Sun Devil Racing

D e v e l o p m e n t 7001 E Williams Field Rd, Mesa, AZ 85212 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________

Prepared for Society of Manufacturing Engineering by Arizona State University –

Polytechnic Engineering 301: Manufacturing Engineering Fall Project

Team Members: M. Adame, C. Gonzales, M. Grunwald, C. Johnson

Z. Ivanov, J. Patton, A. Schneider, C. Scott

Advisors: T. Georgeou, J. Gintz

December 11th, 2013

- 1 -

Executive Summary

The EGR 301: Manufacturing Engineering Fall Project 2013 class (Team) has cooperated with Sun Devil Racing

Development (SDR) in a vendor/customer relationship to engineer an SDR designed Forward-Neutral-Reverse Gearbox

(FNR014) for manufacturability. SDR provided the Team with a preliminary design, which was then benchmarked against

existing similar solutions to determine economic feasibility of further development. The results of this showed that there

currently is not a commercially available forward-neutral-reverse gearbox manufactured for SAE Baja vehicles.

The Team analyzed the SDR generated design and produced Engineering Change Requests (ECR) to improve the

design and manufacturability of the FNR014. Once SDR had approved the ECRs, the Team made the necessary revisions

to the SolidWorks CAD model and created an Assembly Drawing Packet. These engineering drawings were used to

determine part manufacturing processes outlined in the Job Plans and Methods of Tooling (MOT) for each machining

operation. Additionally, First Article Inspection Reports (FAIR) were made so that all manufactured parts would be

inspected for critical dimensions and ensure that Statistical Process Control could be easily applied in future large

production.

With a fully documented manufacturing plan in place, the Team created a budget and sent Requests for Quotes

(RFQ) to material, parts, and tooling vendors, selecting vendors based on economics and product delivery capabilities.

From there Purchase Orders (PO) were generated and submitted through the Arizona State University’s purchasing

department.

Manufacturing of the First Articles began on 21 November 2013 with the Support Cone, and at the time of

writing, the Case Sub-assembly is fully machined out of Aluminum.

- 2 -

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................................................................... - 1 -

TABLE OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................................................................... - 3 -

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................. - 4 -

CONSTRAINTS AND CRITERIA .................................................................................................................................................................... - 4 -

PROJECT ORGANIZATION: ............................................................................................................................................................. - 5 -

RESEARCH...................................................................................................................................................................................... - 8 -

BENCHMARKING .................................................................................................................................................................................... - 8 -

POLARIS GEARBOX REVERSE ENGINEERING .................................................................................................................................................. - 8 -

FUNCTIONAL DECOMPOSITION ............................................................................................................................................................... - 14 -

TESTING AND VALIDATION: ......................................................................................................................................................... - 15 -

ENGINEERING CHANGE REQUESTS ........................................................................................................................................................... - 19 -

MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING DOCUMENTATION .................................................................................................................. - 21 -

ENGINEERING DRAWING PACKET............................................................................................................................................................. - 21 -

JOB PLANS .......................................................................................................................................................................................... - 25 -

METHODS OF TOOLING ......................................................................................................................................................................... - 26 -

FIRST ARTICLE INSPECTION REPORT ......................................................................................................................................................... - 27 -

FAIR PRINT ........................................................................................................................................................................................ - 28 -

RESOURCE PROCUREMENT.......................................................................................................................................................... - 29 -

REQUESTS FOR QUOTE .......................................................................................................................................................................... - 29 -

BUDGET ............................................................................................................................................................................................. - 30 -

PURCHASE REQUESTS............................................................................................................................................................................ - 30 -

PROJECT OUTLOOK ...................................................................................................................................................................... - 32 -

FUTURE TESTING .................................................................................................................................................................................. - 32 -

HIGH PRODUCTION ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................................. - 32 -

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................................... - 32 -

- 3 -

Table of Figures

Figure 1: House of Quality................................................................................................................................................... - 5 -

Figure 2: Flow chart showing Gearbox Section Delegation ................................................................................................ - 6 -

Figure 3: Gantt Chart ........................................................................................................................................................... - 7 -

Figure 4: Weekly Status Report template ........................................................................................................................... - 7 -

Figure 5: Benchmarking Comparison Table ........................................................................................................................ - 8 -

Figure 6: Exploded view of Polaris Gearbox ....................................................................................................................... - 9 -

