2.  Rob Fish (Industrial Designer)  Zachary Kirsch (Mechanical Engineer, PM)  Martin Savage (Mechanical Engineer)  Olivia Scheibel (Mechanical Engineer)  Henry Woltag (Industrial and Systems Engineer)

3.  Guide ◦ Mr. Rick Lux  Customer ◦ Dr. B. Brooks  Faculty Support ◦ Dr. M. Gomes ◦ Dr. M. Lam  Sponsor ◦ RIT MSD Project Office

4.  Introduction and Project History  Customer Needs  Concept Selection  Risk Assessment

5. Current rear view mirrors systems for bicycles are clumsy, unattractive, poor quality, too expensive, or have a small viewing range. Our solution is to create a low cost alternative that requires no power to operate, and attaches to any helmet.

8. Green Process Design For Disassembly Recyclability No Power Input Env. Friendly Materials Environmental Considerations Fog / Rain Resistant Withstand Elements Ability to block out Sun Doesn't Increase Wind Resistance Marketability Inexpensive Easy to Store Aesthetically Pleasing Colors Shape Customizable Ergonomics Comfortable Light Weight Safe to Ware Functionality Doesn’t Compromise Helmet Integrity Adjustable w/o Tools Holds Mirror Orientation Adjustable w/o Tools Provides Wide Viewing Angle Detaches from Helmet Adjustable Mirrors Clear, Correctly Oriented Image Attaches to Multiple Types of Helmets Durable Minimizes Obstruction to Forward view

9. Customer Needs Team’s Evaluation 1. Safe to wear9 2. Provides a wide angle view behind the cyclist9 3. Holds mirror orientation as set by user9 4. Minimizes obstruction to the cyclist’s forward field of vision 9 5. Attaches to a typical helmet without compromising the helmet’s integrity 9 6. Is lightweight and comfortable to wear9 7. Is durable9 8. Provides a clear, correctly oriented image9 9. Is adjustable to provide optimal view for the rider9 10. Is inexpensive ($10-20) for the consumer3 11. Detaches from the helmet3 12. Can be adjusted without the use of tools3 13. Requires no power input3 14. Is aesthetically pleasing3 15. Refrains from significantly increasing wind resistance1 16. Is fabricated in an environmentally friendly way1

10. Source Specification (Metric)Unit of MeasureMarginal ValueIdeal ValueComments/Status S1CN 13Power required for operationWatts-0No power input S2CN 12 Number of tools required for adjustment Quantity10 S3CN 10Materials costDollars3020 Market value projection, no restriction on prototype beyond budget S4CN 2,5,11 Number of helmet styles system can attach to Quantity-3Minimum value S5CN 1,5,7Durability - survive drop from heightft-6 Dropped with mirror system attached to helmet S6CN 1,6Weightlbs0.7750.175 S7CN 1,3,7,15Survive wind speedsmph4560 Mirrors maintain desired position and orientation up to these speeds. S8CN 1,5,11Breakaway force (if snagged on object)lbs-45 Based on NHTSA neck injury criteria S9CN 2,3Rear image angledegrees90110Based on benchmarking S10CN 1,4,15 Projected area of main mirror in direction of motion in 2 188 S11CN 16Recyclability of materials used%-100Exceptions: mirrors, adhesives S12CN 1,5,7,11,12 Mirrors and supports removable from helmet Yes/No-Yes Interface between helmet and supports need not be removable S13CN 1,4Lateral forward viewing angledegrees-180 Does not block lateral vision when looking straight ahead S14CN 2,3,8,9 Distance behind at which vehicles are visable ft100200Based on hand calculations S15CN 1,3,8Image oriented properlyYes/No-Yes

14. IDRisk ItemEffectCause Likelihood Severity Importance Action to Minimize RiskOwner 1 Improper mirror orientations and alignment. Image may be inverted, out of focus, or the projected image may not line up with target. Lack of optics experience within the team 339 Research optics, determine faculty and other experts who can assist with optical design. Martin Savage 2 Improper structural design. System may not be structurally sound, natural frequency may pose stability issues. Lack of vibration experience within the team 339 Research vibrations, determine faculty and other experts who can assist with structural design. Olivia Scheibel 3 Exceeding the desired manufacturing cost. System will be unable to be manufactured within desired price range. Cost of materials to build system 3 26 Research lower cost alternatives for system components. Zachary Kirsch 4 Unable to adhere to NHTSA standards Prototype unable to be manufactured for retail Strict standards conflicting with stability needs 2 3 6 Be knowledgeable of applicable standards. Henry Woltag

15. IDRisk ItemEffectCause Likelihood Severity Importance Action to Minimize RiskOwner 5 Parts are ordered too late Prototype cannot be completed in time Item lead times not taken into consideration 224 No procrastination. Parts needed identified as early as possible. Order well in advance. Henry Woltag 6 Do not meet Customer needs Dissatisfied customer. Poor needs identification/ inability to achieve needs in time 224 Be sure to properly and realistically identify customer needs, not just ideal needs. Zachary Kirsch 7 Poor documentation Disorganization, future project improvement difficult Consistent lack of documentation updating 212 Documentation will be kept consistent through weekly checks of notes/files/ previous notes. Henry Woltag 8 Group Dysfunction Project does not get completed to required specifications. Lack of Communication. Poor Compromising. 111 Consistent communication and project duty management. Expected to complete individual responsibilities. Zachary Kirsch