1.edge.rit.edu/content/P16718/public/Detailed Design... · Web viewTest Names and Definitions9 Subsystem Testing Requirements Summary11 Testing Documentation12 Test Case Description12

P16718 Micropen Workstation RedesignTest Plans & Test Results

Senior Design TeamRachele Floeser, Alex Langkamp, Sabrina Caliri,

Nick Accuosti, Matt DePalo, and Mike Everett

Table of Contents

1. MSD I: MICROPEN SYSTEMS OVERVIEW 31.1. Introduction and Overview 3

1.1.1. Project Information 31.1.2. Project Testing Overview 4

1.2. Systems Features and Subsystems Functions 41.2.1. Major Systems 41.2.2. System Features 41.2.3. Major Subsystems 41.2.4. Subsystem Functions 5

1.3. Important Terminology, Abbreviations, Definitions 7

2. MSD I: WKS 8-10 PRELIMINARY TEST PLAN – “WHAT” 92.1. Developing the Test Strategy 9

2.1.1. Test Phases 92.1.2. Test Names and Definitions 92.1.3. Subsystem Testing Requirements Summary 11

2.2. Testing Documentation 122.2.1. Test Case Description 122.2.2. Steps in Building a Test Case 132.2.3. Test Case Template 132.2.4. Test Report Description 152.2.5. Steps in Completing a Test Report 152.2.6. Test Report Template 16

2.3. Approval - Team, Guide, Customer 17

3. MSD II WKS 2-3 FINAL TEST PLAN – “HOW, WHO, WHEN” 183.1. Data Collection Plan 18

3.1.1. Data Collection Summary 183.2. Test Cases by Subsystem 20

3.2.1. Test Case 1 - Operator Tooling for the Touch-up Procedure 203.2.2. Test Case 2 - Actuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck) 243.2.3. Test Case 3 - Viewing Apparatus Used during Touch Up 273.2.4. Test Case 4 - Arm and Elbow Support During Touch Up 30

_____________________________________________________________________________________________P16718 - Micropen Workstation Redesign - Test Plan Page 1

3.2.5. Test Case 5 - Operator Keypad 343.2.6. Test Case 6 - Proper Seating Position 373.2.7. Test Case 7 - Stretches and Exercise 403.2.8. Test Case 8 - WIP Fixture Time and Stand 433.2.9. Test Case 9 - Kink in the Wire 47

3.3. WBS 513.4. Contingencies and Mitigation Plans 513.5. Approval - Team, Guide, Customer

4. MSD II – WKS 3-10 DESIGN TEST VERIFICATION 52

4.1. Test Reports 524.1.1. Test Report 1 - Operator Tooling for the Touch-up Procedure 524.1.2. Test Report 2 - Actuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck) 534.1.3. Test Report 3 - Viewing Apparatus Used During Touch-Up 544.1.4. Test Report 4 - Arm and Elbow Support During Touch-Up 554.1.5. Test Report 5 - Operator Keypad 574.1.6. Test Report 6 - Proper Seating Position 584.1.7. Test Report 7 - Stretches and Exercise 594.1.8. Test Report 8 - WIP Fixture Time and Stand 604.1.9. Test Report 9 - Kink in the Wire 61

4.2. Test Report Summary 634.2.1. Verification with Success Criteria 634.2.2. Logistics and Documentation 63

4.3. Conclusion 634.3.1. Meeting with Customer 63

P16718 Micropen Workstation RedesignTest Plan


Senior Design TeamRachele Floeser, Alex Langkamp, Sabrina Caliri,

Nick Accuosti, Matt DePalo, and Mike Everett

1. MICROPEN SYSTEMS OVERVIEW

1.1. Introduction and Overview

1.1.1 Project InformationMicropen Technologies designs, develops, and manufactures high precision resistors and medical devices. Micropen Medical, a sub-division of Micropen Technologies, specializes in the printing of critical functional materials, such as conductive electrodes, on medical devices. On one of their products, the current manufacturing process requires operators to use a small tool to perform a touch-up procedure. This procedure requires a high degree of precision and is performed in a repetitive pattern where the operator adopts a number of potentially harmful postures during the process. These requirements of the process present several ergonomic risk factors for the operator.

The objective of this project is to design and develop an improved workstation that eliminates or at least reduces the ergonomic risk factors for the operator, while meeting all the visualization and mechanical motion demands of the manufacturing process. The expected end result will include all design documents for the new design, a working prototype, a time study of the current and new process, as well as a technical paper and poster presented at ImagineRIT. The new system design will pose no significant changes to the current printing instrument, critical dimensions, or features on the system components. The intent of the system design is for the solution to remain within Micropen and only shared at their discretion.

1.1.2 Project Testing OverviewThe system solution will be broken down and discussed at a system and subsystem level. Each system includes a set of subsystem components. Each subsystem includes functions which require individual verification and validation. Each subsystem will be tested against a set of criteria prior to implementation into the system solution and prior to qualifying system level performance.

1.2. Systems Features and Subsystems Functions


1.2.1. Major Systems

1. Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process Tooling2. Operator Orientation and Process Steps3. WIP Fixture

1.2.2. System Features

Discussion: The major systems are described further. The current state features of each system are described in the ‘Current Features’ section.

1. Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process Tooling1.1. Current Features: The instrument, components of the workstation,

and the tooling required for the process currently do not support proper ergonomics for the operator. Constraints placed on the operator due to the current tooling for the process and the workstation and instrument parts requires the operator to maneuver into non-ergonomic positions to perform the processes.

2. Operator Orientation and Process Steps2.1. Current Features: The current constraints of the process cause

the operators to orient parts of their body, and in some cases their whole body, away from the work or into a non-ergonomic position.

3. WIP Fixture3.1. Current Features: The WIP Fixture holds the ceramic parts at the

operator's workstation after they have been painted by the Micropen, touched-up by the operator, and before they have been moved to the 1st oven. The WIP fixture creates a series of challenges for the operators including ergonomic issues related to the physical fixture location and the size of features on the fixture. These challenges may contribute to scrap.

1.2.3. Major Subsystems

1. Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process Tooling

1.1. Operator Tooling for the Touch-up Procedure

1.2. Actuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck)

1.3. Viewing Apparatus Used During the Touch-up Procedure1.4. Arm and Elbow Support During the Touch-up Procedure1.5. Operator Keypad


2. Operator Orientation and Process Steps

2.1. Proper Seating Position (Chair/Back Support)2.2. Stretches and Exercise

3. WIP Fixture

3.1. WIP Fixture Tile and Stand3.2. Kink in The Wire

1.2.4. Subsystem Functions

Discussion: The major subsystems are described further. The current state functionality of each subsystem component is described in the ‘Current Function’ section.

1. Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process Tooling

1.1. Operator Tooling for the Touch-up Procedure

1.1.1. Current Function: After the printing process is complete part of the gold ink is not connected and the operator is required to “touch-up” this portion of the part. The tool used has a toothpick or needle like point and a handle similar to a pencil. The distance between the painted part and the location of the operator's hand requires the tool to be long, or requires the operator to hold the far upper end of the tool so that the point can reach the part. The necessary positioning of the hand and arm to perform the touch-up is uncomfortable. The risk factors for the micropen operators are repetitive hand and arm motions in unsupported, awkward postures. The exposure is in combination with contact stress from grasping tools while applying force, and applied contact stress from the blunt edges. The touch up process require operators to lean forward and assume static postures of the arm, neck and torso for extended periods.

1.2. Actuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck)1.2.1. Current Function: Air valve with ball joint lever, placed in a position

which makes the operator reach up to press it. This causes shoulder and wrist pain for the operators.

1.3. Viewing Apparatus Used During the Touch-up Procedure


1.3.1. Current Function: Semi-adjustable microscope mounted in front of operator that allows a zoomed in view of the part during touch up. The placement of the microscope requires operators to strain their back and neck muscles in a way that causes discomfort when sustained throughout the day.

1.4. Arm and Elbow Support During the Touch-up Procedure

1.4.1. Current Function: After the printing process the operator is required to perform a touch-up step where currently they rest their arm and elbow on a platform to keep it even with the top of the Micropen instrument.

1.5. Operator Keypad

1.5.1. Current Function: There are two keyboards set up with the workstation. One keyboard is a computer keyboard that is sometimes used for setup but is not used in the manufacturing process. The other keyboard is a smaller custom programmed keyboard that is used for the manufacturing process to verify alignment of the part in the chuck using the “flip” key and to perform the painting process using the “go” key. There are other keys that are used to modify the location of the part, these views are sometimes used to verify painting and touch-up procedures.

2. Operator Orientation and Process Steps

2.1. Proper Seating Position (Chair/Back Support)

2.1.1. Current Function: Throughout the process the operator is required to perform procedures in non-ergonomic positions. Many of the steps in their process are repeated numerous times throughout the day. The operators are required to sit in a somewhat sideways position to reach the microscope when performing the touchup step. For the process the operators also need to place the ceramic part on a small metal wire and use this small wire to transport the part after the process to the WIP fixture.

