Project 3.3.

1 Marble Sorter
By:Rofin Maknojia

Westwood High School

Date: 4/26/16
POE Block 4
Group members:
John Rearick
Joanna McDonald
Vivek Ramanathan

Design Problem

Description of task:
Our group has been hired by the NRPA to sort recycled materials. In our case,
these materials are different types of marbles. So we need to be able to design, model,
and test a design that will sort each marble into its own separate bucket based on the
material of the marble.
Learning objectives:
We will get a deeper understanding of how the design process works. We will
use this knowledge combined with our engineering and coding skills to create a solution
to the problem. Our teamwork and soft skills will be enhanced as well as we will work
together to give a presentation on how our project works at the end of the project.
Design Constraints:
The separation process will have to be able to be fully automated. The materials
available to us are the items in the VEX kit and other materials approved by our teacher.
The device should be able to separate marbles that are commingled and not directly
lined up. We must successfully separate a minimum of 4 different types of marbles.
Finally, the whole process must be complete under 2 minutes.

Brainstorm

Description
The marbles will come one at a time from a funnel. They will come down a steel
bar. There will be a slanted gate that only opens when the weighted steel marbles go
through. This will allow us to sort the steel. The remaining three marbles will roll down
onto another inclined steel bar. A light sensor will get the reading and this will prompt a
turntable with the remaining cups to come into position with the help of a servo, sorting
the rest of the marbles.

Final Design Proposal

The process our group used to select a final proposal was by using a design
matrix. We came up with five categories to judge each proposal and those categories
were: build time, simplicity, reliability, run time, and coding. We felt like these categories
were important to our project.
Run time was important because we are on a time constraint so we dont want to
surpass it. Simplicity was important because we didnt want to build a project that was
too hard to make or took too much time. This leads into build time because we dont
want a project that takes forever to make and the less time it takes to make it, the better.
Reliability was important because we need to be able to test it multiple times without
wasting too much time in between. Coding was important because we dont want to
waste too much time doing a difficult code. Finally we voted on a rating for each of the
categories based on the criteria for each of the projects from a scale of 1-5. The project
with the highest total was the one we chose to build.

Decision Matrix

Name

Build Time

Simplicity

Reliability

John

3,2,2

2,3,3

2,2,3

3,5,4

3,3,4

44

Vivek

3,5,4

4,4,3

2,3,3

3,5,4

3,4,5

55

Joanna

2,3,2

2,3,3

3,4,5

3,5,4

3,3,2

47

Rofin

4,4,3

3,5,3

3,2,3

4,5,4

3,5,4

54

Run Time

Coding

Total

1-5, worst to best.

Viveks idea won, but we will incorporate other ideas from our own designs. We will take the
lever from Johns idea and the turntable from my idea to ensure that it works properly.

Picture

Description
The balls will come from the funnel one at a time. Each ball will be enclosed in
the gear chain walls. They will travel to the end and fall on a see-saw. The counter
weight is enough such that only when the steel marbles fall, the seesaw will tip in the
opposite direction sorting the steel. The rest will roll down onto another gear chain.
While they are on it, a light sensor will get a reading and based on that, the remaining 4
cups will turn on a turntable with the help of a servo, sorting the final four marbles.

Design Modifications
Our biggest modification was changing from Viveks idea to Johns. After we
began Viveks idea, we realized that the plan we had on building Viveks wasnt going to

work because the marbles wouldnt be able to enter the machine properly. Johns idea
seemed to be reasonable enough for us to finish on time. Johns machine also seemed
like it was easy to code and build. So this shift in ideas was a very important
modification for us.
Another big modification we made was that we put stands on the whole machine
so it can stand up. We made this change because we wanted to fit a motor underneath
but without adding stands, this wouldnt be possible. So after adding stands we were
able to add the motor and it made the project a lot more successful.
Another modification was that we put a clear film across the front of entire
machine. The reason we decided to do this was when we tested our machine, the
marbles would often bounce out and not stay contained. So we believed that adding this
would keep the marbles from falling out. This modification was very effective because
the marbles didnt fall out and stayed contained.
The last major modification we made was instead of having cups on our turntable
for the marbles to fall in, we took the cups off and divided the entire turntable into
fourths. We made this modification because it would give the marbles a larger target to
fall in. We hoped that this would increase accuracy and it did increase it greatly.

