Authentic Engineering Experience:

Electromagnetic-Induction Keychain Product for a Real Customer

P.R. Stupak, S. Rumrill, B. S. Carlsen, T. George, and J. Suriano

Department of Science and Engineering

Raritan Valley Community College, Branchburg, NJ

The Raritan Valley Community College (RVCC) Engineering program launched a pilot hands-on "Authentic Engineering

Experience" course in Fall 2015 for a Team of four second-year RVCC Engineering students to design,

prototype, manufacture, and deliver a real product to a real customer. The objective of the pilot course was to expose

students early in their academic careers and under "authentic engineering" conditions, to vital skills and practices used

daily in industry. A secondary goal was to give students product development and project execution experience to relate

to potential internship and professional employers. This pilot course will be developed into a full course consisting of 4-5

teams of four students (to maintain small-team authenticity) starting in Fall 2016.

Corresponding Author: Peter R. Stupak, Peter.Stupak@raritanval.edu

Introduction

The Raritan Valley Community College (RVCC)

Engineering program launched a pilot hands-on

"Authentic Engineering Experience" course in Fall

2015 for a Team of four second-year RVCC Engineering

students to design, prototype, manufacture, and deliver a

real product to a real customer. The product was a

customized electromagnetic-induction "shake-light"

requested by the customer to use as a novel gift for the

Customer's visiting customers to demonstrate their

commitment to higher-education and the environment.

The student Team designed and developed the induction

power supply, the energy storage and LED lighting

circuit, and customized 3D-Printed package complete

with customer name. Although guided at arms-length by

industry-experienced staff, the overwhelming emphasis

was for the student Team to reach their own designs,

experience their own failures and successes in earning

their own know-how, resolve their own communications

and scheduling conflicts, and to respond to customer

critical comments of prototype product performance.

The objective of the pilot course was to expose students

early in their academic careers and under "authentic

engineering" conditions, to vital skills and practices used

daily in industry, including in part: customer

communication and support, teamwork and internal

communications, project responsibility, project

management, continuous improvement, and product

customization. A secondary goal was to give students

authentic product development and project execution

experience to relate to potential internship and

professional employers.

The spirit of this project is in line with previous

successful efforts to expose students to “authentic”

engineering experiences and environments through, for

example, Service Learning [1], Learning Factories [2],

Capstone Projects [3], hands-on 1st-Year Engineering

Courses, Learning in Laboratory Settings [4], and

Engineering courses featuring Mechanical Dissection as

a learning tool [5].

Team Formation and Voice-of-the-Customer

The student Team consisted of four RVCC second-year

Engineering students (Figure 1). The Team was not

informed of any of the details of the project – not even

the type of product to be made.

Figure 1: Raritan Valley Community College (RVCC)

“Authentic Engineering” Product Team. (Tyler George,

Ben Carlsen, Justin Suriano, and Shayna Rumrill (Left to

right)

The project started on September 2 with an evening

Skype call to the China Customer to learn the details of

the customer product request. The secondary objective

of the call was to introduce the global nature of business

and that despite the best communications technology, the

12 hour time difference between the east and west will

always exist. The Student Suppliers were therefore

requested to speak to their Customer during the USA

night for the Customer’s convenience in the China

Customer’s next day morning.

The Customer requested key-chain light embossed with

the Customer’s company logo for use as a novel gift for

the Customer’s visiting customers to demonstrate their

commitment to higher-education and a “greener” planet.

The customer did not indicate or suggest how to achieve

the required product performance – those decisions were

left entirely to the student Team. The Customer product

performance, constraints, price-points, and delivery

requirements are given in Table 1.

Team Brainstorming and Project Planning

Responding to the Customer request, the Team met the

following day to brainstorm ideas, define initial

objectives, create a preliminary project plan, and divide

task responsibilities. The brainstorming used standard

rules where each team-member sequentially gave one

idea and where all ideas were listed without discussion

or critique. The idea was to generate as many specific

and open-ended ideas as possible (Table 2). Based on

the Brainstorming, the Team developed an initial list of

key objectives (Table 3) that addressed the customer

product and timeline as well as key product development

steps and an initial Project Plan where the Task

responsibilities were divided among the team-members

(Figure 2).

Figure 2: RVCC Engineering Team initial project plan

with tasks, sub-tasks, schedule dates, and defined

responsibilities.