2.2. Stretches and Exercise

2.2.1. Current Function: The operators perform stretches at their discretion.

3. WIP Fixture

3.1. WIP Fixture Tile and Stand


3.1.1. Current Function: After the printing process is complete, the finished part is removed from the chuck and transported to the WIP fixture. The part is held perpendicular to the fixture by placing the end of the wire into one of the 64 holes located on the 4”x4” ceramic tile.

3.2. Kink in The Wire

3.2.1. Current Function: The step of kinking the wire is not included in the current process.

1.3. Important Terminology, Abbreviations, Definitions

Term Definition

Ergonomic Hazards Any physical movement that creates any source of discomfort for the operator.

Adjustability Ability to include movement a given apparatus from its default position (i.e. that the apparatus is not static).

Shoulder Abduction The amount that the shoulder muscles are strained from a certain position. Specifically, it is the angle from the shoulder to the elbow.

Shoulder Flexion The amount that shoulder muscles are strained from a certain position. It measures the angle from the shoulder height in resting position to flexed position.

Lateral Back Bend Back movement from having to curl or extend the lower back. It measures the angle that the back is from straight up position.

Back Rotation Back movement from having to rotate the operator’s entire body from left to right or visa versa. It measures the full angle of which the back changes from start to finish while doing an action.

Lateral Neck Bend Neck movement from looking up to down and visa versa. It measures the angle that the neck is bent forward or back, in comparison to a resting position.

Neck Flexion Neck strain from having your neck in an uncomfortable position. It measures the angle that the neck is bent to either side, in comparison to a resting position.

Neck Rotation Neck movement from looking left to right or visa versa. It measures the full angle of which the neck changes from start


to finish while doing an action.

Wrist Flexion The amount that the wrist muscles are flexed while doing an action. It is measured by taking the angle from the wrist in resting position to the position while doing an action.

Wrist Radial Deviation The amount of wrist rotation while doing an action. It measures the angle that the wrist changes from beginning to end while doing an action.

Eye Strain Discomfort in eyes while looking / performing an activity.

Eye Fatigue Discomfort in eyes or headaches from looking at something for an extended period of time.

FOS An acronym for “Factor of Safety”.

Test Case A set of test types and the test types associated testing requirements. Each test case pertains to a subsystem of the Micropen Workstation Redesign project. Each test case will be the basis for verification and validation of the subsystem solution.

Test Report A test report includes the result summary and the detailed result data for each test type. The test report documents the the occurrence of discrepancies in performing the tests and in the test results for each test type. Each test report pertains to a subsystem of the Micropen Workstation Redesign project. Each test report will be the documentation for verification and validation of the subsystem solution.


2. MSD I: WKS 8-10 PRELIMINARY TEST PLAN – “WHAT”

2.1. Developing the Test Strategy

2.1.1. Test Phases

A phase approach will be used in testing the subsystem component solutions. The results of each phase will be used to validate the component solutions to be tested in the next phase. A waterfall approach will be used between phases.

Phase 1:Operator Tooling for the Touch-up ProcedureActuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck)Viewing Apparatus Used During the Touch-up Procedure

Phase 2:Proper Seating Position (Chair/Back Support)Arm and Elbow Support During the Touch-up ProcedureWIP Fixture Tile and StandStretches and Exercise

Phase 3:Kink in the WireOperator Keypad

2.1.2. Test Names and Definitions

The following table identifies and describes each test that will be used in validating the system solutions for the Micropen workstation redesign.

Test Number

Test Name Test Description

1 Endurance Test

Since a physical endurance life or friction life test is likely outside of our capabilities for this project, an analysis will be performed for the endurance life and friction life of the tooling. The analysis will be heavily utilized while designing the tooling with proper factors of safety for each component of the tooling assemblies in both stress based failure as well as frictional wear of the components. All components will ultimately be designed to have


an endurance life and friction life that is well past what our analysis deems to be necessary to ensure that our tooling does not fail.

2 Ergonomics Test

Pictures will be taken of the operator at work from various lengths and angles to focus on certain areas of ergonomic concern. Those pictures will be used to analyze angles and distances and compare them against the ideal ranges of ergonomic acceptability. This test will show improved ergonomic positioning to test if the solution will reduce operator discomfort.

3 Functionality Test

This is a test ensuring that a purchased product works as described without any defects. These tests let us know if any parts need to be a different model and determine if products were functional before subjecting them to day-to-day use.

4 Operator Survey

A series of surveys will be distributed to the operators to measure their personal discomfort as well as provide an opportunity for them to provide personal feedback on the new setup. These surveys will measure changes in operator discomfort while also giving insight into their feelings on the new process layout.

5 Stress Test Parts that are not bought but made will undergo a stress test at the foreseeable weak points to ensure that the parts will not fail through operator use or other typical stresses.

6 Survey of Scrap

Information on scrap rates from the process will be collected and measured in comparison to previous data to measure changes in the scrap rates and ensure the new process did not increase scrap.

7 Survey of Throughput

Information on daily throughput from the stations will be collected and measured in comparison to previous data to look at any changes in daily throughput and ensure it was not reduced with the introduction of the new stations.

8 Time Study Testers will time an operator performing the touch up process a number of times to find the average time of the task, as well as to observe times for individual subtasks of the process. This test will measure any change in process time.

9 Workstation Measurement

Precise measurements of certain elements of the workstation will be recorded. This test will allow the team to compare the system to the engineering requirements levels for operators.

2.1.3. Subsystem Testing Requirements Summary

_____________________________________________________________________________________________P16718 - Micropen Workstation Redesign - Test Plan Page

10

The following table identifies the tests required for each of the subsystems. This table is used as a summary and will be the basis for creating the test cases.

Subsystem Test Summary

Subsystem Test Type

Operator Tooling for the Touch-up Procedure Stress Test

Endurance Test

Operator Survey

Workstation Measurement

Survey of Scrap

Ergonomics Test

Time Study

Actuating the Opener (Opening/ Closing the Chuck) Functionality Test

Ergonomics Test

Time Study


Operator Survey

Viewing Apparatus Used During the Touch-up Procedure

Survey of Scrap

Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Time Study

Arm and Elbow Support During the Touch-up Procedure Survey of Scrap

Survey of Throughput

Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Time Study

Operator Keypad Ergonomics Test



11

Operator Survey

Proper Seating Position Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Functionality Test

Stretches and Exercise Ergonomics Test

Operator Survey

WIP Fixture Tile and Stand Survey of Scrap


Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Kink in the WIre Survey of Scrap


Ergonomics Test

Time Study

Operator Survey

2.2. Testing Documentation

2.2.1. Test Case Description

A test case is defined as set of test types and the test types associated testing requirements. Each test case pertains to a subsystem of the Micropen Workstation Redesign project. Each test case will be the basis for verification and validation of the subsystem solution.

2.2.2. Steps in Building a Test Case

Step 1 - Document Test Case Identification InformationSystem Level NameSubsystem Level NameResponsible Person


12

Tested ByStep 2 - Describe the Method of Testing the Subsystem

Identify Purpose of Testing the SubsystemDiscuss Relation of Subsystem in System Solution

Step 3 - Document the Testing InformationTest TypesTest Description

Used to further explain method of testing the test typeTrial Performed

Step 4 - Document the Requirements for Performing the TestEquipment RequirementsTime RequirementsPersonnel Requirements

Step 5 - Identify the Engineering Requirements Related to the Test CaseRequirement NumberEngineering RequirementUnit of MeasureMarginal ValueIdeal Value

Step 6 - Close Out Test CaseGain Approval of Test Case Document Comments

2.2.3. Test Case Template____________________________________________________________________________

Start of Test Case TemplateSystem ____________________________________Subsystem ____________________________________Date Completed __________________Responsible Person ____________________________________Tested By ____________________________________

Method Description The subsystem will be tested to verify its functionality and validate its operation performance in the the system. Answer the questions: what is the purpose of testing this subsystem? what does this subsystem do for the whole system solution? what specific parts of the subsystem will be tested using the test types?

Prerequisites Before the subsystem can be tested, the subsystem(a) needs to pass testing.

Test Descriptions _____________________________________________________________________________________________P16718 - Micropen Workstation Redesign - Test Plan Page

13

Test Type Estimated Time to Complete

Test Procedure

Test Type 1 Each test type will have specific testing procedures for the subsystem it is being used to validate. These testing procedures for the test type will be described in detail here.The procedure will include:

1. Steps to complete testing for the test type2. The number of trials performed3. The equipment and quantity needed to perform the test

Test Type 2 Each test type will have specific testing procedures for the subsystem it is being used to validate. These testing procedures for the test type will be described in detail here.The procedure will include:

1. Steps to complete testing for the test type2. The number of trials performed3. The equipment and quantity needed to perform the test

Personnel Required

Quantity Personnel Reason

# MSD Students Names

Describe the work the person(s) are responsible for.For example - collecting data, performing the tests, taking observations, being the subject of the test, etc.

