Case analysis Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Analysis - Case Study Example The importance and the impact to be made or aimed should be to search and find the modest winner after complete evaluation or complete scrutinization. Three teams embarked on working on the same problem statement and as expected, each one of them came up with unique and different answers to the same problem statement they were all given. In particular, what is being emphasized and required from the three teams is to find out which team will be able to apply the relevant frameworks, knowledge, ability, ideas and skills so as to deliver in the end (Childs 20). The first team alphabetically which was team A came out with the problem being to design a method of burnishing a wet auto-test strip that conserves time while at the same time burnishing the entire surface. Moreover, they were to create a design that could be able to vary the normal force and rotational velocity applied to the burnishing tire. The second team came with the problem to be able to create and implement what can be a ttached to a tractor and was able to get or obtain its power from the tractors power of take off (PTO). This enabled the tire or tires to rotate in a manner mimicking that of a typical ABS system so that it could burnish the track surface as the tractor moves to implement along the surface. The device also has to be modified so that it can accomplish the task on the tyre. This is to allow change in the load which in this case was vertical (Risitano 27). Team C on the other hand was challenged to come up with a design for an implement that can be attached to a tractor and the latter be driven by the tractor power take-off (PTO) that could be used to rotate a tire or an implement along the surface. In addition, the device also should be able to give or provide the option to the tyre for the load that was vertical to change for furnishing process by increasing the time period between the needed burnishing, decrease the time required to burnish and in the end to be able achieve the targ et coefficient of friction consistently over the entirety of the test area (Ashby 34). The following were their solutions respectively in relation to the nature of the representation of the problems above. Each team came up with a dynamic way or solution to their problem and was all determined to carry the day. Team A developed a dual rear wheel assembly of a Ford 8.8 in rear end. The implement accomplishes its goal by burnishing over a short period by utilizing a dual wheel system. One of the benefits of this particular design is that the outer wheels can be removed if the implement is used to a dry track or higher coefficient of friction surfaces. The rear end components are standard Ford components based on the Ford 8.8 in rear end which can be narrowed. Due to narrowing the rear end, the width of the implement is able to allow the user to burnish as close to the watering system as allowed by the tractor (Ashby 38). Team B were able to develop a design that could be able to use t he rotational output of the (PTO) back as the rotational input to drive one or more wheels on the burnisher. This had to make the team to modify the rear wheel drive vehicle as the PTO could act as the driveshaft which would induce the rotational motion of the wheels. This would actually solve the problem or the issue they were targeting. A driveshaft connects the PTO to the differential on the rear axle assembly. The burnisher connects or attaches to the tractor through the three point hitch that is on the machine which in this case is the tractor (Ashby 44). Team C also had to give their part and this is through trying to come up with an effective yet simple design of their own kind. They developed a block which was used to supply the normal loading. This weight is held in