Final Design Presentation

Our machine did not work correctly during the official presentation. When we ran
the program, the marbles didnt transition well from one part of the machine into
another. The criteria we met was that we completed the whole process in under two
minutes so that met the requirement.
However we didnt sort the marbles so our machine was not successful. There
were many problems such as, the balls didnt come out one at a time and the light
sensor didnt give a proper reading to the encoder for it to work. The only marbles we
were able to sort were all of the steel marbles because they were sorted using the
seesaw mechanism which worked perfectly.

ROBOTC Program

Design Process

Define the problem

Our group has been hired by the NRPA to sort recycled materials. In our case,
these materials are different types of marbles. So we need to be able to design, model,
and test a design that will sort each marble into its own separate bucket based on the
material of the marble. The separation process will have to be able to be fully
automated. The materials available to us are the items in the VEX kit and other
materials approved by our teacher. The device should be able to separate marbles that
are commingled and not directly lined up. We must successfully separate a minimum of
4 different types of marbles. Finally, the whole process must be complete under 2
minutes.
Generate Concepts
Each one of us made our own brainstorming idea. We did so without consulting
one another to ensure that each idea was unique. Then after everyone finished, we
shared our ideas and using the decision matrix, we voted on the best design. In this
case Viveks idea originally won.
Develop a solution
We went on to draw technical drawing of our final idea into our own engineering
notebooks for our record. We drew them with detail, labeled each part, and made it
neat. Then we included a description of how the machine is intended to function so
anyone who reads it can get a basic understanding of our machine without us having to
tell them.

Construct and Test a Prototype

Next we went on to actually build the machine using the VEX components in the
kit. We did so for a couple of weeks. We built Viveks idea for two days and then
realized it wouldnt work so we disassembled and built Johns idea instead, following his

brainstorming idea. Right before our deadline, we conducted a final test to see if the
machine would work. We knew going into the final test our chances were very slim.
Evaluate Solution
Our machine did not work correctly during the official presentation. When we ran
the program, the marbles didnt transition well from one part of the machine into
another. The criteria we met was that we completed the whole process in under two
minutes so that met the requirement. However we didnt sort the marbles so our
machine was not successful. There were many problems such as, the balls didnt come
out one at a time and the light sensor didnt give a proper reading to the encoder for it to
work. The only marbles we were able to sort were all of the steel marbles because they
were sorted using the seesaw mechanism which worked perfectly.

Team Evaluation
Vivek did a good job in doing his task. He made the seesaw for our group and
came up with the idea of adding the clear film to the machine. He also helped make
modifications to the machine when needed. He followed the group norms by being
respectful to everyone and stated his thoughts on the project. He did his share of the
work and contributed positively.

Joanna did a good job as well. She is the one who came up with the idea for
making stands on our machine. Although she was absent one day, she let us know
before hand that she would be absent during class so she followed group norms.
Although she was gone on the second day, on the first day she helped lay out the
design and get everything started. She even stayed after school on her own to work on
the project.
John also did a good job. We used his idea for the final project. He contributed
positively by adding spacers when we needed to reduce friction between the gears and
the board. John also did the code for our program. He followed group norms as well as
he communicated with us to make sure we knew what we had to turn in the next day in
class.
I also did a good job. I worked on the turntable and came up with the idea to
remove the cups. I added bushings to make the wheel and axles more stable and to
reduce the wobble they created. I also followed group norms as I was always positive
and didnt criticize anyone negatively for mistakes. I think I did my job.
As a whole, each person in our group did their part and fair share. This helped
our group work well together and complete the task without too many problems
amongst ourselves. We all followed group norms as well and will continue to do so. This
was a successful project in terms of teamwork.

Reflection
1. What would your team do differently with your design solution and
why?
If we had more time, we would figure out a way to make the balls come out one
by one by adding a gate of some sort. This wouldve been helpful because that way
each marble could be sorted independently. We would also figure out a way to stop the
marbles right at the light sensor so we could get an accurate reading each time.
2. What was the most challenging aspect of this design problem?

The most challenging part was finishing the whole project in time. Time was a
huge problem as we had to come in before and after school to work on the project. We
need to be more efficient next time and stay on task so we can finish the project
completely before the deadline.
3. What did you learn?
I learned that not every project can be successful. Up till this project, all of my
projects have been fairly successful. This is the first project to not work. I wouldnt call
this a failure though because I got experience and we sorted one kind of marble
completely.
4. What were some of the challenges of working in a design team?
One big challenge was trying to figure out how to solve a particular problem.
Everyone has their own idea and we have to agree on one idea so that can be difficult
as other peoples ideas are often left out. Another challenge was dividing up the tasks.
There are some tasks that everyone is weak at so we have to work together better in
order to complete those tasks.