# Other Personnel Names


Related Engineering Requirements

ER # Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value Test Type

ER# % [↑] > 97 > 99 Test Type 1

ER# Yes / No No Yes Test Type 2

Approval of Test Case Yes/ No CommentsName ______________________________ ______________________________Date ______________________________ ______________________________


14

______________________________

______________________________

End of Test Case Template ____________________________________________________________________________

2.2.4. Test Report Description

A test report includes the result summary and the detailed result data for each test type. The test report documents the the occurrence of discrepancies in performing the tests and in the test results for each test type. Each test report pertains to a subsystem of the Micropen Workstation Redesign project. Each test report will be the documentation for verification and validation of the subsystem solution.

2.2.5. Steps in Completing a Test Report

Step 1 - Document Test Report Identification InformationSystem Level NameSubsystem Level NameResponsible PersonTested By

Step 2 - Verify Testing Conditions Equipment Requirements MetPersonnel Requirements MetDocument Discrepancies in Testing Conditions

Step 3 - Identify the Testing InformationTest TypesPass/Fail Criteria - Reference ERsTrial Performed

Step 4 - Perform Tests Based on Defined ProcedureStep 5 - Document Testing Results

Document Pass/Fail for Each Trial of Each Test TypeDocument the Date the Trial was CompletedDocument Discrepancies in Test Results

Step 6 - Close Out Test ReportGain Approval of Test Report Document Comments


15

2.2.6. Test Report Template____________________________________________________________________________

Start of Test Report Template System ____________________________________Subsystem ____________________________________Date Completed __________________Responsible Person ____________________________________Tested By ____________________________________

Verification of Testing Conditions

Equipment Requirements Met Yes / NoPersonnel Requirements Met Yes / No

Document Discrepancies Description of Resolution in Testing Conditions of Discrepancy ______________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ______________________________

Testing Information

rqmt # Unit of Measure

Marginal Value

Ideal Value

Test Type Pass/Fail Date Complete

ER# % [↑] > 97 > 99 Test Type 1 Pass / Fail

ER# Yes / No No Yes Test Type 2

Document Test Results

Subsystem Passed Required Test Types Based on Criteria Yes / No

Document Discrepancies Description of Resolution in Test Results of Discrepancy ______________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ______________________________

Approval of Test Report Yes/ No Comments


16

Alexander Langkamp, 12/09/15,

Report for every subsystem

Name ______________________________ ______________________________Date ______________________________ ______________________________

______________________________

______________________________

End of Test Report Template ____________________________________________________________________________

2.3. Approval - Team, Guide, Customer

The signatures below show the approval of the following parties in MSD I of the Test Plan for the Micropen Workstation Redesign.

MSD Team

Rachele Floeser _______________________________

Alex Langkamp _______________________________

Sabrina Caliri _______________________________

Nick Accuosti _______________________________

Matt DePalo _______________________________

Mike Everett _______________________________

Guide

John Kaemmerlen _______________________________

Customer

William Grande _______________________________

Gary Fino _______________________________


17

3. MSD II WKS 2-3 TEST PLAN – “HOW, WHO, WHEN”

3.1. Data Collection

In collecting the testing data each subsystem will be tested based on its associated test case. Each subsystem will have one test case containing the test types and associated test procedures for verification and validation of the subsystem. Each test case will have an associated test report which will contain the results of the verification and validation processes.

3.1.1. Data Collection Summary

The following table presents the test types required for each of the subsystems. The table will be used to summarize the progress during testing; the test status will be identified as pass/fail and the test completion date will be recorded.

Subsystem Test Summary

Subsystem Test Type Pass/Fail Date Completed

Operator Tooling for the Touch-up Procedure

Stress Test

Endurance Test

Operator Survey


Survey of Scrap

Ergonomics Test

Time Study

Actuating the Opener (Opening/ Closing the Chuck)

Functionality Test

Ergonomics Test

Time Study


Operator Survey


18

Viewing Apparatus Used During the Touch-up Procedure

Survey of Scrap

Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Time Study

Arm and Elbow Support During the Touch-up Procedure

Survey of Scrap


Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Time Study

Operator Keypad Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Proper Seating Position Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Functionality Test

Stretches and Exercise Ergonomics Test

Operator Survey

WIP Fixture Tile and Stand

Survey of Scrap


Ergonomics Test


Operator Survey

Kink in the WIre Survey of Scrap


19


Ergonomics Test

Time Study

Operator Survey

3.2. Test Cases by Subsystem

Each of the following test cases use the 2.2.3. Test Case Template. For each of the subsystems there is one Test Case.

3.2.1. Test Case 1 - Operator Tooling for the Touch-up Procedure

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Operator Tooling for the Touch-up ProcedureDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Sabrina CaliriTested By ____________________________________

Method Description

The purpose of testing this subsystem is to verify its functionality and validate its operation performance in the system. We must ensure that the tooling fixture meets the following

1. Accommodates both CR100611-00 and CR110623-00 part diameters2. Allows “touch-up” procedure so the contact pads can be connected to the helix3. Reduces ergonomic issues for the operator without creating new ones4. Is designed for easy replacement

The touch up process require operators to lean forward and assume static postures of the arm, neck and torso for extended periods. Utilizing a mechanical fixture to hold/support the tool during the touch up process provides the following -

1. More control than moving the tool by hand2. Stable performance while simultaneously providing flexibility and maneuverability3. Enables the operator to manipulate tooling with precision4. Requires less effort or rotational movement to use5. Decreases touch-up time and time spent holding tool

Testing includes completing a feasibility analysis by evaluating the design mathematically to objectively decide whether to proceed with a proposed model. The designs selected for testing will initially be 3D printed to show a more detailed proof of


20

concept. The physical prototypes will be tested for functionality. Pictures will be taken of the operators working in the modified station so that specific areas of ergonomic importance can be measured against ideal positioning. Measurements of the workstation in comparison to the operators will be taken to ensure they are within suitable ergonomic limits. Surveys will be distributed amongst the operators to evaluate discomfort levels. Scrap surveys and time studies will be performed to ensure that the overall process throughput and quality are not reduced as a result of the changes.

Test Descriptions


Test Procedure

Functionality Test Procedure1. This is a test ensuring that a purchased product works as

described without any defects. These tests let us know if any parts need to be a different model and determine if products were functional before subjecting them to day-to-day use.

2. Designs selected for testing will initially be 3D printed to show a more detailed proof of concept.

3. Purchased components of the subassembly prototype are selected based on the specifications and requirements decided by the team.

4. The assembled prototype will be tested by team members.a. 3D printed devices will be printedb. The parts will be assembledc. The ease of operation will be analyzedd. Corrections and improvements will be made until the

team is satisfied the objective is accomplished.5. Operators will test the tooling fixture on a Micropen workstation.

a. For each operator observed, there will be a video taken and feedback gathered.

b. Adjustments will be made if necessary.Trials/Replications

● For each Design Selected, tests will be repeated until the prototype meet requirements

Equipment Required● 2 - 3D Printed Tooling Models● 1 - Functional Micropen Workstation● 20 - Ceramic Parts on Wire

Stress Test One day Procedure1. A theoretical stress test is to be completed using Solidworks or a

similar program in order to understand the stresses applied onto the supports.

2. Analyze the system with an over-estimate of the average operator load. Ensure that any deflection of the fixture, doesn’t Interfere with the process, the model can withstand the bending stress at base.


21

3. Parts that are not bought but made will undergo a stress test at the foreseeable weak points to ensure that the parts will not fail through operator use or other typical stresses. Analyze the results and determine if the components meet the pass/fail criteria

Trials/Replications● All parts manufactured in house will be tested once if necessary

Equipment Required● 2 - Simulations of Models

Endurance Test One day Procedure1. Since a physical endurance life or friction life test is likely outside

of our capabilities for this project, an analysis will be performed for the endurance life and friction life of the tooling.

2. The analysis will be heavily utilized while designing the tooling with proper factors of safety for each component of the tooling assemblies in both stress based failure as well as frictional wear of the components.

3. All components will ultimately be designed to have an endurance life and friction life that is well past what our analysis deems to be necessary to ensure that our tooling does not fail.

Trials/Replications● One analysis

Equipment Required● Component specification

Ergonomic Test 15 minutes per operator to take pictures

Procedure1. Determine the setup and location for the proposed tooling fixture

a. Placing part used by operator in an easily accessible area that

i. Keeps wrist in a neutral positionii. Reduce awkward elbow and shoulder posturesiii. Less effort or rotational movement to useiv. Reduce touch-up time and time spent holding

tool2. For each operator observed, there will be ergonomic tests

concerning the following areas: Shoulder abduction, Shoulder flexion, Neck flexion, Wrist flexion, Wrist radial deviation.

Trials/Replications● This test should be performed for at least 6 operators.