Team Research and Division of Responsibility

Although knowledgeable of certain specific

technical concepts that may be used in the project, for

example RC-circuit theory from Physics class, the Team

realized that they needed to learn more to put that

knowledge into action for the project and learn about the

other project technologies. The first tasks from the

project plan divided the technological ideas from the

Brainstorming session into three categories

corresponding to the three main technical challenges for

the product, including: electromagnetic-induction power

supply, the electrical power storage and release, and 3D-

Printing of the product package. Each Team member

assumed responsibility to further investigate specific

parts of these technologies with the objective of reducing

the technology options to a few testable technologies.

The Team investigated the technologies

independently and reconvened the following week and

gave brief summary presentations to their fellow Team

members (Figures 3 and 4).

Figure 3: Team members giving summary presentations

to the Team as a means to evaluate multiple technology

options quickly and reduce the options to a testable few.

Figure 4: Some of the technology topics investigated

and presented to the Team.

Following the summary presentations, the Team

discussed which technologies would be the most feasible

in the short time available before the October 5

Prototype shipping date. The decision was made to

subdivide the work on the technologies to allow each

Team member to focus on a portion of the project and

the Team to make progress in parallel. Co-author

Rumrill was responsible for the induction power-supply

(coil and magnet), George and Carlsen were responsible

for the electrical power storage and release, and Suriano

was responsible for the 3D-Printed package. The Team

launched a series of “Rapid Prototyping” experiments to

evaluate the few selected technologies.

But first the Team demonstrated the principle of

electromagnetic induction and to ensure themselves that

in fact they could light low-voltage LED lights using just

a magnet passing through a copper wire coil. By tilting

a PVC pipe to cause a rare-earth magnet to slide back

and forth through a coil of copper magnet wire wound

around the pipe, the Team was able to light the LED –

for a first technical success.

The Value of Hands-On Know-How:

Over the next two weeks the Team invested sheer effort

to earn the “know-how” that resulted from their rapid

prototyping experiments. A main result of this period

was the sobering realization by the Team that what

seems trivial in principle is very much more difficult in

fact. But when thoroughly earned, the know-how gained

creates the basis for new and innovative ideas and

informs the way ahead in the project.

Induction Power Supply: Rumrill’s work on the

induction power supply evolved steadily from hand-

winding wire onto PVC pipes to using an electric drill to

wind fine copper magnet wire onto polymer cylinders of

decreasing size (Figure 5). Initially manually counting

fiber turns and experiencing the anxiety of the wire

breaking after 1000+ turns – and not finding the ends –

Rumrill and other Team members worked together to

automate the counting using a photogate that counted the

passes of a stick attached to the drill chuck.

Power Storage and Release: George and Carlsen’s work

was broad initially where they evaluated different circuit

designs including Zener diode triggers, mini super-

capacitors, and multiple capacitors. At first the designs

were complex and intended to solve all the technical

problems together in one solid go. A lot was learned but

experience taught that the complex designs were too

unknown and trouble-shooting not possible (Figure 6).

The decision was made to start from the simplest circuit

possible – a RC circuit containing a resistor and

capacitor leading to an LED light. Start simple and

evolve the complexity only as needed.

3D-Printed Package: Suriano’s work began with the

need to learn the operation and use of both the 3D-

Printer to print the package and the 3D “Inventor”

software to design the package. A variety of object

shapes, sizes, colors, materials, processing parameters,

and finishing methods were tested. Again steady know-

how was gained through dedicated effort (Figure 7).

Figure 5: Know-how gained in winding the induction

power coil included the use of a hand drill to automate

winding, automated turn counting, and the use of fine 42

gauge copper magnet wire.

Figure 6: Know-how gained in designing and testing a

variety of electrical storage and discharge circuits.

Ultimately the Team’s decision was to begin all

investigations of technology and manufacturing methods

with the simplest approach possible and add complexity

only as needed to improve performance and reduce

manufacturing time.

Figure 7: Know-how gained in learning the 3D-Printer

and 3D design software including a variety of object

shapes, sizes, colors, materials, processing parameters,

and surface finishing methods.

