The Space Jammers were tasked with developing a plan to reduce waste from the ENES100 engineering course at UMD. In this course, students build rover projects but parts are often wasted when ordering takes too long or projects are thrown out. The team analyzed issues like long shipping times and lack of part reuse. They recommend a sustainability program where a student group like MDSE collects, stores, and redistributes usable parts. This will reduce costs for students and waste by allowing parts to be reused for multiple semesters.

1. Presents
ENES100
Sustainability
Project
Ryan Chow
Joseph Dadzie
Kristina Dziki
Eric Huang
Hargun Kalsi
Abraham Leventhal
1

2. Table of Contents
Executive Summary 2
Introduction 2­3
Issues and objectives 3
Deliverables 3­4
Methodology 4­6
Analysis 6­8
Recommendations 8­9
Conclusions 9­10
References 10
Appendix 10­13
2

3. 1. Executive Summary
At the University of Maryland, the Clark School of Engineering requires all first year
engineering students to take an introductory course called ENES100, in which they must build a
functioning rover, (also known as a dune buggy). Our client, Dr. Ayush Gupta, is an instructor
for the Clark School’s Keystone program, who observed the high amount of project building
material that goes to waste after students complete their projects. Dr. Gupta assigned the Space
Jammers the task of developing a plan for a process that would reduce the amount of materials
that go to waste through material storage and redistribution. Our proposed solution is to create a
sustainability program that would collect donated parts, store them, and redistribute them to new
students in the next semester. We are planning to utilize student groups such as Maryland
Sustainability Engineering (MDSE), who is willing to support this program and use its
(Engineers Without Borders, or EWB) space to store recycled parts. We found that the main
problems in the project are that students have to order parts from far away locations and that
students simply throw away their rovers when they are done with the course. Our solution solves
these problems by giving students a local convenience store for parts so they do not have to wait
on shipping times, and can actually see parts before selecting them. It also gives students a way
to easily recycle their projects, reducing waste and increasing sustainability.
2. Issues and Objectives
In the past this project required students to build a functioning hovercraft. Regardless,
the problem is the same now as it has always been. Each semester after buying the necessary
materials and completing the project, the students throw their parts away. The disposal of useful
parts every semester by ENES100 teams creates unnecessary waste for the environment, and
3

4. unnecessary expenses for students doing the same project in the next semester. The Space
Jammers are in charge of finding a solution to these unnecessary obstacles to the problem. The
team’s objective was to reduce waste during the project as much as possible by preserving parts
through a storage system, and creating a process that ENES100 students will be able to use for
years to come. We also recognized that part of the objective was focusing on reducing costs
incurred for students as well.
3. Deliverables
Our team was tasked with giving Dr. Gupta a report detailing our proposed solution. The
report will give supporting evidence and a detailed criteria that accurately explains how our team
arrived to the chosen recommendation. This criteria should also show why we chose not to use
other ideas. Our final report will explain possible partners of the chosen system and the current
status between our team and other groups. In the future, after giving Dr. Gupta this status report,
we will try to actually implement our system. This will require us to develop a detailed plan of
exactly how this system will work, which will be presented to Dr. Gupta, Dean Darryll Pines of
the Clark Engineering School, and the MDSE/EWB student organization. If necessary, we will
also use this plan to write an application to the Office of Sustainability for a grant to start up this
system.
4. Methodology
The Space Jammers used the DMAIC approach to develop a solution to this problem. In
the DMAIC sequence (which stands for Define, Measure, Analyze, Implement, Control) we have
focused in these three weeks mainly on defining the problem and the client’s needs (“D”),
measuring the current process and its performance (“M”), and analyzing the causes of key issues
4

5. (“A”). However, in the future, we plan to continue with the rest of the DMAIC sequence to
implement our recommendations (“I”) and use control methods (“C”) to maintain a quality
ENES100 project material sustainability program.
To start defining the key problems and our client’s needs, we first met with our client, Dr.
Ayush Gupta. After speaking to Dr. Gupta, we determined that the key issue in the current
ENES 100 materials acquisition process is that a high amount of waste is produced. This is not
only unsustainable and bad for the environment but also very costly as students in the course
spend a total of $60,000 a year to purchase parts that are simply thrown out most of the time.
Using Dr. Ayush’s feedback we developed a list of questions to ask current and previous
ENES100 students. We asked these questions in a survey featuring 50 random UMD engineering
students and in­depth
interviews with current ENES100 students. These provided us with both
qualitative and quantitative information about how students felt about the current materials
acquisition and disposal process; how satisfied students were with the wait­times
and
functionality of their ordered parts; and how willing students would be to donate parts to or use
pre­owned
parts from a redistribution system.
We then took our clients’ feedback and measured the effectiveness of the current
materials acquisition and donation process using descriptive statistics, and analyzed the key
issues and their potential causes using different tools such as a fishbone diagram and process
flow diagrams. We found in our statistics that most (89%) of students were willing to use
pre­owned
parts, and that a lot of students were not satisfied with the current process (45% of
survey responders said they were not satisfied with the wait time and functionality of shipped
parts). Keeping these results in mind, we outlined a solution to deal with the clients’ wants and
5

