fixup! Describe Method

content/case_method.tex

@@ -1,64 +1,13 @@
 %&tex
-\chapter{case method}
+\chapter{Case study Method}
 \label{chap:case_method}
+The goal of this case study is to evaluta the design plan as presented in the previous chapter.
+The evalutation is done by developing a system according to the design plan.
+Ingeneral, the method of the case study follows all the steps of the design plan.
+Additionally, an evaluation protocol ensures that the development is evaluated consistently.
+The last important thing is a subject of design that is developed in the case study.
+The next sections present the evaluation protocol and the subject of design.
 
-
-\section{Subject of Design}
-The choice in subject of design has a strong influcence on the evaluation of the design plan.
-A set of requirements is used to ensure that the optimal subject of design is selected.
-    
-        \subsection{Requirements}
-            The goal is to find a case study that can be used to evaluate the design method within a Master's Thesis.
-            Some requirements are defined to help the selection of a suitable case study.
-            To fit the design in the period of a Master's Thesis it should not require more than 10 weeks.
-            A fully-designed and constructed product is a nice result but is not required.
-            The case study can be terminated at the end of the period if all the elements of the design method have been sufficiently evaluated.
-
-            Although a finished product is not required, a partial prototype is part of the testing and validation procedure.
-            As the design method focuses on the physical component, a mechanical prototype is important.
-            The prototype would originally been constructed with the rapid prototyping facilities at the university.
-            However, the COVID-19 pandemic forced the university to close and to work from home.
-            This limited the rapid prototyping to DIY-tools and a 3D-printer.
-
-            To comply with the limited time and construction options it is tempting to go with a simple system.
-            Going for a simple system is not an option.
-            The goal of the design method is to reduce the complexity of the development.
-            Therefore, the case study should cover at least multiple features and interesting dynamics.
-            Multiple features allow for multiple design cycles.
-            Complex dynamics make multiple levels of detail possible.
-
-            \subsection{Tweet on a Whiteboard}
-            \label{sec:whiteboardwriter}
-            An example is for a system to be designed is a device that writes tweets on the white board.
-            That would be device that can write on white board.
-            This can be split in multiple features, with increasing complexity:
-            \begin{enumerate}
-                \item Moving the marker on the board: Simple XY-movement
-                \item Lifting the marker from the board: Z-movement
-                \item Erasing: End effector manipulation
-                \item Changing color: Switching Marker
-                \item Speed increase.
-                \item Direct input.
-            \end{enumerate}
-
-            The moving and change of color have multiple solutions, which satisfy the features requirement.
-            The complexity is also present in this example, the movement of the marker introduces multiple degrees-of-freedom.
-            Furthermore, the speed increase adds complexity as well.
-            The actuation of the system requires software.
-            However, instead of characters on the board it is possible to make basic figures, like squares and circles.
-            This minimizes the implementation of the software.
-
-            \subsection{Decision}
-                The preferred case study is the whiteboard writer in \autoref{sec:whiteboardwriter}.
-                The Peg-in-Hole problem is mainly a control problem instead of a mechanical challenge.
-                Therefore the Peg-in-Hole problem disqualifies as a good case study for goal of this Thesis.
-                The RTK Calibration is a good case study.
-                However, as it is a calibration device it has to be accurate.
-                It is expected that this abstracts the complex dynamics from the design space.
-                Overall the whiteboard writer gave more possibilities and is also a better demo.
-                Sending a tweet to a robot has never been a bad demo.
-
-    
 \section{Evaluation Protocol}
     A survey is design to assess how the method is applied during the case study.
     The survey specifies a list of questions.
@@ -127,3 +76,68 @@ A set of requirements is used to ensure that the optimal subject of design is se
         Each step will have its own issue. 
         This issue has a description and a checklist for the evaluation.
         Commits will be referenced to the issue, in that way all commits are grouped and can be tracked in the issue.
+
+\section{Subject of Design}
+The choice in subject of design has a strong influence on the effectiveness of the evaluation of the design plan.
+To ensure the best subject of design a list of requirements is composed.
+Based on this list the best subject of design is a "Tweet on a whiteboard writer", which will be referred to as system.
+Other subjects were considered, but did not meet the desired requirements.
+
+The most important requirement is that, while developing the system, the different aspects of the design plan are used.
+Taking into account that there is a limited time budget and that the system must be within the scope of the design plan, the set of possible subjects of design is slim.
+The time budget is set to 10 weeks of development and the system must have a dynamic system that can be controlled.
+The tweet on a whiteboard fits within these requirement as it can have interesting dynamics and has multiple features.
+Although the system could be seen as a simple wall plotter with simple XY-movement, it has alternative implementations that achieve more complex XY-movement.
+%%%%%% Ligt toe dat er meerdere features zijn.
+
+    
+        \subsection{Requirements}
+            The goal is to find a case study that can be used to evaluate the design method within a Master's Thesis.
+            Some requirements are defined to help the selection of a suitable case study.
+            To fit the design in the period of a Master's Thesis it should not require more than 10 weeks.
+            A fully-designed and constructed product is a nice result but is not required.
+            The case study can be terminated at the end of the period if all the elements of the design method have been sufficiently evaluated.
+
+            Although a finished product is not required, a partial prototype is part of the testing and validation procedure.
+            As the design method focuses on the physical component, a mechanical prototype is important.
+            The prototype would originally been constructed with the rapid prototyping facilities at the university.
+            However, the COVID-19 pandemic forced the university to close and to work from home.
+            This limited the rapid prototyping to DIY-tools and a 3D-printer.
+
+            To comply with the limited time and construction options it is tempting to go with a simple system.
+            Going for a simple system is not an option.
+            The goal of the design method is to reduce the complexity of the development.
+            Therefore, the case study should cover at least multiple features and interesting dynamics.
+            Multiple features allow for multiple design cycles.
+            Complex dynamics make multiple levels of detail possible.
+
+            \subsection{Tweet on a Whiteboard}
+            \label{sec:whiteboardwriter}
+            An example is for a system to be designed is a device that writes tweets on the white board.
+            That would be device that can write on white board.
+            This can be split in multiple features, with increasing complexity:
+            \begin{enumerate}
+                \item Moving the marker on the board: Simple XY-movement
+                \item Lifting the marker from the board: Z-movement
+                \item Erasing: End effector manipulation
+                \item Changing color: Switching Marker
+                \item Speed increase.
+                \item Direct input.
+            \end{enumerate}
+
+            The moving and change of color have multiple solutions, which satisfy the features requirement.
+            The complexity is also present in this example, the movement of the marker introduces multiple degrees-of-freedom.
+            Furthermore, the speed increase adds complexity as well.
+            The actuation of the system requires software.
+            However, instead of characters on the board it is possible to make basic figures, like squares and circles.
+            This minimizes the implementation of the software.
+
+            \subsection{Decision}
+                The preferred case study is the whiteboard writer in \autoref{sec:whiteboardwriter}.
+                The Peg-in-Hole problem is mainly a control problem instead of a mechanical challenge.
+                Therefore the Peg-in-Hole problem disqualifies as a good case study for goal of this Thesis.
+                The RTK Calibration is a good case study.
+                However, as it is a calibration device it has to be accurate.
+                It is expected that this abstracts the complex dynamics from the design space.
+                Overall the whiteboard writer gave more possibilities and is also a better demo.
+                Sending a tweet to a robot has never been a bad demo.