Equipment Required● 1 - Camera● 2 - Tooling Models

Workstation Measurements

15 minutes to record

Procedure1. For each operator observed, there will be measurements taken on

the horizontal work reach, as well as on the work surface in relation to the operator’s position.

Trials/Replications● This test should be done for at least 6 separate operators

Equipment Required● 1 - Tape measure


22

● 1 - Angle measuring device

Operator Survey 1-2 weeks to distribute and collect, 2-3 hours to analyze

Procedure1. A survey will be distributed to all operators concerning all

subsystems and generic discomfort they feel.2. The surveys will be collected and analyzed in comparison to the

similar surveys sent out during MSD1 to measure changes in discomfort frequency and intensity with the new layout.

Trials/Replications● Each operator will be asked to fill out a survey over the course of a

work day, for 1-3 workdays.Equipment Required

● 1 - Operator Survey

Survey of Scrap One day Procedure1. Information on scrap rates from the process will be collected and

measured in comparison to previous data to measure changes in the scrap rates and ensure the new process did not increase scrap.

Trials/Replications● 1 survey per workstation

Equipment Required● 1 - Scrap Data Collection Sheet


One day Procedure1. Information on daily throughput from the stations will be collected.2. Collected information will be measured in comparison to previous

data to look at any changes in daily throughput and ensure it was not reduced with the introduction of the new stations.


Equipment Required● 1 - Throughput Data Collection Sheet

Time Study 15 minutes per trial, 1 hour to analyze

Procedure1. Testers will time an operator performing the touch-up process a

number of times to find the average time of the task.2. The process will be divided into subtasks3. Testers will time an operator performing the individual subtasks of

the process.4. This data will be analyzed to measure any changes in processing

time.Trials/Replications

● This test should be done for at least 6 separate operatorsEquipment Required

● 1 - Stopwatch● 1 - Time Study Data Collection Sheet

Personnel Required


23


4 MSD Students Sabrina Caliri Nicholas Accuosti Matthew DePalo Alexander Langkamp

Perform testing, Recording purposes

>=3 Station Operators The station operators are required during the data recording for ergonomic tests and station measurements. The operators also need to fill out the surveys to provide data and feedback


ER# Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value Test Type

ER1 % [↑] > 97 > 99 Survey of ScrapER5 Yes / No No Yes Operator SurveyER6 seconds [↓] 15 <=15 Time StudyER7 degrees [↓] 35 - 67 < 34 Ergonomics TestER8 degrees [↓] 48 - 94 < 47 Ergonomics Test

ER13 degrees [↓] 23 - 45 < 23 Ergonomics TestER15 degrees [↓] 26 - 50 < 25 Ergonomics TestER16 degrees [↓] 8 - 14 < 7 Ergonomics TestER17 m^2 [↓] TBD TBD Workstation MeasurementER18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator SurveyER19 cm [↑] 63 - 87 68 - 91 Workstation MeasurementER20 cm [↓] 46 30 Workstation MeasurementER21 cm [↓] 152 102 Workstation MeasurementER32 Yes / No Ergonomics TestER33 cm [↑] 0.8 - 1.3 1 Workstation MeasurementER34 lb [↓] >2 1 Workstation MeasurementER36 FOS 3 >5 Stress TestER37 cycles/hour 50 >60 Endurance Test


______________________________

______________________________

3.2.2 - Test Case 2 - Actuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck)

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process Tooling Subsystem Actuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck) _____________________________________________________________________________________________P16718 - Micropen Workstation Redesign - Test Plan Page

24

Date Completed ________________________________Responsible Person Matt DePaloTested By ________________________________

Method Description The Actuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck) subsystem will be tested to verify its functionality and validate its operation performance in the the Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process Tooling system. The subsystem solution identified for testing is the solenoid controlled air valve, this relates to holding the part using a controlled airflow system. The purpose of testing this sub system is to ensure that the new airflow control system functions properly and is able to open and close the part holding chuck of the Micropen Hemostasis Probe printing system. The chuck should open and close with the press of a button or flip of a switch, the same way it currently does when the operator physically manipulates the lever of the ball valve which blocks and supplies the flow of air from the source at Micropen. This subsystem greatly reduces the ergonomic risk incurred by having the operator reach for and manipulate the mechanical ball valve which is currently used to control the flow of air to the part holding chuck. The subsystem is comprised of a solenoid controlled air valve, a switch, a power supply, connecting wires, air hosing, and the press-fit connectors required to connect the air hoses. The components work together as a single unit in order to open and close the part holding chuck of the printing system.

Test Descriptions


Test Procedure

Functionality Test

approximately 1 hour

Procedure1. This will be a pass/fail test determining is the solenoid valve is

able to properly control the airflow in order to actuate the chuck.2. In order to pass, the solenoid valve air control system must be

able to open, hold open, close, and hold close, the jaws of the part holding chuck in the printing system.

3. An inability to do any of these functions will result in a failure.Trials/Replications

● For each Design Selected, tests will be repeated until the prototype meet requirements

Equipment Required● 1 - Solenoid Airflow control system

Ergonomics Test 1 day Procedure1. Identify the operator positions to ensure relief of stresses and

strains due to static loads and operating the process.a. Wrist flexion


25

b. Wrist radial deviation2. Pictures will be taken of the operator at work from various lengths

and angles to focus on the wrist, arm, and shoulder.3. Those pictures will be used to analyze angles and distances and

compare them against the ideal ranges of ergonomic acceptability.

4. This test will show improved ergonomic positioning to test if the solution will reduce operator discomfort.

Equipment Required● 1 - Camera● 1 - Solenoid air valve

Time Study 1 day Procedure1. Testers will time an operator performing the touch up process a

number of times to find the average time of the task, as well as to observe times for individual subtasks of the process. This test will measure any change in process time

Trials/Replications● 1-3 times per operator

Equipment Required● 1 - Stopwatch● 1 - Time Study Data Collection Sheet


1 day Procedure1. Precise measurements of certain elements of the workstation will

be recorded. This test will allow the team to compare the system to the engineering requirements levels for operators.

Trials/Replications● 1 set of measurements

Equipment Required● 1 - Work station● 1 - Solenoid Air Valve

Operator Survey 1 day Procedure1. A series of surveys will be distributed to the operators to measure

their personal discomfort as well as provide an opportunity for them to provide personal feedback on the new setup. These surveys will measure changes in operator discomfort while also giving insight into their feelings on the new process layout.

Trials/Replications● One per operator

Equipment Required● 1 - Operator Survey

Personnel Required


2 MSD Students Matt DePalo Rachele Floeser

Assembling the system, running functionality test, documenting results,


26

1 Micropen Personnel Gary Fino

Oversight, Assembly assistance, observation


ER# Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value Test TypeER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomics TestER6 seconds [↓] 15 <=15 Time StudyER7 degrees [↓] 35 - 67 < 34 Ergonomics TestER8 degrees [↓] 48 - 94 < 47 Ergonomics Test

ER15 degrees [↓] 26 - 50 < 25 Ergonomics TestER16 degrees [↓] 8 - 14 < 7 Ergonomics TestER17 m^2 [↓] TBD TBD Workstation MeasurementER18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator SurveyER35 Yes / No Ergonomics Test


______________________________

______________________________

3.2.3 Test Case 3 - Viewing Apparatus Used During the Touch-up Procedure

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Viewing Apparatus Used During the Touch-up ProcedureDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Michael EverettTested By ____________________________________

Method Description Pictures will be taken of the operators working in the updated station so that specific areas of ergonomic importance can be measured against ideal positioning. Measurements of the workstation in comparison to the operators will be taken to ensure they are within suitable ergonomic limits, including distance to monitor and monitor angle of inclination. Surveys will be distributed amongst the operators to evaluate discomfort levels. Scrap surveys and time studies will be performed to ensure that the overall process throughput and quality did not reduce as a result of the changes.

Prerequisites _____________________________________________________________________________________________P16718 - Micropen Workstation Redesign - Test Plan Page

27

The viewing subsystem will need to be tested after the implementation of the operator tooling to simulate the final operator orientation as accurately as possible.

Test Descriptions


Test Procedure

Ergonomic Test 15 minutes per operator to take pictures, 1 hour to analyze all results

Procedure1. For each operator observed, there will be ergonomic tests

concerning the following areas: Neck flexion, Lateral neck bend, Back flexion, Lateral back bend, neck rotation, and back rotation.

Trials/Replications● This test should be performed for at least 3 operators.

Equipment Required● 1 - Camera, a smartphone should suffice.


15 minutes to record, 15 minutes to analyze

Procedure1. For each operator observed, there will be measurements taken

on the monitors and their distance from operators and the angle of inclination to operators, as well as on the work surface in relation to the operator’s position.

2. These measurements will be compared to the recommended ergonomic layout for monitor use to ensure that the monitors will not cause unnecessary eye strain.

Trials/Replications● This test should be done for at least 3 separate operators.

Equipment Required● 1 - Tape measure● 1 - Angle measuring device.