6. needs. This solution was a sustainability program that would manage the collection, storage, and
redistribution of pre­owned
dune buggy parts. These three parts of this solution would all be
overseen by a third party group. Moving forward, we decided to reach out to various third party
groups, including the Office of Sustainability; Terrapin Trader; and different engineering student
organizations. After interviewing with these groups, we determined that our best options were
the MDSE (Maryland Sustainability Engineering) student group for collecting and redistributing
parts and the EWB (Engineers Without Borders) space in Glenn L. Martin Hall on campus for
storing the parts. Additionally, we decided upon a non­for­profit
donation system.
Because this project was only three weeks long, we were limited in how much of the
DMAIC process we could actually accomplish. Moving forward however, we will implement
our solution by continuing to talk to MDSE and EWB about forming this new system. We will
communicate more with the Dean of the Clark School to get approval for using the EWB space.
Additionally, although the Office of Sustainability said they would not oversee the actual system,
they did inform us that we could apply to them for a grant by January 15, 2015 for any startup
costs necessary to establish this new system. When the system is eventually created, controls
will have to be applied to maintain quality. An important issue to consider would be to prevent
certain students from abusing this redistribution system by “monopolizing” or acquiring all the
best materials before other teams have a chance to use the system. This would probably require
an in­depth
cataloging system to determine which project teams have already gotten project parts
from this program and limiting how many times they could return to get more parts.
6

7. 5. Analysis
The Space Jammers analyzed the current process of the ENES100 course and created a
process flow diagram to determine any parts of the process that are not adding value and
generating waste. From personal interviews with rover teams during open lab hours and survey
results, our team observed that students were particularly unsatisfied with the shipping time of
materials. The first process diagram in appendix A provides a visual explanation of this issue in
the current ENES100 process. Often after purchasing parts, students must wait multiple weeks
for their materials to ship in. During this time, students cannot start building the rover or
complete milestones for their project. For a form and function project such as the rover, students
cannot afford to lose weeks of building and testing due to shipping.
A second problem our team noticed was after the initial buying phase. As shown in the
fishbone diagram in appendix B, people, materials, and machines all serve as causes of why new
tools may be needed at a later stage. Whether a part broke, malfunctioned, or a new part was
needed entirely, teams had no easy way to rectify this issue. These teams had to repeat the entire
buying process from the start, meaning more weeks were lost in project building and testing.
The time lost from shipping ultimately had a detrimental effect on students completing the
project on time.
The third issue in the current system was discovered after the final competition. Once the
ENES100 course ends, teams trash their rover parts. Not only are the recyclable parts wasted,
but students in the next ENES100 semester use the same parts. A cycle where student teams
spend their own money in a $400 budget, trash the parts they pay for, and future classes repeat
the process has unfortunately developed in the course.
7

8. To resolve these three problems, our team developed a process shown in the future
process diagram in appendix A. Creating an on­campus
redistribution system gives students an
alternative option when searching for rover materials. If the item needed is in storage, student
can pick up the materials immediately and begin working on their project. Even if teams still
need to order parts from companies, these teams can start building the rover while other parts
ship in. This storage can also prevent students from having to repeat the shipping process if a
part breaks or a new part is needed. At the end of the course, parts can be donated back to
storage and provide resources for the next ENES100 students. With this solution, rover teams
are always adding value to their project, reducing their costs by getting parts from storage, and
helping out future classes.
6. Recommendations
Our team chose to promote a program that collects reusable materials, recycles unusable
materials, and redistribute these materials to students. From discussions with Terrapin Trader,
the Keystone program, and student organizations such as EWB and MDSE, our team determined
which group is best suited to implement our recommendation. Appendix E provides a table
summary of scores for Terrapin Trader (option 1), the Keystone program (option 2), and student
organizations (option 3) based on a criteria determined by the survey and people associated with
our solution.
Terrapin Trader is UMD’s on­going
surplus operation. Items deemed as surplus by the
owning department such as computers, printers, and tables are identified and picked up. Having
a showroom allows the group to determine a proper price for the item. Terrapin Trader already
8