Leadership, Project Management, and Control

The project leadership was rotated weekly among the

Team members. The Team Leader for the week was

responsible to maintain overall project coordination,

communication, and lead the Weekly Team Meeting. At

the start of every Weekly Team Meeting the Team

Leader also was responsible to monitor and maintain

project progress through the use of weekly “Report Out”

sessions. The Report Out was a brief review of the

Project Management Gantt chart where the Team

member responsible for each line-item task due that

week or within the next few weeks gave a status update

for the task with no discussion allowed. In this manner

the entire project was reviewed in less than 10 minutes,

all Team members understood the status and risk areas,

and the Project Plan was updated by the Team Leader

that week. Only after the Report Out was discussion

allowed and Team members needing to discuss key

points could do so without involving all members of the

Team. The Weekly Team Meeting was also an

opportunity for full Team collaboration to integrate their

individual efforts. Many good Team problem-solving

sessions were conducted at the Weekly Team Meetings

(Figure 8). Therefore the Weekly Team Meeting was a

productive opportunity to be informed, communicate,

collaborate, and make progress.

Figure 8: Weekly Team Meetings were an opportunity

for Team Members to “Report Out” and be informed of

the full project progress, communicate, and collaborate.

Prototype and Customer Feedback

Five units of the prototype product were shipped to the

Customer for critical review October 5 – only 33

consecutive days since the start of the project. The

Team’s effort to converge on a design and make the five

prototypes was very significant and their achievement

notable. The prototype consisted of an induction power

supply of 3000 turns of 42 gauge copper magnet wire

wound around a precision-polymer-tube (a drinking

straw) and a ¼” rare-earth magnet, a 1000uF capacitor, a

15k Ohm resistor, a 2.1V clear LED light, and a custom

3D-Printed rectangular package with the Customer’s

company name embossed (Figure 9).

Figure 9: The prototype product was shipped to the

Customer only 33 consecutive days after the start of the

project.

The Customer distributed the prototype units to the

factory Engineers who cut-open all five units to critically

examine their performance and construction. The result

was a list of deficiencies that were presented to the Team

November 2 (Table 4).

During the one month between the prototype shipment

and critical feedback, the Team made progress on

improving the product manufacturing methods and

performance, but naturally at a lesser rate than that

required during the intense period up to the prototype

shipment. However, following the Customer feedback,

the Team needed once again to muster the energy and

focus to address the product shortcomings. This

reinvigoration of any Team following the effort to

achieve a major interim milestone is not easy.

The Team began again by Brainstorming possible

solutions to the Customer issues and focused on four

main technical areas including, increasing the electrical

charging of the capacitor per shake to make the product

light brighter in fewer shakes, maximize the LED

brightness and “on” time, reduce the magnetic field

outside of the package, and improve the 3D Printed

lettering quality to better showcase the Customer’s

company name. After two weeks the Team significantly

improved the product performance by increasing the

number of turns of copper magnet wire from 3000 to

7000 to increase the voltage produced per shake, adding

a bridge rectifier electronic component to capture the

electricity made during both directions of the shake

instead of the previous one direction, and both using a

new tougher and brighter polymer packaging material

and improved embossed letter edge definition for the

Customer’s company name (Figure 10).

Figure 10: The first version of the improved product

following the Customer’s critical performance feedback

for the prototype units (Nov 18, 2015) – now the LED is

bright after only 8 shakes, remains bright for >20s, and

the 3D Printed package is a bright iridescent blue.

Design Freeze

The Customer’s initial request was for the final product

to be shipped by December 5. Given the mid-November

date at this point in the project, the Team needed to

freeze the final design and begin manufacturing the

products to meet the ship date less than three weeks

away. Delays to a design freeze costing several days

resulted from continued testing to maximize the duration

of the LED highest brightness as well as improvements

to the 3D-Printed lettering.

Then an unexpected technical surprise was identified

that precluded hope of a design freeze until it was

resolved. The problem was an off-shoot of the fact that

the magnetic field of the strong magnet used for the

electromagnetic induction power supply extended

outside of the 3D Printer package. This fact was

identified earlier by the Team and again by the

Customer’s Engineers. Although the strength of the

magnetic field was believed to be lower than that

required to damage credit-cards, it was strong enough to

attract Chinese coinage – which is based on a steel alloy.

Therefore the new unexpected surprise was that if the

Customer’s customers used the keychain and carried it in

their pocket, then upon removal from the pocket the key-

chain product would hold coins attached to its surface

resulting in the inconvenience of coins falling on the

ground and sending a negative message about the

Customer!

The Team at first put its hope for a quick resolution by

using a high-permittivity alloy foil to attempt to shield

the magnetic field. But the foil strongly attracted the

induction magnet and prevented the operation of the

product.

In the meantime time was passing and the December 5

final ship date lapsed without a solution and a final

product design freeze.

With the hoped solution now defunct, the Team

employed a process of sequential “3-day tactical plans”

that focused the Team’s work on immediate potential

solutions and thorough but rapid evaluations.

