ughly $81 250. Along with this, the footprint associated with this design was calculated as 1225cm^2, costing $159250. With the total cost of this design at $240500, it was evident that other ideas of design had to be explored. The second design improved drastically on the first by utilizing Matlab to produce contour maps of the sandbox. The advantage of this was the computation of a perfect location, given the program directions, of the footprint. A position was calculated by Matlab in an area which put the total sand useage at 5.05 litres. Although it calculated that 0.05 litres would have to be brought onto the site, the cost of doing this was significantly less than the previous at $5 000 due to the $100/mm^3 penalty. This was an important improvement on the first design which calculated the removal of sand as $81 250. An issue arose however that involved the numerical model not taking into account the fact that the embankment could not come into contact with the edge of the sand box. With this, a third design was conducted. The final design surpassed the others by successfully improving the program so that the edges of the sandbox could not be considered. Along with this was the increased position and accuracy of the footprint, while using as close to the 5 litres of sand as possible. The program placed the footprint at an east-west position in the sandbox, with the area at 1215cm^2. With this advancement on the second design, dramatic decreases in costing at $157950, ensured the efficiency and stability in the project. The sand useage incorporated that 4.99 litres would be used in order to complete the footprint, which costed $1250 compared to $5000. The total cost outcome of the design accumulated to $159200 and it was decided that this attempt would be the practical design that was used during the experiment. When experimentation concluded, it was evident that the results were not as predicted in the numerical program design. A...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document