1. Double Award Engineering Spring Term 2010 Matthew Lane – Double Award GCSE Engineering Centre Number: 68870 DIY Multi-tool Project Matthew Lane UNIT 2B

8. Gant Chart Matthew Lane – Double Award GCSE Engineering Blue Block - Estimated time to complete task Red Block - Actual time taken to complete task

25. The Final Product Matthew Lane – Double Award GCSE Engineering This is the final completed product!

26. Testing Matthew Lane – Double Award GCSE Engineering After the product had been completed, it need to be tested. Each tool on the metal multi-tool was tested. They all worked successfully. I have shown images of the multi-tool achieving these results. There a 7 tools in total. Opening a Corn Beef Can (Butterfly Opener) Cutting a card box (Serrated Edge) Tightening a Screw into Wood (Screw Driver) Cutting some Wood (Saw Edge) Opening a Bottle (Bottle Opener) Pulling a Tent Peg from some Grass (Bottle Opener) Fastening a Nut (6 Position Wrench)

28. Evaluation Matthew Lane – Double Award GCSE Engineering Fit During the manufacturing and construction of the tool, I managed to build the multi-tool to the specified dimensions. There was no need to change any of the original dimensions of the component parts. All parts fit and work in harmony to allow the tool to work. Therefore I was able to stick to the specified dimensions on my technical drawings sheet. All component parts are within the specified sizes and I kept the quality of my dimensions high by measuring twice, and only cutting once . By using this method, the accuracy of our dimensions will be more accurate and fewer replacements parts would have been needed to manufacture. This maintains a high standard of quality and less time will be needed to replace or modify parts to fulfil their original needs. Using this method ensures that the tool ‘Has been manufactured to a high standard,’ as stated in the product specification. Form When evaluating the form of the tool, we must investigate whether the materials used were suitable for their original purpose. Before we started the construction of the product we researched which materials would be suitable for each part. All the parts were analysed and assessed in the alternative materials & material justification sheet. Throughout the manufacturing and the construction of the tool, all parts served their purpose well and no obvious flaws have appeared using the chosen materials. As a result, all materials used, appear to be suitable for the product. Using the correct materials means that the tool is ’robust enough to take general day to day use and abuse’ . No material alternatives were required to allow the tool to work more effectively and as such I believe the best materials have been chosen, therefore the tool fully fulfils this vital requirement. All component parts have smooth edges; all burrs removed and have no sharp corners by design, so as to limit potential causes of injury. From the start of this project, a main priority was to make sure the tool is safely secured in some casing method. Therefore I chose for the plastic handles to rotate around, from when the tool is fully open to enclose and hide the metal multi-tool. By doing this the metal multi-tool sits safely inside the plastic handles, which then act as a case.. This means that the product’s ‘metal multi-tool tools sits safely within the case, when not in use’ and the product also has ‘a suitable protective case to house the multi-tool’. A fundamental point since the begining of the project (and stated in the Design Brief) is that the multi-tool needs to be relatively cheap to mass produce, as it will need to sell with a DIY magazine. The most costly part of the multi-tool is the mild steel multi-tool component, as this had to be manually processed by using drills and metal files. However, mild steal is fairly cheap to buy. To make the product suitable for mass production, the metal would need to be processed by a metal CAM machine, and then it could easily be produced for mass production at a low price (manual labour of processing the metal is costly).

29. Evaluation Matthew Lane – Double Award GCSE Engineering Also, if a CAM machine were to process the metal it could have a more accurate and higher quality finish. CAM Machines are procession tools, so there is no humans involved in the processing of the metal, thus there is no human error. Acrylic is cheap to purchase, and is easily processed by a CAM machine, like the Laser cutter we used so it could easily be made for mass production, at a low price. Overall, the multi-tool therefore fully qualifies that it can be ’built and constructed for a low price, so that it can come free with a magazine.’ Function The main function of the tool is that it ‘will require to have many useful & essential tools.’ The tool achieves its purpose by having many general purpose tools capable of many functions for activities, and therefore it also meets the requirement specified in the product specification. This means that the multi-tool also fully qualifies that ‘the tool must be able to be used for many functions and activities’ stated in the design specification. It was patently obvious from the begining that a multi-tool actually needed to be compact enough to be held in a human hand, therefore it would need to be small and compact to be seen as valuable tool. This then completes the specified ‘It needs to be compact, so that it can be stored in a trouser pocket.’ As well as the product being a suitable size, the tool also need to be ‘different’ and interesting . As my product includes an irregular but innovative method of enclosing and holding the tool, it could be seen as a valuable and original design of tool, which people would possibly like and desire. If the tool is attractive to a possible customer they are more likely to try and purchase (the magazine) it. As a result ‘The multi-tool is visually attractive and includes interesting shapes/angles’. As stated in the design brief, the product that had to be created needed to be suited for the ‘Do it Yourself’ market (DIY). All of the tools which are currently on the tool, a DIY enthusiast would find essential for general DIY work. I have also kept in mind that this sort of tool would be very useful to a Camping enthusiast. It could also appeal to some one just wanting a general purpose multi-tool. In total , the multi-tool could appeal to a number of different markets therefore it is fully complete. To summarise, the multi-tool fits the design specification criteria that ‘The multi-tool will be aimed at the DIY, general purpose and camping market.’ I have also added other functions along the production of the tool. One of which is magnets located in the bottom of the plastic handles. These plastic handles allow the multi-tool to lock open so that it can click into place. This gives the multi-tool an expensive and executive feel. The magnets also require you to apply some force to separate the plastic handles, which makes the tool better to work with, as it stays open. This has been a valuable and worthwhile addition to the tool.

30. Evaluation - Summary Matthew Lane – Double Award GCSE Engineering I have thoroughly enjoyed making the multi-tool. I have completed all the necessary work which needed to be done to fully complete the tool. I feel that I have finished the whole product to a high standard, which is a fundamental point of the whole project (and specified in the Design Specification). I have further improved my knowledge on how to use certain machinery and designing products on paper and using CAD programs such as 2D Design and Google SketchUp. I have also completed every component part within the set time, keeping the quality of my products high and the dimensions of my parts accurate to their original dimensions. Overall I would say that this product is a massive success. I have thoroughly enjoyed designing, creating, using and evaluating this product. I am looking forward to the next project, and to further improve my knowledge and to create new and innovative products. If I were to make this component again, I would have liked to have been more effective with my use of available time. Much time was consumed and wasted when filing the metal, and waiting to use certain metal files. I would have better used this down time to have been manufacturing other parts that did not require the use of metal files. If I were to do this, I would have been able to complete my component parts in a shorter amount of time, meaning that I could have completed the project in a shorter time. I therefore need to improve my overall manufacturing planning for future projects.

31. Matthew Lane – Double Award GCSE Engineering This is a mock front page for a DIY magazine which I have created, showing the toll performing some of its possible functions.