1. Jorge Corujo Sandín Wilfredo Mercado Torres Débora Pagán Díaz Anthony Silva Reyes Faculty Advisor : Vijay K. Goyal, PhD Course: INME 4058 University of Puerto Rico Mayaguez Campus Mechanical Engineering Department

2.  Problem Description  Literature Survey  Design Selection  Optimization  ANSYS  Cost  Conclusion

3.  Actual car clothes carriers hold only a few hangers  Visibility of the driver can be affected when using the standard carrier  Sometimes a great amount of clothes is needed to be carried, Wrinkle Free!  Placement of clothes in seats affect available seating space

4.  Hanger Extensions  Pro:  Provides Space for 10 comfortably placed slim hangers.  Clothes can travel and be Wrinkle Free  Economic  Compact and simple to use.  Rear passengers next to the window is not bothered

5.  Hanger Extensions (cont)  Cons:  It limits the hanging space to 5-8 garments  The placement of the garments affects the drivers visibility  It may be weak to sustain heavier loads.

6.  Cross Car Bars  Pros  It can hold large number of clothes as well as heavy loads.  It provides hanging surface even if there is no clothe hanger  Cons  Limits the driver’s visibility  May cause discomfort to rear passenger.  When kept inside the vehicle; its difficult to store.

7.  Design a clothes carrier system for a Toyota Sienna  Should not compromise safety  Should not compromise seating space  Hold up to 20 pounds in clothes  Cost less than $20.00 USD  Be ergonomic and easy to use

8. Need Generate Idea Final DesignAnalysisConclusions 321 Optimization Structure Analysis Cost Analysis Final RemarksRecommendations

9. Long slot to hang up many clothes hangers Idea # 1 Idea # 2 Idea # 3

10. Pughs Method Criteria Score (0-10) Design #1Design #2Design #3 DATUM : Standard clothes carrier Backpack strapped to the back of a car seat Retractable handle Headrest device 1. Safety7020 2. Cost51 0 3. Ease of use6-200 4. Style4020 5. Available hanging space91120 6. Strength72010 7. Space occupied50 0 Total43 50 Total Positive----4170 Total Negative-----5-2 0 Weighted Total----0-2370

11.  Idea # 3

12.  Optimize the arms  Most critical part of the system  Supports clothes’ weight  Subjected to bending stresses  Clothes’ weight creates a moment at the pins  Design the arms to be:  Strong  Light Arms to be analyzed

13.  Material: Al alloy 2024  Analyzed as supported by 2 pins  Modeled as a hollow cylinder  Distributed force of 1.66 lb/in  Greatest Moment @ pin B Pin B

14.  Design variables x 1= R o x 2= R i  Objective function

15.  Constrained optimization problem  Constraints

16.  Method of Lagrange Multipliers  The Lagrangian Function  Lagrangian equation for our problem

17.  Lagrangian problem:  System of nonlinear equations

18.  Solution Optimum inner radius: R i = 0.44604 in Selected radius: R o = 0.5 in R i = 0.4375 in

19. Optimized Segment can be modeled as a simply supported beam Each support element carries half of the design weight (i.e. 10 lbs each)

20. The applied force was simulated perpendicular to the beam. This is a worst case scenario, since in practice said force would be in an angle. Therefore reducing the actual force applied. Element chosen was Pipe 16 Max Deflection at free point was 0.394 inches Additional analysis proved troublesome and where ignored, since they provided questionable answers.

21. MaterialQuantityUnit Price High-Strength Aluminum (Alloy 2024) 1$15.16 Sheet 0.025" THK, 12" x 12" High-Strength Aluminium (Alloy 2024) 1$29.68 Tube 0.500" OD, 3' L High-Strength Aluminum (Alloy 2024) 1$4.22 Tube 0.375" OD, 1' L *Miscellaneous1$10.00 Prototype Total $59.06 * Miscellaneous = Washers and Bolts

22.  There is still room for improvement:  Stronger and less expensive materials  Adaptability for multiple vehicles  Optimization of the rest of the elements will yield an even better design.  Design parameters where reached:  Simple Design  Ease of use  Supports desired weight  Does not affect visibility  Does not take up a passenger’s seat

23. Our Motto: “SIMPLICITY, EFFECTIVENESS & STRENGHT”.