Figure 7: Polaris Gearbox Case ............................................................................................................................................ - 9 -

Figure 8: Polaris Gearbox Gears and Sprockets ................................................................................................................ - 10 -

Figure 9: Polaris Gearbox Shafts ....................................................................................................................................... - 11 -

Figure 10: Polaris Gearbox Shifting Components ............................................................................................................. - 13 -

Figure 11: Black Box Functional Decomposition of FNR014 ............................................................................................. - 14 -

Figure 12: Functional Flow Decomposition of FNR014 ..................................................................................................... - 14 -

Figure 13: 3D Rendering of the Gearbox Design ............................................................................................................... - 15 -

Figure 14: RP Model of FNR014 ........................................................................................................................................ - 16 -

Figure 15: GB-1 Interference ............................................................................................................................................ - 16 -

Figure 16: GB-1 Interference and Snap Rings in Reduction Shaft ..................................................................................... - 17 -

Figure 17: G10-D Interference Top View .......................................................................................................................... - 17 -

Figure 18: G10-D Interference Tilted View ....................................................................................................................... - 18 -

Figure 19: RP Model Showing Interfering Boss Removed................................................................................................. - 18 -

Figure 20: ECR form for the right case requesting a design change to fix an interference problem with the

shift shaft .......................................................................................................................................................................... - 20 -

Figure 21: Exploded View Assembly Drawing of the Final Gearbox Design ..................................................................... - 21 -

Figure 22: Exploded View of the Case Assembly .............................................................................................................. - 22 -

Figure 23: Engineering Drawing of the Shaft Assembly .................................................................................................... - 22 -

Figure 24: Engineering Drawing of the SM DP Gear Set ................................................................................................... - 23 -

Figure 25: Engineering Drawing of the LG DP Gear Set .................................................................................................... - 23 -

Figure 26: Exploded View of the Shifter Assembly ........................................................................................................... - 24 -

Figure 27: Part Routing/Job Plan for right case ................................................................................................................ - 25 -

Figure 28: Method of Tooling for Shift Fork CNC OP#2 .................................................................................................... - 26 -

Figure 29: FAIR Report for Support Cone .......................................................................................................................... - 27 -

Figure 30: FAIR Print for Support Cone ............................................................................................................................. - 28 -

Figure 31: Quote from Jorgensen Steel ............................................................................................................................ - 30 -

Figure 32: Purchase Request For Jorgensen Steel ............................................................................................................ - 31 -

- 4 -

Introduction

The SAE Baja program involves several competitions that simulate real world automotive engineering design

projects and the challenges associated with them. Engineering students involved in the program are given the task of

designing and building an off-road Baja vehicle that can withstand the conditions of racing over rough terrain. In 2013

Sun Devil Racing Development (SDR) built car #13 and competed in the 2013 SAE Baja competition in Bellingham,

Washington. After finishing the competition in 17th place overall the team determined that one of the main areas for

improvement was the powertrain, specifically the gearbox. The gearbox is a component of the powertrain that accepts

power input from the engine, provides adequate gear reduction to obtain a desired top speed and torque output, and

transfers power to the axles. The problem that was quickly discovered was that there are currently no commercially

available forward-neutral-reverse gearboxes manufactured for SAE Baja vehicles. SDR quickly began work designing an

F-N-R gearbox that would improve upon the current gearbox configuration. The gearbox that has been designed consists

of many improvements over the current gearbox such as reducing the weight from a 48lb configuration to a projected

6lbs. The new design has also allowed for the powertrain to be reconfigured to have a lower center of gravity and better

vehicle weight distribution. The EGR 301: Manufacturing Engineering class has taken SDR’s preliminary gearbox design

and performed preproduction engineering and design for manufacturability. This engineering documentation was used

to manufacture a proof of concept gearbox for validation and testing before mass production. Due to the rules set by

the Society of Automotive Engineers for the Baja competition, strict constraints and criteria were outlined that the

gearbox design must conform to.