Operator Survey 1-2 weeks to distribute and collect, 2-3 hours to analyze

Procedure1. A survey will be distributed to all operators concerning all

subsystems and generic discomfort they feel.2. The surveys will be collected and analyzed in comparison to the

similar surveys sent out during MSD1 to measure changes in discomfort frequency and intensity with the new layout.

Trials/Replications● Each operator will be asked to fill out a survey over the course of

a work day, for 1-3 work days.Equipment Required


Survey of Scrap 1 hour to analyze

Procedure1. Micropen’s data on scrap rates of their products will be analyzed

and compared to the rates before the station overhaul to detect any significant change in the scrap rate

Trials/Replications● This will be performed after a suitable amount of parts have been

produced so that there is a good sample size to work withEquipment Required


28

● 1 - survey of scrap data sheet

Time Study 15 minutes per trial, 1 hour to analyze

Procedure1. A time study will be performed for each operator, timing in

batches of 10 parts completed, and taking the average time per part, as well as noting any major hold ups in the process.


Equipment Required● 1 - Stopwatch

Personnel Required


2 MSD StudentsMichael EverettAlexander/Rachele

The students will be collecting data and pictures for ergonomic tests, workstation measurements, and time studies. They will also need to analyze the data from all the tests.

>=3 Station Operators The station operators are required during the data recording for ergonomic tests and station measurements. The operators also need to fill out the surveys to provide data and feedback



ER1 % [↑] > 97 > 99 Scrap SurveyER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomic TestER4 Percentile [↑] 20-80 10-90 Ergonomic TestER6 seconds [↓] 15 <=15 Time StudyER9 degrees [↓] 26 - 45 < 25 Ergonomic Test

ER10 degrees [↓] 11 - 20 < 10 Ergonomic TestER11 degrees [↓] 26 - 45 < 25 Ergonomic TestER12 degrees [↓] 13 - 24 < 12 Ergonomic TestER13 degrees [↓] 23 - 45 < 23 Ergonomic TestER14 degrees [↓] 21-40 < 20 Ergonomic TestER17 m^2 [↓] TBD TBD Workstation MeasurementER18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator SurveyER19 cm [↑] 63 - 87 68 - 91 Workstation MeasurementER26 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator SurveyER28 cm [↑] 69 69-84 Workstation MeasurementER29 degrees [↓] <15 15-20 Workstation MeasurementER30 in [↑] <20 20-40 Workstation Measurement

Approval of Test Case Yes/ No CommentsName ______________________________ ______________________________


29

Date ______________________________ ____________________________________________________________

______________________________

3.2.4 - Test Case 4 - Arm and Elbow Support During the Touch-up Procedure

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Arm and Elbow Support During the Touch-up ProcedureDate Completed ____________________________________Responsible Person Nick AccuostiTested By ____________________________________ Method Description

The forearm and elbow supports will be tested to verify its functionality and validate its implementation into the system. The purpose of testing this subsystem is to make certain that the new supports will reduce ergonomic risks in comparison to the previous setup. In addition, tests will be performed to check the durability and strength of the system. The subsystem solution adds a new support for the operator that previously was not present. The specific parts of the forearm support that will be tested are the endurance of the support, the stresses on the support, and the ergonomic improvements that the support provides.

Prerequisites

The support must be attached to the workstation, and adjusted by the operator into the most comfortable position that they can create. The workstation measurement test must be conducted before any other tests are conducted.

Test Descriptions Test Type Estimated

Time to Complete

Test Procedure

Ergonomic Test ~ 2 hours Procedure1. The operator will be placed into the work station with the new

workstation setup including the arm/elbow supports.2. Measurements of the static position of an operator in a resting

position with the arm rest will be performed to see if they are within


30

our engineering requirements for operators in a static resting position (see related engineering requirements below).

3. Measurements of the static position of the operator while performing the touch up procedure will be measured and compared to ergonomic microscope users as detailed in our engineering requirements (see related engineering requirements below).

Trials/Replications● Three trials on three different operators (preferably variable size).

Equipment Required● 1 - Work Station● 1 - Forearm / elbow support with all components needed to set it up

to the workstation.

Survey of Scrap ~ 1 hour to analyze

Procedure1. Micropen’s data on scrap rates of their products will be analyzed

and compared to the rates before the station overhaul to detect any significant change in the scrap rate.

Trials/Replications● This will be performed after a suitable amount of parts have been

produced so that there is a good sample size to work with.Equipment Required

● 1 - Survey of Scrap Sheet


~ one hour to analyze

Procedure1. Information on daily throughput from the stations will be collected.2. Collected information will be measured in comparison to previous

data to look at any changes in daily throughput and ensure it was not reduced with the introduction of the new stations.

Trials/Replications● One analysis of throughput.



~ one hour Procedure1. The design will be placed into the workstation as designed.2. The test passes if the support fits into the current footprint. This test

should be implemented prior to all other tests regarding the forearm / elbow support.

3. The location of the elbow / forearm support will be measured as well.

Trials/Replications● One trial, replications needed if it fails to correctly fit into the

workstation as theoretically predicted.Equipment Required

● 1 - Work station● 1 - Forearm / elbow support with all components needed to set it up

to the workstation.

Operator Survey ~ two weeks Procedure1. The operators will fill out a similar survey given to them at the

beginning of MSD I in which they described discomfort levels while


31

doing the procedure.2. The results of these surveys will be compared to the initial operator

surveys to show changes in operator pain levels.Trials/Replications

● One survey per day over the course of a weekEquipment Required

● ~50+ Discomfort surveys (one for each operator over the course of approximately two work weeks ).

Time Study ~ half of a work day

Procedure1. A time study will be performed for each operator, timing in batches

of 10 parts completed, and taking the average time per part, as well as noting any major hold ups in the process.

2. The results will be compared to the previous workstation setup in to make sure there is nothing slowing down the process dramatically by implementing a forearm support.


Equipment Required● 1 - Stopwatch

Stress Test ~ 2 hours to analyze

Procedure1. A theoretical stress test is to be completed using Solidworks or a

similar program in order to understand the stresses applied onto the supports.

Trials/Replications● One trial - reviewed by all Mechanical Engineers.

Equipment Required● 1- Computer with applicable programs installed.

Endurance Test ~ 2 hours to analyze

Procedure1. The endurance of the forearm support will be analyzed theoretically

due to time constraints not allowing a thorough endurance test (over the course of a month or more) to be tested.

Trials/Replications● One trial - reviewed by all Mechanical Engineers.

Equipment Required● 1- Computer with applicable programs installed.

Personnel Required Quantity Personnel Reason

1 Nick Accuosti Performing the ergonomic test, workstation measurement, stress test, time study, and endurance test.

1 Alex Langkamp Collecting data through the survey of scrap, survey of throughput, and operator survey.

3 Operators To be the subject of the following tests: ergonomic test, operator survey, and the


32

time study.


rqmt# Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value Test Type

ER1 % [↑] > 97 > 99 Ergonomic Test

ER2 Parts/Hour [↑] >= 0 > 5 Survey of Throughput

ER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Operator Survey

ER4 Percentile [↑] 20-80 10-90 Ergonomic Test

ER6 seconds [↓] 15 <=15 Time Study

ER7 degrees [↓] 35 - 67 < 34 Ergonomic Test



ER14 degrees [↓] 21-40 < 20 Ergonomic Test



ER17 m^2 [↓] TBD TBD Workstation Measurement

ER18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator Survey

ER19 cm [↑] 63 - 87 68 - 91 Workstation Measurement

ER20 cm [↓] 46 30 Ergonomic Test

ER21 cm [↓] 152 102 Ergonomic Test

ER31 Yes / No Operator Survey

Approval of Test Case Yes/ No Comments Name ______________________________ ______________________________ Date ______________________________ ______________________________

______________________________

______________________________


33

3.2.5 Test Case 5 - Operator Keypad

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Operator KeypadDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Rachele FloeserTested By ____________________________________

Method Description The operator keypad will be tested to verify its functionality and validate its operation performance in the Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process Tooling system. After redesigning the keypad, the test designs will be used to measure the ergonomic differences between the current keypad and the proposed keypad, survey the operators on ease of use and preference for use, as well as measure the workstation to ensure proper workstation ranges. The location of the keypad and the key set-up on the keypad will be tested. The keypad controls the micropen tooling tip and includes a series of keys used by the operator, some keys are used for each part processed while others are used intermittently. The functions of the keypad can be keyed in on the keyboard as well. The location of the keypad is located to the side of the operator requiring the operator to somewhat reach for the keys when operating the system.

Prerequisites The operator keypad subsystem is part of Phase 3 for the test phases due to a constraint on resources being available for testing. No other subsystem is required to pass testing before the operator keypad subsystem is tested.

