After building the cannon we did some test firing and recorded the range of shots an different angles.
- When making the stabilizer we originally had only two cross beams, and eventually realized that it would need three to provide the necessary support to the cannon.
- When making our final base design we did not double check measurements and when we did the conversion from the box making website to onshape. This heavily impacted material usage, weight, and balance.
- When making the original turning system we made the mistake of making the hole for the turning system too small to fit the PVC
Overall I hold a very large amount of disdain for this project. I understand that this project was new and there were a lot of shortfalls in the connect between concept and execution. That being said, the majority of my discontent arises from inadequately defined/constantly changing criteria, too much dictation and chunking of the design process (It would have been better to simultaneously create the designs of the stabilizer, arduino, and base so that a holistic and parametric design approach could be taken), lack of explanation of limitations and restraints of the project, and overall scarcity of guidelines as to what expectations were for both the project itself and this portfolio. Consequently the result of this was confusion and the need to rework designs. This required my group and I to spend more time on creating new designs. This was particularly stressful on me. I have done a lot of CAD in middle and high school, and even enjoy it to an extent. As a result I have become fairly familiar with Autodesk and Onshape, and my group decided I was the most suited to execute our designs in the CAD program. As a result I probably designed/redesigned about 30 or so parts and at least 5 assemblies, most of which were voted to be discarded as a result of confusion over the changing and unclear requirements and guidelines of the project. Personally this made me feel as if my time was wasted and left a very bad taste in my mouth for this project, especially because the final design our group decided to implement was based on poorly taken measurements and last minute decisions. Overall I feel that I invested a lot of time into design, which was mostly discarded in favor of an more easily executable design that required less thought and time because of a deadline that had to be met in conjunction with indecisiveness on our part as a consequence of unclear expectations. The result was a poorly constructed base that could not seemingly fire with the intended level of consistency. I understand that this project and portfolio are meant to show off what we are capable of and what we have learned, but in my honest opinion, I do not think that the final product our group put out is something to be proud of, and I don't believe it was educationally consummate with other school projects; therefore, I believe that if I do not feel proud of the final product I should not feel proud of the process of it's design and subsequently should not feel that this is worth including in any of my resumes or applications in the foreseeable future. The point of engineering is to create a solution to a problem. This isn't science, where failure is an acceptable part of the learning process. The way I see it is that the final product of engineering should not be a failure and I believe that the final product our group put out was a failure and thus little time and effort should be expended presenting it, instead it should serve as an explanation of why the end product failed and what attempts were made to improve it.