Constraints and Criteria

Constraints:

• 3800 RPM max input • 14.5 lb-ft input torque • Acceleration of car #14 (350 lbs.) ≥ car #13 (525 lbs.) • 10.5" distance from engine output to gearbox input • Gearbox positioned behind engine

Criteria:

• 41mph top speed • CV center height must be less than 4 inches from bottom of case. • Total weight must be less than 20 lbs. • Forward/Neutral/Reverse capability. • CV inside to inside width must be less than 6 inches. • Locking differential. • Integrate mounting surface for lateral links into case. • Rear Axles to be used: Polaris part number 1332935

House of Quality

These constraints and criteria were prioritized into a House of Quality (HOQ) that applied a metric value and

importance to the requirements of the gearbox.

- 5 -

FIGURE 1: HOUSE OF QUALITY

Project Organization

The first step the team took before beginning the design process was to determine team member roles and

responsibilities. To accomplish this it was first determined that the team should be split into smaller groups that would

each focus on a different section of the gearbox assembly. Using Microsoft Visio, flow charts of the different sections of

the gearbox assembly were created and team members were assigned to their sections as seen in Figure 2.

- 6 -

FIGURE 2: FLOW CHART SHOWING GEARBOX SECTION DELEGATION

It was also decided that each team member would be given a specific overall job that they would be responsible

for. Each team member as well as their specific jobs are as follows:

Team Leader – Matthew Grunwald

MRP / Budget – Collin Johnson

Bill of Materials – Carl Scott

SDR Liaison – Carl Scott

3D Modeling/CAM Programming – Joshua Patton

Material Research – Alexandra Schneider

Meeting Minutes / Notes – Alexandra Schneider

Engineering Drawing Compiler – Cameron Gonzales

Reports and Documentation – Matthew Adame

- 7 -

A working schedule was then created in order to organize the events required to design and manufacture the

gearbox. Target dates were then set for when each phase of the project should be completed. This was accomplished by

creating a Gantt chart using Microsoft Project. Error! Reference source not found. shows an overview of the Gantt chart

that was created by the team.

FIGURE 3: GANTT CHART

*The full Gantt chart is included in Appendix A.

The team decided to use status reports that each person would complete every week. The purpose of the status

report was to help each member of the group keep track of what tasks were completed that week and what tasks were

upcoming. Figure 4 shows the outline for the weekly status report:

FIGURE 4: WEEKLY STATUS REPORT TEMPLATE

- 8 -

Research

Before SDR decided to design a gearbox, research was done to determine what the desired constraints and

criteria for a powertrain package were, and whether or not there were any commercially available gearboxes that met

them. Additional investigation was conducted by the Team, in the different forms of Benchmarking, Reverse

Engineering, and Functional Decomposition.

Benchmarking

This research was done online through the gearbox manufacturer’s websites and enthusiast communities for

anecdotal data. Three possible candidates were identified: Dana Spicer model “H-12”, RPM Gearbox model “FNR”, and

the Polaris gearbox which was reverse engineered by the team (see following section). After this research was

completed, the data gathered was weighed against the criteria given by the team and it was decided that there was not

a commercially available gearbox that met the packaging and weight goals required.

FIGURE 5: BENCHMARKING COMPARISON TABLE

Polaris Gearbox Reverse Engineering

Before reviewing the design of the new gearbox, the team performed a complete disassembly and functional

decomposition of the Polaris gearbox that was used in the 2013 Baja vehicle. This was done in order to gain insight into

the engineering and manufacturing decisions made in its production. Doing so led to a better understanding of the inner

workings and functions of each part of the gearbox giving the team a better comprehension of how to approach the

gearbox design. The complete decomposition as well as functions and manufacturing processes associated with each

part are as follows:

- 9 -

FIGURE 6: EXPLODED VIEW OF POLARIS GEARBOX

Case:

FIGURE 7: POLARIS GEARBOX CASE

- 10 -

Functions:

Contoured around components

Oil is picked up by the gears

Bearings are pressed into machined pockets in the case

Case is made of cast aluminum

Manufacturing processes:

-Sand Casting -Milling -Drilling -Tapping

Gears:

FIGURE 8: POLARIS GEARBOX GEARS AND SPROCKETS

- 11 -

Functions:

Forward

o Power enters

o Torque transmitted through chain

o Power exits

Reverse

o Power comes in

o Torque transmitted through gear set

o Direction reversed by gear set

o Power exit

Manufacturing Processes:

-Casting

-Turning

-Milling

-Hobbing

-Heat Treating

Shafts:

FIGURE 9: POLARIS GEARBOX SHAFTS

- 12 -

Functions:

