Project Readiness Package
Rev 5/22/2012
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION:

Project Name (tentative):

Project Number, if known:

Preferred Start/End Quarter in Senior Design:
Fall/Winter
Fall/Spring
Winter/Spring

Faculty Champion: (technical mentor: supports proposal development, anticipated technical mentor during project
System to reduce false positives in a leakage test fixture
P13681
execution; may also be Sponsor)
Name
Dr. Jason Kolodziej
Dept.
ME
Email
jrkeme@rit.edu
Phone
For assistance identifying a Champion: B. Debartolo (ME), G. Slack (EE), J. Kaemmerlen (ISE), R. Melton (CE)

Primary Customer, if known (name, phone, email): (actual or representative user of project output; articulates
needs/requirements)
Name/Organization
Rob Bauer/Moog

Email
rbauer@moog.com
Phone
716-523-7345
Sponsor(s): (provider(s) of financial support)
Name/Organization
Moog
Contact Info.
Rob Bauer
Page 1 of 9
Type & Amount of Support Committed
~$7800
Project Readiness Package
PROJECT OVERVIEW:
Rev 5/22/2012
One of the ways in which Moog proves the effectiveness of the products they sell is leakage testing (See
figure below). Valve assemblies are tested for leakage through the valve components, but then they myst
also be tested for leakage through the valve body (This is primarily applicable for low-atomic-radius
gases that can permeate solid metal). The valve body is fixtured atop a high-pressure gas port inside a
vacuum chamber. Ideally, when high-pressure test gas is introduced, the valve body does not leak and a
vacuum is maintained. A mass spectrometer is used to sample the vacuum environment for test gas
contamination that would indicate a leak in the valve body.
The current test configuration relies on o-ring seals around the high-pressure test gas port to ensure that
the only way test gas can enter the vacuum environment is through the valve body. However, falsepositive tests are not unusual, due to test gas leakage around the o-rings and diffusion of test gas through
the o-rings. Additionally, the room where the testing is done is test-gas-rich, and other o-ring seals around
the test chamber may be contributing to the false positive results. Moog has modified the test
configuration in the past with improved results, but false-positives are still an issue. The senior design
team is charged with reducing the leakage of test gas into the vacuum chamber by means other than that
being specifically tested.
The Customer provides Moog a specification that the product must meet, and they have to comply. Most
of the time this is not an issue, because the products do not leak significantly. However, because of the
pressure differential being tested across, the fixturing does leak. Moog wants the Senior Design Team to
create a system using pneumatic equipment to replace high concentrated test gas areas in the fixturing
with Nitrogen Gas.
It is also well known that if the product were actually leaking, the leakage values would be much higher
than provided. Various iterations to the test stand design have been implemented, providing lower leakage
with each iteration, proving that this is where the majority of the fixture leakage occurs.
Two different systems are being analyzed in this project: The ambient test gas in the room leaking
through the lid and bottom of the can, and the concentrated test gas space between the vented o-rings
Page 2 of 9
Project Readiness Package
Rev 5/22/2012
Page 3 of 9
Project Readiness Package
DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Rev 5/22/2012
Customer Needs Assessment
Affinity Group
Avoid false positive
for leakage
Customer Objective
Description
Provide accurate test data 10
7
Minimize increased cycle
time
8
yes or no
System should run concurrently
with existing system
User Safety
12
CDR/FMEA (Critical Design
Review/Failure Mode Effects Analysis)
Provide Data in a
timely Manner
Safe and easy to use
Minimize Cost
Withstand
Everyday
Use
Withstand Everyday
Use
Maintainable
Maintainable
Test Data
proof test
Historical records, and comparative
data.
Preserve Vaccume
Reduce delay caused by
false failures
Safe and easy to use
Comments
Is a concern overall, but new
system should not contact
existing system other than with
pressure, and therefore is not a
concern for the project.
This till be done after the system
had been implemented
Avoid false positive
for leakage
Provide Data in a
timely Manner
Safe ad easy to use
Measure of Effectiveness (How will
Customer
you demonstrate that you have met
Ranking
the need).
1
operator understands
process
3
System is controlled
transparently by existing
software system
9
Minimize cost by balancing
initial cost, maintenance
cost, and consumable
materials
6
Sturdy and Robust System
maximize time between
maintenance
Maintenance plans
Maintenance can
accomplished with minimal
money and time
Training Material
yes or no
Cost analysis provided
11
CDR
4
5
CDR
Written yes or no
2
CDR and cost of maintenance
analyzed
Page 4 of 9
Operater should not have any
extra tasks associated with
system, other than maintenance,
but should know what they are
working with.
Project Readiness Package