Test Descriptions


Test Procedure

Ergonomics Test

1 day Procedure1. Identify the quantity of use for the keys

a. Often used keys during the processb. Less often used keys during the process

2. Determine the key setup and key location for the proposed keypad

a. Place controls in optimal viewing area by key use frequency

b. Place keypad in easily accessible area3. Compare the key setup for the current keypad to the key setup

for the proposed keypad.4. Measure the ergonomic differences between the current

keypad and the proposed keypad


34

Trials/Replications● Measure for at least 3 operators/testers

Equipment Required● 1 Workstation Setup● 1 Keypad● 12 Double Keys● 12 Double Key Clip-on Covers● 12 Key Labels● 1 Plastic Keypad Cover


1 day for data collection,1 week for data analysis

Procedure1. Identify measurements to take

a. Number of keys on keyboardb. Height of keypadc. Range of adjustabilityd. Operation capability - left/right hand operablee. Lateral neck bendf. Neck flexiong. Neck rotationh. Wrist flexioni. Wrist radial deviationj. Horizontal work reach depthk. Horizontal work reach width

2. Take measurements of the workstation and operatorsa. Using the current processb. Using the proposed process

3. Analyze and compare measurements to ensure proper workstation ranges

Trials/Replications● Measure for at least 3 operators/testers

Equipment Required● 1 - Workstation Setup● 1 - Keypad● 12 - Double Keys● 12 - Double Key Clip-on Covers● 12 - Key Labels● 1 - Plastic Keypad Cover

Operator Survey 1 day for survey initialization

Procedure1. Identify questions to include in operator survey

a. Have the ergonomic hazards related to the keypad been reduced?

b. The modified workstation is more comfortable to use than the previous setup?

2. Develop operator survey3. Present operators with operator survey4. Receive completed surveys from Micropen5. Analyze feedback from surveys

Trials/Replications● Measure for at least 5 operators

Equipment Required


35


Personnel Required


1-2 MSD Students Rachele Floeser Alex Langkamp

Discuss test with SMEs, Recording purposes



S3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomics TestS4 Percentile [↑] 20-80 10-90 Workstation Measurements, Operator SurveyS5 Yes / No No Yes Operator Survey

S12 degrees [↓] 13 - 24 < 12 Ergonomics TestS13 degrees [↓] 23 - 45 < 23 Ergonomics TestS14 degrees [↓] 21-40 < 20 Ergonomics TestS15 degrees [↓] 26 - 50 < 25 Ergonomics TestS16 degrees [↓] 8 - 14 < 7 Ergonomics TestS17 m^2 [↓] TBD TBD Workstation MeasurementS18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator SurveyS19 cm [↑] 63 - 87 68 - 91 Workstation MeasurementS20 cm [↓] 46 30 Workstation MeasurementS21 cm [↓] 152 102 Workstation MeasurementS35 Yes / No Yes Yes Ergonomics Test


______________________________

______________________________

3.2.6 Test Case 6 - Proper Seating Position (Chair/Back Support)

System Operator Orientation and Process StepsSubsystem Proper Seating Position (Chair/Back Support)Date Completed __________________Responsible Person Sabrina CaliriTested By ____________________________________


36

Method Description

The purpose of testing this subsystem is to verify its functionality and validate its operation performance in the system. We must ensure that the tooling fixture1. Allows for workstation adjustability to accommodate variations in operator size2. Allows “touch-up” procedure so the contact pads can be connected to the helix3. Reduces ergonomic issues for the operator without creating new ones4. Maintains current printing system hardware5. Utilizes space occupied by existing workstationThe current workstations, prevents the operator from working in a neutral posture. Due to the lack of legroom at the workstation the operators are forced to sit sideways adapting an awkward posture to complete the process. The operator is in a constant state of leaning forward and leaning backward, through the use of the microscope. Time spent sitting and doing the touch up process is an ergonomics risk factors which magnifies other risk factors such as awkward posture. An optimal solution would allowEmployees to alternate between standing and sitting. However, precision work demands focus and requires constant efforts and stability and worker tend to lean forward and adopt a tense posture. Chairs with a forward tilting seat and backrest should help to minimize this problem and are recommended for this type of work.

Prerequisites

The proper seating position (chair/back support) subsystem is a part of the system and directly influences other subsystems while also being directly influenced by the other subsystems. The proper seating position (chair/back support) subsystem is part of Phase 2 for the test phases due to a constraint on resources being available for testing. No other subsystem is required to pass testing before the stretches and exercise subsystem is tested.

Test Descriptions


Test Procedure

Ergonomic Test 30 minutes per operator to take pictures

Procedure1. Three operators will be observed for ergonomic tests

concerning the following areas:a. Shoulder abductionb. Shoulder flexionc. Back flexiond. Lateral back bend


37

e. Back rotationf. Lateral neck bendg. Neck flexionh. Neck rotation

2. Pictures and measurements will be made in order to measure all of the above.

Trials/Replications● One trial performed for at least 3 operators.

Equipment Requirements● 1 - Camera

Functionality Test

one day Procedure1. All components of the purchased product (i.e.

adjustability components) are going to be tested to ensure that the purchased product works as described without any defects.

2. The test fails if any components do not work as advertised.

a. Obtain top seating options for trial evaluation to gathering employee feedback.

Trials/Replications● One trial.

Equipment Requirements● 1 - Work Station● 1 - Product with all necessary components


15 minutes to record

Procedure1. The design will be placed into the workstation as designed.2. The test passes if the support fits into the current footprint. This

test should be implemented prior to all other tests regarding the modified seating position.

3. The location of the modified seating position will be measured as well.

Trials/Replications● One trial, replications needed if it fails to correctly fit into the

workstation as theoretically predicted.Equipment Required

● 1 - Work station● 1 - Product with all necessary components.

Operator Survey

1-2 weeks to distribute and collect, 2-3 hours to analyze

Procedure1. The operators will fill out a similar survey given to them at the

beginning of MSD I in which they described discomfort levels while doing the procedure.

2. The results of these surveys will be compared to the initial operator surveys to show changes in operator pain levels.

Trials/Replications● One survey per day over the course of a week

Equipment Required


38

● ~50+ Discomfort surveys (one for each operator over the course of approximately two work weeks ).

Survey of Scrap One day Procedure1. Micropen’s data on scrap rates of their products will be

analyzed and compared to the rates before the station overhaul to detect any significant change in the scrap rate.

Trials/Replications● This will be performed after a suitable amount of parts have

been produced so that there is a good sample size to work with.Equipment Required

● 1 - Survey of Scrap Sheet


One day Procedure1. Information on daily throughput from the stations will be

collected.2. Collected information will be measured in comparison to

previous data to look at any changes in daily throughput and ensure it was not reduced with the introduction of the new stations.

Trials/Replications● One analysis of throughput.


Time Study One day Procedure1. A time study will be performed for each operator, timing in

batches of 10 parts completed, and taking the average time per part, as well as noting any major hold ups in the process.

2. The results will be compared to the previous workstation setup in to make sure there is nothing slowing down the process dramatically by implementing a proper seating position.


Equipment Required● 1 - Stopwatch● 1 - Time study data collection sheet

Personnel Required


1-2 MSD Students Rachele Floeser Sabrina Caliri

Discuss test with SMEs, Recording purposes

3 Micropen Operators Analyzer



39

ER# Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value Test TypeER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomics Test

ER4 Percentile [↑] 20-80 10-90Workstation Measurement,

Operator SurveyER7 degrees [↓] 35 - 67 < 34 Ergonomics TestER8 degrees [↓] 48 - 94 < 47 Ergonomics TestER9 degrees [↓] 26 - 45 < 25 Ergonomics Test

ER10 degrees [↓] 11 - 20 < 10 Ergonomics TestER11 degrees [↓] 26 - 45 < 25 Ergonomics TestER12 degrees [↓] 13 - 24 < 12 Ergonomics TestER13 degrees [↓] 23 - 45 < 23 Ergonomics TestER14 degrees [↓] 21-40 < 20 Ergonomics TestER17 m^2 [↓] TBD TBD Workstation MeasurementER18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator SurveyER20 cm [↓] 46 30 Workstation MeasurementER21 cm [↓] 152 102 Workstation MeasurementER22 cm [↑] 20 20-28 Workstation MeasurementER23 cm [↑] 46 53 Workstation MeasurementER24 degrees [↑] <5 <10 Workstation MeasurementER25 Yes / No Functionality Test


______________________________

______________________________

3.2.7 Test Case 7 - Stretches and Exercise

System Operator Orientation and Process StepsSubsystem Stretches and ExerciseDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Rachele FloeserTested By ____________________________________

Method Description

The stretches and exercise subsystem will be tested to verify its functionality and validate its operation performance in the Operator Orientation and Process Steps system. Using the developed series of stretching and exercise sheets meet with subject matter experts to review and receive suggestions for improvement.


40

Based on feedback from the initial operator surveys, the operators stretch intermittently when they feel discomfort. The stretches sheets and exercise information would encourage the operators to stretch more often, resulting in relieved static muscles.