Input Shaft

o Accept power from CVT

o Transfer power to gears

o Stay concentric with CVT

o Stay concentric with gears

o Stay concentric with bearings

o Allow dog gear to slide freely

o Seal against case seal

o Keep gears aligned

Output Shaft

o Accept power from gears

o Transfer power to the jackshaft drive sprocket

o Transfer power in both gears

o Stay concentric with bearings

o Stay concentric with jackshaft drive sprocket

o Stay concentric with gears

o Seal against case seal

Manufacturing Processes:

-Turning

-Hobbing

-Heat Treating

-Grinding

- 13 -

Shifting Components:

FIGURE 10: POLARIS GEARBOX SHIFTING COMPONENTS

Functions:

Dog Ring

o Transmit power from input shaft to forward or reverse gear

Shift Fork

o Slide Dog Ring into forward or reverse gear

Shift Shaft

o Move Shift Fork to select direction of power

o Hold Shift Fork position in order to maintain gear selection

o Locate the shift fork in the correct position in reference to the case

Detent Pin

o Hold shift shaft in selected location in order to maintain gear selection

Spring

o Apply tension to Detent Pin in order to maintain gear selection

Plug Bolt

o Retain the Spring for the Detent Pin inside of the Right Side Case

Plug Bolt Seal Washer

o Seal Plug Bolt to Right Side Case in order to retain oil

Manufacturing Processes:

-Casting

-Milling

-Broaching

-Heat Treating

- 14 -

Functional Decomposition It was decided that a functional decomposition of FNR014 was necessary in order to compare the gearbox

against the information obtained during the benchmarking and reverse engineering processes. This began by performing

a black box functional decomposition using Microsoft Visio to create a flow chart illustrating the flow of inputs and the

output to and from the gearbox as seen in Figure 11. A functional flow decomposition was then created with a flow

chart that breaks the system down into its individual components and functions as seen in Figure 12. From here the

team was able to compare and contrast the methods others used to perform the tasks outlined in our constraint and

criteria and perform a failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to identify high risk design areas. These high risk areas

were key components leading into validation of the FNR014 design.

FIGURE 11: BLACK BOX FUNCTIONAL DECOMPOSITION OF FNR014

FIGURE 12: FUNCTIONAL FLOW DECOMPOSITION OF FNR014

*The full Functional Decomposition flow chart is included in Appendix B.

- 15 -

Testing and Validation: Two principle models were developed in the course of this project: A 3D CAD model in SolidWorks shown in

Figure 13, and a 3D printed Rapid Prototype (RP) using Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) shown in Figure 14. The CAD

model was visually checked for interference by method of iterated sections, whereby a section view of the assembly is

used to scan for clearance issues. This scan revealed the interference between the Left Side Case and GB-1 Reduction

Gear, shown in Figure 15 and Figure 16 resulting in ECR #0106. The method of scan is depicted in the figures below with

causes for the ECR circled. Also generated from this test was the ECR #0101 removing the inner retaining rings on the

reduction shaft, replaced by a locating boss integral to G1-2, circled in Figure 16

Figure 17 and Figure 18 show the interference between G1-D and the boss for the Shift Shaft in the Right Side

Case. This interference escaped notice until assembly of the RP model was attempted, preventing assembly. ECR #0102

rectified this oversight by decreasing the size of the boss to clear the gear. In order to test function of the RP gearbox,

the boss was removed, shown Figure 19, and UHMW Polyethylene bushings were machined to match the bearing sizes.

Due to the tolerances of the FDM process, the splines were not able to be mated together, and were hand filed to fit.

Upon final assembly, the gear ratio and proper rotation of the RP model were checked by engaging the Dog Ring against

the Forward Input Gear and spinning the input shaft, counting the number of turns of the input to complete a single turn

of the output. The test was repeated with the Dog Ring engaged against the Reverse Input Gear. The RP model

demonstrated the expected direction and reduction ratio in both cases.

FIGURE 13: 3D RENDERING OF THE GEARBOX DESIGN

- 16 -

FIGURE 14: RP MODEL OF FNR014

FIGURE 15: GB-1 INTERFERENCE

- 17 -

FIGURE 16: GB-1 INTERFERENCE AND SNAP RINGS IN REDUCTION SHAFT

FIGURE 17: G1-D INTERFERENCE TOP VIEW

- 18 -

FIGURE 18: G1-D INTERFERENCE TILTED VIEW

FIGURE 19: RP MODEL SHOWING INTERFERING BOSS REMOVED

- 19 -

Engineering Change Requests Engineering Change Requests (ECR) document the necessity, justification, and rectification of design changes.

