1. Zach Bolotin Cody Hatch Robert Swartz
Moog Flight SimulatorVisual Display
Zach Bolotin
Cody Hatch
Robert Swartz

2. Agenda Project Overview Confirm Customer Needs/Engineering Specs
Functional Decomposition
Concept Generation
Design Introduction
Design Overviews & Details
Pugh Chart
Risk Assessment
Project Plans

3. Project Overview Visual Display
The purpose of this project is to design and build a system for displaying the flight simulator program.
The visualization technology and mounting system need to be selected.
It will important to analyze the system, taking into account the effect that the 6 DOF table will have on the components.

4. Customer Needs Engineering Specs Immersive Visual Environment
Robust Mounting Strategy
Interface with Flight Simulation Software
Engineering Specs
·Cost · Weight · Screen Size · Resolution · Brightness · Acceleration Tolerance · Vibration Tolerance · Material Strength

5. Functional Decomposition

6. Concept Generation

7. Design Introduction
The main focus of the Visual Display design so far, has been in determining the best technology and general concept to design with.
The concept generation flow chart has helped us to come up with different Designs.
 Five general plans have been developed and analyzed in an effort to make this decision
After a concept is selected, additional design and analysis will be done to finalize the design.

8. Design 1 Overview
The idea behind the first design is to be a simple case.
The visual display would be a single large TV in front of the cockpit.
It would be mounted with steel brackets and pipes to the base.

9. Design 1 Details $3,200 - $4,200 (includes frame) 210 - 235 lbs.
There are several concerns with the first design.
In order to get the most out of a single screen, it would be desirable to get the largest TV allowed by the budget. 
 This would drive up to cost and the weight on the stand.
It is a concern that a single large TV would be put alot of stress on the mounting system .

10. Design 2 Overview The second design is an expansion of the first.
Two or three TVs would be mounted next to each other in front of the cockpit to widen the view.
They would be mounted separately, using steel pipes mounted to the back of the TVs

11. Design 2 Details $1,500 - $2,100 220 - 260 lbs
 Using two slightly smaller TVs would help to relieve some of the weight on the mounting system.
One effect of a move to multiple TVs is that there would now be a stripe of black between the screens, eliminating some of the desired immersion of the pilot.

12. Design 2A Modifications
Another possibility would be to move the TVs above the nose of the plane.
Bringing the TVs closer would reduce the screen size necessary.
However, it would also raise different issues.
Would the mounting get in the way of the lifting eyes or casters?
Would the TVs need to be dismantled to remove the plane?

13. Design 3 Overview The third design uses front projection.
The projector would be mounted above the cockpit and display on a large flat screen in front of the cockpit.
The screen would be made of painted plywood or a plastic sheet on a wooden frame.

14. Design 3 Details $1,800 - $4,200 40 - 45lbs
One concern with the projector, is the imaging shaking when the platform is moving.
Another concern is that the screen will deform under the movement of the table

15. Design 4 Overview The fourth design also uses front projection.
The fourth design also uses front projection.
There would be dual projection on a large curved screen around the front of the cockpit.
A curved screen could still be built using plywood or a plastic sheet on a wooden frame.

16. Design 4 Details $2,780 - $4,480 30 - 45 lbs
A concern with the projectors would be that the image shakes when the platform moves. This would be compounded by having multiple projectors.
Another option, would be to have multiple projectors on flat screens, we could use cheaper projectors for this method, and the screen design would be easier.

17. Design 5 Overview
The fifth design takes the visual display off the motion table.
This allows for a larger display and eliminates concerns about stress on the electronic components.
This system would have a large screen in front of the motion table using rear projection.

18. Design 5 Details $3,000 - $4,200 Weight ~ N/A
This design is off the table. This may require a modification of the software to ensure the proper image is seen.
With this design there are multiple possibilities for the screen size and shape to achieve total immersion

19. Pugh Chart

20. Comparison

21. Risk Analysis

22. Project Plan