Prerequisites

This subsystem is a part of the system but does not directly influence the other subsystems and is not directly influenced by the other subsystems. The stretches and exercise subsystem is part of Phase 2 for the test phases due to a constraint on resources being available for testing. No other subsystem is required to pass testing before the stretches and exercise subsystem is tested.

Test Descriptions


Test Procedure

Ergonomics Test

1 hour Procedure1. Identify the operator motions to ensure relief of stresses and strains

due to static loads and operating the process.a. Shoulder abductionb. Shoulder flexionc. Back flexiond. Lateral neck bende. Neck flexionf. Neck rotationg. Wrist flexionh. Wrist radial deviation

2. Verify operator motions are addressed by proposed stretching and exercise sheets.

a. Place controls in optimal viewing area by key use frequencyb. Place keypad in easily accessible area

3. Modify stretching and exercise sheets as necessary.4. Review stretching and exercise sheets with SMEs

Trials/Replications● One trial for each sheet until all pass criteria is met.● One trial discussing the stretching and exercise sheets with SMEs.

Equipment Required● 1 - set of stretching and exercise sheets

Operator Survey

1 hour Procedure1. Identify questions to include in operator survey

a. Have the ergonomic hazards been reduced?b. The modified workstation is more comfortable to use than the

previous setup?2. Develop operator survey3. Present operators with operator survey4. Receive completed surveys from Micropen


41

5. Analyze feedback from surveysTrials/Replications

● One trial for each operator.Equipment Required

● 1 - set of stretching and exercise sheets

Personnel Required


2 MSD Students Rachele Floeser Sabrina Caliri

Discuss tests with SMEs, Recording purposes

1 Ergonomic SME Analyze ergonomics related to the documentation

1 Design SME Verify the design and presentation of the documentation



ER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomics Test

ER7 degrees [↓] 35 - 67 < 34 Ergonomics Test







ER14 degrees [↓] 21-40 < 20 Ergonomics Test






42

______________________________

______________________________

3.2.8 Test Case 8 - WIP Fixture Tile and Stand

System WIP FixtureSubsystem WIP Fixture Tile and StandDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Rachele FloeserTested By ____________________________________

Method Description

Using a designed factorial experiment to test the four models.The four models are described as:

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

Tile Dimensions 4”x4” 4”x4” 4”x4” 4”x?”

Hole Dimensions 5x5 5x5 7x7+1 ?

WIP 25 25 50 50

Pattern Grid Brick Grid Grid

The WIP fixture Tile and Stand subsystem will be tested to verify its functionality and validate its operation performance in the WIP Fixture system. Using the set of WIP fixture prototypes based on the design solutions, validate the optimal solution by analyzing the operator preference and the time to fill the WIP fixture under normal operating conditions. The WIP Fixture Tile and Stand is used to hold the painted parts after they are removed by the operator from the Micropen Instrument. Based on feedback from the operators, there is a significant number of reported discomforts in the left hand, wrist, and arm. Modifying the WIP Fixture Tile can be tested to ensure a more ergonomic workstation design for the operator. The number of holes for parts to be placed will be varied, the size of the WIP fixture will be varied, and the pattern of the holes in the WIP fixture will be varied, these factors will be tested for ergonomic benefits and ease of use.

Prerequisites

The WIP fixture Tile and Stand subsystem is a part of the system but is not directly influenced by the other subsystems. No other subsystem is required to pass testing


43

before the WIP fixture Tile and Stand subsystem is tested. The WIP fixture Tile and Stand subsystem is required to be tested prior to or in parallel with the Kink in the Wire subsystem. The WIP fixture Tile and Stand subsystem is part of Phase 2 for the test phases due to a constraint on resources being available for testing.

Test Descriptions


Test Procedure

Ergonomics Test

4 hours Procedure1. Define the Response Variable

ResponseAverage time required per piece to place painted part in WIP Fixture

2. Define the Experimental Layout

Testing Requirements● Number of Operators: p=2● Number of Replications: n = 2● Number of Observations: N = 36● No - The large tile with small WIP is not being proposed

Partial 23 Factorial DesignFactors Levels

A Tile Dimension 4”x4”, 4”x?”B WIP 25, 50C Pattern Grid, Brick

Factors Observations

Include

A B C Operator 1

Operator 2

Yes/No

1 - - - Yes


44

a + - - x x

x x

No

b - + - Yes

ab + + - Yes

c - - + Yes

ac + - + x x

x x

No

bc - + + Yes

abc + + + Yes

3. Define the Constraints

Constraints:● The factor “Wire” at its low and high levels of “No kink” and “Kink”,

respectively, are not being tested here. The factor “Wire” will be tested separately.

● The location of the WIP fixture will be kept in its current location and constant. The factor “WIP Fixture Location” will be tested separately.

● The factor “WIP Fixture Height” will be tested separately.

4. Describe Test Process

The time it takes to place the parts into the WIP fixture will be measuredThe time will start after the part is removed from the chuck.The time will stop when the tester removes their hand from the wire.Each tester will fill the entire board with ‘painted’ parts.

5. Determine time to run experiment

Calculating time needed for testing~45-50 parts/hour for staging, loading, painting, unloading, placing in WIP FixtureFor 50 parts, the estimated time required to unload from the chuck and place the part in the WIP Fixture is 10 minutes.(200 parts)*(2 replicates)*(3 operators)/(50 parts)*(10minutes)/(60 minutes) = 4 hours

Equipment Required● 1 - Stretching and exercise sheets


Procedure1. Identify measurements to take

a. Work surface heightb. Horizontal work reach depth


45

c. Horizontal work reach width2. Take measurements of the workstation and operators

a. Using the current processb. Using the proposed process

3. Analyze and compare measurements to ensure proper workstation ranges

Number of Trials● 1 - set of measurements for 3 operators/testers

Equipment Required● 1 - Workstation Measurement Data Collection Sheet

Operator Survey Procedure1. Identify questions to include in operator survey

a. The modified workstation is more comfortable to use than the previous setup?

2. Develop operator survey3. Present operators with operator survey4. Receive completed surveys from Micropen5. Analyze feedback from surveys to determine whether the operators

prefer the current or future state of the WIP fixture.Number of Trials

● One trial for each operator.Equipment Required


Survey of Scrap Procedure1. Analysis of Scrap Rates versus Future Scrap Rates

a. If the future state increases the scrap, steps will be taken to study the reasoning behind the increased rates

b. If the future state maintains or decreases scrap, the WIP fixture will be kept as a viable option

Number of Trials● Replications, n = 1

Equipment Required● 1 - Survey of Scrap Analysis


Procedure1. Analysis of Throughput Rates versus Future Throughput Rates

a. If the future state decreases the throughput, steps will be taken to study the reasoning behind the decreased rates

b. If the future state maintains or increases throughput, the Kink in the wire will be kept as a viable option

Number of Trials● Replications, n = 1

Equipment Required● 1 - Workstation Setup● 1 - Functioning Chuck● 55 - Unpainted or Scrap Ceramics Parts● 55 - Wires● 1 - WIP Fixture Stand● 4 - WIP Fixture Models


46

Personnel Required


1-2 MSD Students Rachele Floeser Sabrina Caliri

Run the test, Recording purposes

3 Micropen Operators Testers

1 Gary Fino Lab Access


ER# Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value Test TypeER1 % [↑] > 97 > 99 Survey of ScrapER2 Parts/Hour [↑] >= 0 > 5 Survey of ThroughputER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomics TestER5 Yes / No No Yes Operator SurveyER7 degrees [↓] 35 - 67 < 34 Ergonomics TestER8 degrees [↓] 48 - 94 < 47 Ergonomics TestER9 degrees [↓] 26 - 45 < 25 Ergonomics Test

ER10 degrees [↓] 11 - 20 < 10 Ergonomics TestER11 degrees [↓] 26 - 45 < 25 Ergonomics TestER15 degrees [↓] 26 - 50 < 25 Ergonomics TestER16 degrees [↓] 8 - 14 < 7 Ergonomics TestER18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator SurveyER19 cm [↑] 63 - 87 68 - 91 Workstation MeasurementER20 cm [↓] 46 30 Workstation MeasurementER21 cm [↓] 152 102 Workstation Measurement


______________________________

______________________________

3.2.9 Test Case 9 - Kink in The Wire


47

System WIP FixtureSubsystem Kink in The WireDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Alex LangkampTested By ____________________________________

Method Description

Testing the Kink in the wire subsystem will allow the team to determine if the effects from kinking each wire, help to solve the ergonomic issues associated with the current system. The Kink in the wire subsystem allows operators the ease of manually handling each piece that is processed. Specifically, the tests completed will ensure the operators are comfortable with the future system.

Prerequisites

The kink in the wire subsystem is part of Phase 3 for the test phases due to a constraint on resources being available for testing. No other subsystem is required to pass testing before the operator keypad subsystem is tested.