This gives a recorded history of a given design, allowing for ease of reference for design decisions to be made in the

future. In addition to the change, justification, and corrective action there are locations for appropriate approvals or

denials as well as a closeout section to indicate that the change has been implemented.

After Testing and Validation revealed items which needed to be corrected in the design, ECRs were generated.

The documents were forwarded to the customer (SDR) for approval, and when authorized the Team made the

appropriate revisions. Figure 20 below shows a sample ECR which was filled out for a change to the Right Case.

- 20 -

ENGINEERING CHANGE

PART/DRAWING NO. PART DESCRIPTION ECR NO. DATE

Right Case Right Case 0102 10/28/13

REASON FOR CHANGE

G1-D crashes with the shift shaft internal boss and the gear cannot be moved.

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE

Remove internal shift shaft boss so G1-D will clear the case and rotate freely.

ORIGINATOR NAME SIGNATURE: DATE

Joshua Patton 10/28/13

DISPOSITION

DISAPPROVED

REASON FOR DISAPPROVAL:

APPROVED DUE DATE

INSTRUCTIONS: 11/4/13

Change CAD model to reflect desired change.

CLASS A – STOP SHIPMENTS UNTIL CHANGE IMPLEMENTED B – MUST BE IMPLEMENTED BY DUE DATE

QUALITY ASSURANCE NAME SIGNATURE: DATE

Carl Scott 10/30/13

ENGINEERING NAME SIGNATURE: DATE

Joshua Patton 10/30/13

MANUFACTURING NAME SIGNATURE: DATE

Joshua Patton 10/30/13

CLOSEOUT

CORRECTIVE ACTION CAR NO. DUE DATE

YES NO 11/4/13

ORIGINATOR NAME SIGNATURE: DATE

Joshua Patton 11/4/13

FIGURE 20: ECR FORM FOR THE RIGHT CASE REQUESTING A DESIGN CHANGE TO FIX AN INTERFERENCE PROBLEM WITH THE

SHIFT SHAFT

*All Engineering Change Requests are included in Appendix C.

- 21 -

Manufacturing Engineering Documentation

One of the most important aspects of Manufacturing Engineering is the documentation. The following

documentation produced by the team is the primary communication device which enables the client, SDR, to

consistently produce all of the components of FNR014 at any time in any appropriately equipped location.

Engineering Drawing Packet After testing and validation was completed and design changes were made, thus finalizing the gearbox, the team

created an engineering drawing packet for the complete gearbox assembly. Figure 21 through belowFigure 26 show

engineering drawings of the component subassemblies:

FIGURE 21: EXPLODED VIEW ASSEMBLY DRAWING OF THE FINAL GEARBOX DESIGN

- 22 -

FIGURE 22: EXPLODED VIEW OF THE CASE ASSEMBLY

FIGURE 23: ENGINEERING DRAWING OF THE SHAFT ASSEMBLY

- 23 -

FIGURE 24: ENGINEERING DRAWING OF THE SM DP GEAR SET

FIGURE 25: ENGINEERING DRAWING OF THE LG DP GEAR SET

- 24 -

FIGURE 26: EXPLODED VIEW OF THE SHIFTER ASSEMBLY

*The full Engineering Drawing Packet is included in Appendix D.

- 25 -

Job Plans Upon completion of the Engineering Drawing Packet, manufacturing planning documents were created. The first

of these were Job Plans, also called Part Routings, which overview the manufacturing processes required to produce

each part. Each Job Plan shows the operations, machine tools, and operation specific tooling and fixturing required.

Included are locations to indicate operation completion and time to perform, which provide part processing status and

data for manufacturing time in system. Figure 27 below shows a sample Job Plan, the format of which was followed for

all components in FNR014.

FIGURE 27: PART ROUTING/JOB PLAN FOR RIGHT CASE

*All Job Plans are included in Appendix E.