It’s important to note that by this point of the project the

Team was functioning as a thoroughly seasoned and

effective Team. Communication was excellent,

leadership was shared and respected, and the

responsibility of completing the project successfully was

taken fully and seriously by each Team-member.

The Team ultimately decided to strategically enlarge the

diameter of the package such that when the magnet was

positioned at the most likely end position, the package

diameter would be large enough so that the magnetic

field at the surface would just slightly attract the lightest

Chinese coin. This approach to strategically modify the

product 3D Printed package was successful and resulted

in a tapered “Peanut” shaped product that was still

compact and met all other Customer performance

requirements (Figure 11).

Figure 11: The final shape of the 3D-Printed product

package designed such that the strength of the magnetic

field at the end of the product is strong enough to only

slightly attract the lightest Chinese coin.

Teamwork and Final Product Shipment

Throughout the period required to solve the magnetic

field problem, the Team continued to make progress in

innovating and improving the product manufacturing

methods, including the use of spools to contain the

copper wire coil (Figure 12), a pre-printed component

“jig” to unambiguously organize the electronic

components in position and correct polarity prior to

soldering (Figure 13), and the actual 3D-Printing of the

final product package (Figure 14).

Once the magnetic field problem was resolved, the Team

then focused on manufacturing the final products to ship

to the Customer. With the original December 5 ship

date passed and College Final Exams in session, the

Team members continued nonetheless to work making

their individual component subassemblies and meeting

to fully assemble and test each final product. The Team

worked through the Holidays and made the final

shipment to the Customer December 28 (Figure 15).

Figure 12: The final electromagnetic induction power

supply manufacturing method included drill-wound 40-

gauge copper magnet wire (8000 turns), automated

counting, and spools to hold organize the wire.

Figure 13: The final electrical storage and discharge

electronics used a pre-printed jig to ensure correct

component position, polarity, and assembly and included

a bridge rectifier, 1000uF capacitor, 1.5kOhm resistor,

and 2.1V LED.

Figure 14: The final 3D-Printed product package

contained pre-formed supports to hold the induction

power supply polymer tube, electronic component jig

and components, and LED, and was formed in the

“Peanut” shape to reduce the external magnetic field

strength.

Figure 15: The final Raritan Valley Community College

(RVCC) “Authentic Engineering Experience” Induction

Key-Chain Product designed, manufactured, and

delivered to a real Customer December 28, 2015.

Customer Reactions

One of the authors of this paper (i.e., Stupak) was in

China in January 2016 and met with the Customer. The

Customer commented, “The student team did excellent

work and the improvements in the product performance

since the prototype are remarkable! This is an excellent

project. We are pleased to support this type of higher

education.”

A secondary Customer remarked, “This is a fantastic

work and I will give the highest points to these four

students! It is too good to believe that it actually

happened!?”

Conclusions/Implications

The "Authentic Engineering Experience" pilot course

was successful to expose students to vital industry skills

and concepts under simulated but realistic hands-on

industrial Engineering conditions that resulted in a

mature, cohesive, and effective student team that

delighted their customer. This pilot course will be

developed into a full course at RVCC consisting of 4-5

teams of four students (to maintain small-team

authenticity) starting in Fall 2016.

References

1. James L.Huff, Carla B. Zoltowski, and William

C.Oakes, “Preparing Engineers for the

Workplace through Service Learning:

Perceptions of EPICS Alumni,” Journal of

Engineering Education (January 2016): 43 – 69.

2. John S. Lamancusa, Jose L, Zayas, Allen L.

Soyster, Lueny Morell, and Jens Jorgensen ,

“The Learning Factory: Industry-Partnered

Active Learning,” Journal of Engineering

Education (January 2008): 5 - 11.

3. Alan J. Dutson, Robert H. Todd, Spencer P.

Magleby, Carl D. Sorensen, “A Review of

Literature on Teaching Engineering Design

Through Project Oriented Capstone Courses,”

Journal of Engineering Education (January

1997): 17 - 28.

4. Milo Koretsky, Christine Kelly, and Edith

Gummer, “Student Perceptions of Learning in

the Laboratory: Comparison of Industrially

Situated Virtual Laboratories to Capstone

Physical Laboratories,” Journal of Engineering

Education (July 2011): 540 - 573.

5. Heshmat A. Aglan and S. Firasat Ali, “Hands-

On Experiences: An Integral Part of Engineering

Curriculum Reform,” Journal of Engineering

Education (October 1996): 327 – 330..