Test Descriptions


Test Procedure

Survey of Scrap

1 hour Procedure● Analysis of Current Scrap Rates versus Future Scrap

Rates○ If the future state increases the scrap, steps will

be taken to study the reasoning behind the increased rates

○ If the future state maintains or decreases scrap, the Kink in the wire will be kept as a viable option


Equipment Required● 1 - Scrap Data Collection Sheet


1 hour Procedure● Analysis of Throughput Rates versus Future Throughput

Rates○ If the future state decreases the throughput,

steps will be taken to study the reasoning behind the decreased rates

○ If the future state maintains or increases throughput, the Kink in the wire will be kept as a


48

viable optionTrials/Replications

● 1 survey per workstationEquipment Required

● 1 - Throughput Data Collection Sheet● 2 MSD students will be required to complete this analysis

Ergonomics Test

Procedure● Analysis of Ergonomic Improvements

○ Images will be taken of the current state■ Specifically, images will be taken of the

wrist flexion while the operator is in process of placing the part into or out of the chuck

■ A second image will be taken of the operator’s overall seating position to also check that the Kink in the Wire doesn’t cause any larger problems

○ Images will be analyzed to determine flexion angles to ensure the ergonomic hazards have been reduced

Trials/Replications● Measure for at least 5 operators

Equipment Required● 1 - Operator survey document● 2 - MSD students● 3 - operators● 1 - other person with lab access will be required to

complete this analysis

Operator Survey

Procedure● Sending out a secondary operator survey to ask operators

if the current system is desirable in their opinionTrials/Replications

● Measure for at least 5 operatorsEquipment Required

● 1 - Operator survey document● 2 - MSD students● 3 - Operators● 1 - other person with lab access will be required to

complete this analysis

Time Study Procedure● Video recording of current state and video recording of

future state○ Times will be collected through a number of trials

for the step of placing a part in the fixture, as well as the step of removing a part in the fixture

● The times will be compared respectively for current and future state to ensure the future state maintains or improves the time required


49

Trials/Replications● 1 set of data collection

Equipment Required● 2 - MSD students,● 1 - operators● 1 - other person with lab access

Personnel Required


2 MSD Students Alex Langkamp Rachele Floeser


3 Operators Ask operators whether the current state or future state is more preferable from their perspective.

1 Other Personnel Gary Fino

Lab Access


ER # Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value Test Type

ER1 % [↑] > 97 > 99 Survey of Scrap


ER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomics Test

ER6 seconds [↓] 15 <=15 Time Study




Approval of Test Case Yes/ No Comments Name ______________________________ ______________________________ Date ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________


50

3.3. WBS

3.4. Contingencies and Mitigation Plans

3.4. Approval - Team, Guide, Customer

The signatures below show the approval of the following parties of the Test Plan for the Micropen Workstation Redesign in MSD I.

MSD Team

Rachele Floeser _______________________________

Alex Langkamp _______________________________

Sabrina Caliri _______________________________

Nick Accuosti _______________________________

Matt DePalo _______________________________

Mike Everett _______________________________

Guide

John Kaemmerlen _______________________________

Customer

William Grande _______________________________

Gary Fino _______________________________


51

4. MSD II – WKS 3-10 DESIGN TEST VERIFICATION

4.1. Test Reports

The following test reports are available for each of the subsystems. Each subsystem has one test report associated with that subsystem’s test case.

4.1.1 Test Report 1 - Operator Tooling for the Touch-up Procedure

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Operator Tooling for the Touch-up ProcedureDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Sabrina CaliriTested By ____________________________________




Testing Information


Marginal Value

Ideal Value


ER# % [↑] > 97 > 99 Functionality Test Pass / Fail




52



______________________________

______________________________

4.1.2 Test Report 2 - Actuating the Opener Test ReportSystem Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Actuating the Opener (Opening/Closing Chuck) Date Completed __________________Responsible Person Matt DePaloTested By ____________________________________




Testing Information


Marginal Value

Ideal Value




53





______________________________

______________________________

4.1.3. Test Report 3 - Viewing Apparatus Used During Touch Up

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Viewing ApparatusDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Michael EverettTested By ____________________________________




Testing Information


54

ER# Unit of Measure

Marginal Value

Ideal Value Test Type Pass/Fail Date

CompleteER1 % [↑] > 97 > 99 Scrap Survey Pass/Fail

ER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomic Test Pass/Fail

ER4 Percentile [↑] 20-80 10-90 Ergonomic Test Pass/Fail

ER6 seconds [↓] 15 <=15 Time Study Pass/Fail

ER9 degrees [↓] 26 - 45 < 25 Ergonomic Test Pass/Fail





ER14 degrees [↓] 21-40 < 20 Ergonomic Test Pass/Fail

ER17 m^2 [↓] TBD TBD Workstation Measurement Pass/Fail

ER18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator Survey Pass/Fail

ER19 cm [↑] 63 - 87 68 - 91 Workstation Measurement Pass/Fail

ER26 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator Survey Pass/Fail

ER28 cm [↑] 69 69-84 Workstation Measurement Pass/Fail

ER29 degrees [↓] <15 15-20 Workstation Measurement Pass/Fail

ER30 in [↑] <20 20-40 Workstation Measurement Pass/Fail




Approval of Test Report Yes/ No CommentsName ______________________________ ______________________________Date ______________________________ ______________________________

______________________________

______________________________

4.1.4. Test Report 4 - Arm and Elbow Support During Touch Up_____________________________________________________________________________________________P16718 - Micropen Workstation Redesign - Test Plan Page

55

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Arm and Elbow Support During the Touch-up ProcedureDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Nick AccuostiTested By ____________________________________




Testing Information


Marginal Value

Ideal Value








56

______________________________

______________________________

4.1.5. Test Report 5 - Operator Keypad

System Micropen Instrument and Supporting Process ToolingSubsystem Operator KeypadDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Rachele FloeserTested By ____________________________________




Testing Information


Marginal Value

Ideal Value





Document Discrepancies Description of Resolution in Test Results of Discrepancy ______________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ______________________________


57

______________________________ ______________________________


______________________________

______________________________

4.1.6. Test Report 6 - Proper Seating Position

System Operator Orientation and Process StepsSubsystem Proper Seating Position (Chair/Back Support)Date Completed __________________Responsible Person Sabrina CaliriTested By ____________________________________




Testing Information


Marginal Value

Ideal Value




Subsystem Passed Required Test Types Based on Criteria Yes / No_____________________________________________________________________________________________P16718 - Micropen Workstation Redesign - Test Plan Page

58



______________________________

______________________________

4.1.7. Test Report 7 - Stretches and Exercise

System Operator Orientation and Process StepsSubsystem Stretches and ExerciseDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Rachele FloeserTested By ____________________________________




Testing Information


Marginal Value

Ideal Value



59






______________________________

______________________________

4.1.8. Test Report 8 - WIP Fixture Time and Stand

System WIP FixtureSubsystem WIP Fixture Tile and StandDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Rachele FloeserTested By ____________________________________



Document Discrepancies Description of Resolution in Testing Conditions of Discrepancy ______________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ______________________________


60

______________________________ ______________________________

Testing Information


Marginal Value

Ideal Value







______________________________

______________________________

4.1.9. Test Report 9 - Kink in the Wire

System WIP FixtureSubsystem Kink in The WireDate Completed __________________Responsible Person Alex LangkampTested By ____________________________________




61


Testing Information

rqmt #

Unit of Measure

Marginal Value

Ideal Value


ER1 % [↑] > 97 > 99 Survey of Scrap Pass / Fail


Pass / Fail

ER3 % [↓] > 75 > 90 Ergonomics Test Pass / Fail

ER6 seconds [↓] 15 <=15 Time Study Pass / Fail

ER15 degrees [↓] 26 - 50 < 25 Ergonomics Test Pass / Fail

ER16 degrees [↓] 8 - 14 < 7 Ergonomics Test Pass / Fail

ER18 % [↑] >75 >90 Operator Survey Pass / Fail




Approval of Test Case Yes/ No CommentsName ______________________________ ______________________________Date ______________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________P16718 - Micropen Workstation Redesign - Test Plan Page

62

______________________________

______________________________

4.2. Test Report Summary

Test #

Subsystem Tested

Specification Tested

…? CR/ ER#

Pass/ Fail

Test Date

1

2

3

4.4.1.Verification with Success Criteria

3.3. Logistics and Documentation

Where are the test results being performed, logged (i.e. project notebook) and documented (i.e. excel spreadsheet)? EDGE team website structure (i.e. document names, file types, and header location).

4.3. ConclusionCan you explain why a particular function doesn’t work? Conclusions are reported or summarized (i.e. significance with confidence, pass/fail, etc.) as applicable.

4.3.1. Meeting with Customer

See Customer Acceptance above. Field Demonstration. Deliver the project. Demonstrate to the Sponsor. Customer needs met / not met.


63

Documents

1.edge.rit.edu/content/P16718/public/Detailed Design... · Web viewTest Names and Definitions9 Subsystem Testing Requirements Summary11 Testing Documentation12 Test Case Description12