ASSEMBLY:

PART:

DRAWING REV:

MATERIAL:

OP # Operation DescriptionMachine Tools or

CellsChecked Time

10Order 7" x 2" Bar Stock

From SupplierN/A

11 Saw Stock to 11" LengthDo-All Horizontal

Bandsaw

12 Inspect and Debur Blank N/A

20 CNC Operation #1HAAS VF-3 CNC

Mill

21CNC Operation #1

F.A.I.R.Inspection

30 CNC Operation #2HAAS VF-3 CNC

Mill

40CNC Operation #2

F.A.I.R.Inspection

Kurt Vise, Case Fixture,

Face Mill, Roughing End

Mill, End Mill, Center Drill,

Drill Bit, Reamer, Keyway,

Kurt Vise, Case Fixture,

Face Mill, Roughing End

Mill, End Mill, Drill Bit,

Center Drill, Reamer

N/A

Caliper and File

Caliper

Caliper, Flatness Gauge

Part Routing/Job Planner

Gearbox

Case (Right)

B

6061-T6 AL

Notes: Deburr all edges after every operation.

Tooling and Fixtures

Required

N/A

- 26 -

Methods of Tooling For each operation outlined in the Job Plans, a Method of Tooling (MOT) was made. These are commonly called

Setup Sheets, and provide detailed instructions for how to perform each process. Key to this are the instructions listed at

page top, as well as tooling setup and cutting information. By following the method outlined, a technician can perform

the operation with a high level of repeatability key to tolerance control. Figure 28 below shows a sample MOT, the

format of which was followed for all components in FNR014.

FIGURE 28: METHOD OF TOOLING FOR SHIFT FORK CNC OP#2

*All Methods of Tooling are included in Appendix E.

- 27 -

First Article Inspection Report Each part produced is considered a First Article, and to meet quality control guidelines set by the tolerances in

the Engineering Drawing Packet an inspection report was made. This document, called a First Article Inspection Report,

details each critical dimension, its nominal size, and the range of allowable measurements. Areas are left blank for the

inspector to complete upon inspection showing the empirically measured dimension from the part, additional

comments, and whether the measurement falls within tolerance. Figure 29 below shows a sample FAIR, the format of

which was followed for all components in FNR014.

The measurements gathered in FAIR processing can be used to implement Statistical Process Control, which uses

statistical analysis of measured data to draw conclusions about the manufacturing processes used. Inferences which can

be made include, but are not limited to, CP ratio (an indicator of process capability to perform the operation within

design tolerance) and machine/tool wear. This information is vital to continued quality control processes and lean

manufacturing in mass production, allowing a manufacturing engineer to predict the proportion of out of tolerance

parts and tool wear with a great degree of confidence.

FIGURE 29: FAIR REPORT FOR SUPPORT CONE

*All FAIR Reports are included in Appendix F.

- 28 -

FAIR Print Used in conjunction with the FAIR, the FAIR Print is a simplified copy of the Engineering Drawing for a specific

part. Only the critical dimensions to be measured are shown, with labels referencing the Dimension ID. This helps the

technician collect the appropriate data during inspection, verifying that the FAIR accurately reflects the part being

measured. Figure 30 below shows a sample FAIR Print, the format of which was followed for all components in FNR014.

FIGURE 30: FAIR PRINT FOR SUPPORT CONE

*All FAIR Prints are included in Appendix F.

- 29 -

Resource Procurement

The process for resource procurement is outlined in the following section, and gave the team valuable

experience and insight into resource management within a large entity such as ASU. Strict guidelines for process and

procurement must be met in order receive orders in as short a time as possible. One important learning theme was the

fact that while the person(s) in purchasing are skilled and capable, they are not familiar with the project and have likely

never contacted the vendors before. As such, it is in the best interests of the engineer to provide all possible contact and

order information in a clear manner to the purchasing agent to ease their task and guarantee correct part delivery in as

timely a manner as possible.