9. has experience redistributing used items. However, our team did not make much progress on a
possible partnership when we called a member of Terrapin Trader.
The Keystone program gives UMD’s engineering faculty the opportunity to teach new
engineering students in the major’s fundamental courses. ENES100 is one of the courses
associated with the program and is closely reviewed by Keystone in order to improve the skills
that the course teaches to students. Dr. Gupta also serves as an ENES100 instructor in the
program. If members of Keystone oversaw our sustainability recommendation, it would
guarantee that the system lasts for multiple semesters and is embedded with the course’s
curriculum. However, the system must follow a non­profit
route and managing the process puts
extra strain on the faculty’s already heavy workload. Our client advised our team to find a
different group who could handle the task of management.
Engineers Without Borders and Maryland Sustainability Engineering serve as examples
of the university’s many student organizations that promote sustainability in both local and
foreign environments. These student groups reliably produce solutions in the projects they
encounter along with having the experience in implementing sustainable ideas to benefit their
clients. Based on our decision criteria in appendix E, student groups earned the highest score
and would effectivity manage a redistribution system. Our team has recently discussed our
system to EWB and MDSE and have received positive feedback. If a successful partnership
develops, our client would only need to inform the chosen student organization on any changes
to the ENES100 curriculum as both EWB and MDSE have shown that they can handle
sustainability­related
systems.
7. Conclusions
9

10. Dr. Ayush Gupta, our client, tasked the Space Jammers with creating a redistribution
system that recycles unusable rover parts, stores reusable parts, and redistributes reusable parts
to students. Through ENES100 team interviews and survey, our team created a criteria for a
decision matrix to compare possible partners for a redistribution process. After receiving
feedback from students, the Office of Sustainability, Terrapin Trader, Keystone, and student
organizations we recommend an on­campus
non­profit
system managed by a student
organization, specifically MDSE. The student organization will guarantee the new solution lasts
for multiple semesters while our plans to collect and store unneeded rover parts will provide
resources for future redistribution. This will significantly reduce money spent by student teams
and increase the recycling of materials at the end of the course.
8. References
"Engineers Without Borders." Engineers Without Borders. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Nov. 2014.
<http://www.ewb.umd.edu/>.
"Maryland Sustainability Engineering, University of Maryland." Maryland Sustainability
Engineering, University of Maryland. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Nov. 2014. <http://www.se.umd.edu/>.
9. Appendices
Appendix A: Process Flow Diagram
Current State
Future State
10

11. A comparison between the current ENES100 process and a proposed future system is shown
above. Having a redistribution system gives students the opportunity to buy parts immediately to
give themselves more time to build the rover. At the end of the course, instructors can have a
donation box that collects unneeded rover materials for future classes.
Appendix B: Fishbone Diagram
This fishbone diagram shows the most important causes of the excessive waste of project
materials by students in the ENES100 course. The variety of causes, ranging from people
choosing the wrong parts to relatively long shipping times, served as issues our team would want
to solve with a redistribution system. The number of issues our recommendation would solve
also served as a gauge for success,
Appendix C: Client Deliverables
● Reduce waste
○ Recycle unusable parts and redistribute reusable materials
○ Reduce the expenses and waste of the ENES100 student teams
● Ensure sustainability
○ Create a system that consistently lasts multiple ENES100 semesters
Appendix D: Survey Results
11

12. Our survey, which featured 50 random UMD engineering students, asked key questions about
the students’ satisfaction with the current ENES100 materials acquisition and disposal system,
and their likelihood to use pre­owned
parts. There were four key statistics that really stood out to
us in this survey. First, 89% of responders said that they would use pre­owned
parts. Next 45%
of responders said they were satisfied with how long it took to get shipped materials and also
how well their parts functioned in comparison to what they expected when they ordered the
parts. Finally, the average score on a scale of 1­10
(1 being extremely inconvenient, 10 being
extremely convenient) for the ranking question “How convenient was the process of acquiring
12

13. materials for your project?” was a 4.6 (not pictured here). These survey results clearly showed
that the system needs to be changed.
Appendix E: Decision Matrix
The decision matrix above showed how we compared the benefits of having Terrapin Trader
(option 1), Keystone (option 2), or a student organization (option 3) manage our recommended
redistribution system. Certain aspects that would affect the success of the system were given a
corresponding weight and used to score each option. The table helps visualize our reasoning to
pursue a partnership with student organizations such as EWB and MDSE.
13