Rev 5/22/2012
Functional Decomposition:
Page 5 of 9
Project Readiness Package

Rev 5/22/2012
Functional Interfaces:
Page 6 of 9
Project Readiness Package
Rev 5/22/2012

Specifications (or Engineering/Functional Requirements)

Constraints:
o Safety Considerations
 THE USER MUST BE SAFE AT ALL TIMES
 Failure Mode Effects Analysis(FMEA) Must be performed prior to implementation. This
will cover all effects of the system being created and response to potential problems that
the existing system could produce.
o Contamination
 The clean room that this system will be implemented into will be a class 10,000 clean
room. This means that the room cannot have more than 10,000 airborne particles per
square meter. Most parts that are introduced to the test stand have their own specifications
for cleanliness. For this reason Moog wants to do all the manufacturing, and the team much
be aware when designing of these constraints
o Existing Fixture
 The existing fixture cannot be modified. this would cost too much. Any changes made to
the existing could potentially cause changes to other fixtureing that is mated to it, and the
company is not willing to make that risk. The system developed should coordinate with
existing interfaces.
 The only part that can be redesigned is the plug. This means that the team is constrained by
the current interface.
o Gas Flow
 The only gas available for use in flushing is Nitrogen Gas(GN2). This is because it is used
in multiple systems throughout the building and is cheap, inert, and readily available.
 The Automatic Gas Tester (AGT) provides GN2 at 120 PSIA. A regulator can be
purchased to reduce this value.
 The Building has a built in Vacuum System at 1 PSIA this cannot be changed.
 The Vacuum System cannot be introduced to high pressures. This means that a release
valve or something equivalent must be put in place to make sure the system does not try to
pull a vacuum on extremely high pressures.
o Documentation
 Training Materials:. Although there should not be any additional procedural operations, the
user must know what it is they are working with and how it works.
 Maintenance plans: Maintenance plans should be provided explaining what needs to be
done to maintain the system and how often. A detailed maintenance procedure should be
included.
Page 7 of 9
Project Readiness Package

Rev 5/22/2012
Project Deliverables:

Budget Estimate:

Manufacturing:
All wetted (flow) surfaces will be manufactured at or purchased by Moog, including: valves, tubing,
fittings, the plug, and flexline
The support structure for the new system will be made by the RIT team. This includes any bracketing
that is necessary to support the shelf.
 Intellectual Property (IP) considerations:
Moog will supply all documents/data that the team needs. They will not be able to publish these
documents or post them on the internet, but can use them as necessary. The reasoning is that even though
the actual parameters won’t be published, it can be easily concluded that Moog pushed toward the
Page 8 of 9
Project Readiness Package
Rev 5/22/2012
extreme in most cases. The IP includes:
 Drawings
 Test Parameters
 Pass/Fail Criteria
These documents do not affect the system being created, but are more to help the team understand the
system enough to be able to optimize it.
The system that the team designs and builds, up to but not including the details of the interface with the
existing test system, may be published. This includes pressures, cycling rates, and whatever other
conclusions come out of the team’s design.
Will the team need to sign a non-disclosure agreement that states all this?
STUDENT STAFFING:
Anticipated Staffing Levels by Discipline:
Name
Marie
Rohrbaugh
Austin Frazer
Discipline
ME
TBD Student
ISE
TBD Student
ChemE
ME
Role/Skills
Team leader/project manager, customer interface, manufacturing.
Interface design with existing test stand
Fluid control systems design, interface with all internal system
components. Pressure effects analysis on equipment and plumbing.
Control System
Error-proofing user interface, maintenance, training, DOE for testing
and validation
Modeling of gaseous mixtures and flow patterns, specifications for
DOE
Page 9 of 9
Prepared by:
Marie Rohrbaugh
Date:
5/22/2012