Requests for Quote Once the Job Plans and MOTs had been completed, outlining the tooling and material needed to manufacture

FNR014, tooling and processing capabilities were evaluated at the ASU polytechnic campus. Concurrently, each member

of the team sent out one or more requests for quote to local manufacturing companies to determine whether out-

sourcing of the manufacturing was feasible. The companies were first contacted through a phone call and then a follow

up, either by email or an in person visit, was made to receive input on manufacturing processes along with a quote for

the company to manufacture the piece. After receiving all the quotes back from the local companies it was decided that

all manufacturing would be done at ASU; this required the team to send requests for quotes to local metal suppliers. The

local companies were contacted in the same manner as the manufacturing companies were. During this time online

retailers for metal were also evaluated for cost. Once all material quotes had arrived, the companies with the most

reasonable quotes were selected. Figure 31 shows a quote received from a local company, Jorgensen Steel. While this

was being done, all standard parts needed were put into a bill of materials. Local companies were contacted as well as

websites visited to find the most cost efficient way to procure standard parts. Along with this, some specialty tooling

was investigated in order to complete the in house manufacturing of the gearbox.

- 30 -

FIGURE 31: QUOTE FROM JORGENSEN STEEL

*All quotes received are included in Appendix G.

Budget Having received quotations from multiple suppliers, a budget was created to identify both the required

minimum cost for the project and the cost per prototype. The team evaluated competing quotes for cost efficiency,

minimum purchase, and lead time before selecting vendors. Vendors local to Phoenix, Arizona were given preference

over non-local suppliers, but this was not a constraint in the selection process.

A part of the SAE Baja competition is total vehicle cost, so SDR requested a per-piece cost breakdown be

provided along with First Article delivery. The budgeting sheet is available in full in Appendix G.

Purchase Requests After selecting vendors for parts and materials, purchase requests were prepared and submitted to the

Purchasing Department at Arizona State University, College of Technology and Innovation. Included along with the

Purchase Request was a Contact Information file, with all information needed to contact each vendor. Figure 32 below

shows a sample Purchase Order, the format of which was followed for all components in FNR014.

- 31 -

FIGURE 32: PURCHASE REQUEST FOR JORGENSEN STEEL

*All Purchase Requests are included in Appendix G.

- 32 -

Project Outlook

Due to the application of the project, manufacturing and development will continue beyond the scope of this

report. This section is a look at the future development of the FNR014 manufacturing and testing.

Future Testing Upon delivery of the First Article the customer, SDR, will be implementing a rigorous test program to validate

the performance and durability of the FNR014 prototype design. The team will be testing the power transmission

efficiency using a Dynomite Kart Engine Dynamometer modified to accept the full Baja powertrain. This will be

accomplished by comparing the horsepower and torque readings from the engine connected directly to the

dynamometer with the readings through the Continuously Variable Transmission and FNR014 gearbox. Proper gearbox

operating temperature and lubrication will also be evaluated at this point.

Upon completion of the dynamometer cell testing, FNR014 will be installed in the 2014 Baja vehicle for in-

service durability and performance testing. Once fully validated, SDR will utilize the engineering documentation and

manufacturing processes outlined herein to produce several testing prototypes for use during the 2014 SAE Baja

competition season. SDR expects to do well in the competition season in large part due to the new gearbox, which

provides substantial packaging, weight, cost, and efficiency improvements over the existing Polaris/SDR hybrid modular

assembly.

High Production Analysis Beyond prototype testing, the engineering will continue into EGR 318: Manufacturing Engineering Spring

Project. In EGR 318 the FNR014 proof-of-concept and associated documentation will be used to plan mass production.

This will be an exciting venture for the team, as the prospect of engineering a demand driven product all the way from

the problem definition through mass production planning is not only an impressive resume keynote, but also directly

field applicable to manufacturing engineering.

Conclusion

The documentation shown in the report above illustrates the necessary steps to fully manufacture a prototype

FNR014 gearbox. This report has demonstrated the full Manufacturing Engineering process, whereby an engineering

firm is solicited by a customer to revise a principal design for manufacturability and document all aspects of production.

Each step along the way has revealed critical insights into the necessity for properly engineered production. Research,

Benchmarking, and Validation revealed design oversights that initiated Engineering Change Requests to produce a

functional gearbox upon First Article delivery. The Organization of the project initiated at the start allowed the Team to

communicate effectively and remain on schedule throughout the semester with the use of a Gantt chart and the

delegation of the individual tasks. Job Plans and Methods of Tooling allow the components of FNR014 to be produced

repeatably by a qualified technician at any point in the future, ensuring that the design work is not lost to entropy, and

the Resource Planning provides reference for future ordering. The end result is a lean manufacturing process that

produces a quality product for our customer, Sun Devil Racing Development, which satisfies all of the constraints and

criteria they set forth.