COMPACT MOBILE LIFTING DEVICE

1. COMPACT MOBILE LIFTING DEVICE Innovative Lifting Solutions Team 3 Michael Shaffer, Ken Kammerer, Dave Geesaman, Jin Ko Sponsor: Fraunhofer Advisor: Dr. Michael Keefe

2. Summary • Background and Problem Description • Mission & Approach • Customers, Wants, Constraints • Metrics , Target Values • System Benchmarks, Functional Benchmarks • Concept Generation - Derivation from Critical Functions • Concept Development • Concept Selection - Evaluation against Metrics • Working Model • Schedule • Budget

3. Fraunhofer has three machines which utilize molds to process plastics and metals. The molds are heavy and large, making it difficult for a person to install and remove them from the machines. They desire a device which will provide mechanical help in transporting these heavy objects.

4. Hot Press Thermal Technology Inc. Loaded / Unloaded daily

5. Injection Molding Machine Arburg AllRounder S-Series

6. Injection Mold Storage Rack Lowest Operating Height: 25 to 30 inches; adjustable

7. Vacuum Oven Centorr Vacuum Industries Highest Operating Height: 52 inches; fixed

8. Approach: We will use the engineering method to obtain a conceptual design based upon the wants and constraints of the customers. From this we will construct and test a prototype in order to obtain our final product. Mission and Approach • Mission: • To design and build a mobile device which will aid a user in lifting, moving, and placing heavy molds into an injection molding machine, a hot press, and a vacuum oven.

9. Customers • Users of the device • James Adkins • Michelle Mattera • Brandon Fichera • Bernie McGuinness • Molding Equipment Manuf. • Centorr Industries • Thermal Technologies, Inc. • Arburg Manufacturing • Commercial Manufacturers • Wesco • Bishamon • Lee Engineering • Centorr Industries • Thermal Technologies • Arburg Manufacturing

10. Wants • Versatility • Minimize Time for Operation • Maneuverable • Minimize Forces on Machines • Minimize the wear on objects • Inexpensive Prototype • Minimize Cost of Manufacture • Minimize Maintenance Cost

11. Constraints • Must fit in front of the machines it needs to interface with • Must fit through doors at Fraunhofer • Must roll on tile floors • Must reach highest machine at 53” (max. height) • Must reach mold rack at 26” (min. height) • Must have provisions for locking of all mechanisms • Must be operable by a single user • Must withstand use in a commercial situation • Must be capable of moving the objects • Angle deflection of molds when supported must be less than 1 • Must not damage objects being manipulated

12. Primary Wants and their Metrics Versatile: Interfaces with all devices (Target: Yes) Time to convert between modes of operation (Target: 0 sec) Fast operation: Time to load & unload (Target: 5 seconds) Maneuverable: Pushing forces (Target: 10 to 20 pounds) Overall weight (Target: 200 pounds) Minimize forces on Machines: Forces (Target: 0 pounds)

13. Primary Wants and their Metrics Minimize cost of prototype: No. of standardized parts (Target: All) Minimize cost of Manufacture: No. of standardized parts (Target: All) Overall Weight (Target: 400 lb.) Minimize cost of Maintenance: No. of standardized parts (Target: All) Cost to replace failure-sensitive components (Target: $0)

14. Prioritized Metrics

15. System Benchmark Best and Only Practice • Wesco Hydraulic Lift Table and Manual Loading • Caster wheels provide good maneuverability • Hydraulic lift cylinder provides large lifting capacity • Disassembly necessary for large • molds

16. Functional Benchmarks • Functions: Lifting and Moving • Bishamon ESX40 Scissors Lift • Related Metrics: • Allows interface with all machines • Commercially available • Low number of moving parts • Maneuverable • Low weight (229 pounds)

17. Functional Benchmarks Functions: Lifting, Positioning • Yale powered chain hoist • Related Metrics: • Commercially available • Maneuverable • Motor powered for minimal operator work • Low positioning time

18. Functional Benchmarks Function: Positioning • Heavy duty drawer slide • Related Metrics: • Low positioning time • Commercially Available • Inexpensive

19. Functional Benchmarks Function: Positioning Thomson Pillow Blocks & Rails • Related Metrics: • Low positioning time • Commercially Available • Low user force required • High precision • Expensive

20. Concept Generation 1) Investigated critical functions 2) Analyzed each function and found a particular, ideal solution 3) Pooled solutions and determined best combinations 4) Used SSD to analyze strength of each concept

21. Concept Generation • Top Critical Function: Interface with all three machines • Concept must allow handling of differently shaped objects: • Cubical injection molds • Cylindrical hot press molds • Flat plates for Vacuum oven • Concept of fork design makes use of flat bottom commonality between all three objects

22. Concept Generation • Other Critical Functions used in Concept Generation: • Lifting - Scissors Lift & Hydraulic Lift • Mobility - Caster Wheels & Air Cushion • Positioning - Drawer Slides & UHMWP

23. Concept 1: Sliding Forklift • Strengths: • Time to convert is low • Uses commercially available parts • Can interface with all three machines • Low conversion time • Forks provide versatility • Drawer slides allow positioning • Scissors lift provides lifting and mobility via caster wheels

24. Concept 2: Fold-out Low-Friction Tabletop • Strengths • Uses commercially available parts • Can interface with all three machines • Fast positioning • Utilizes UHMWP for quick and low-effort positioning of objects • Scissors lift provides lifting and mobility via caster wheels

25. Evaluation of Concepts Against Metrics • Sliding Forklift Concept: • Time to convert between modes of operation is low • Forks are interchangeable and held on by wing nuts • Estimated time required: 5 minutes • Prototype, Mass Production, and Maintenance costs are low • Uses 70% commercially available parts • Estimated cost - $2300 • Object loading and positioning • User effort is low • Estimated 5 pounds force required for positioning • Weight is within acceptable limits • Estimated weight is 400 pounds • Estimated push force of 20 pounds

26. Evaluation of Concepts Against Metrics • Low-Friction Table Top Concept: • Prototype and Mass Production costs are low • Uses 80% commercially available parts • Estimated cost - $2000 • Object loading and positioning • User effort is relatively high • Estimated 40 pounds force required for positioning • Weight is within acceptable limits • Estimated weight is 300 pounds • Estimated push force of 15 pounds • Time to convert between modes of operation is reasonably low • Fixtures for each machine provide interfacing • Estimated time required: 10 minutes

27. 3-D rendering of Wooden Model Working Model Full scale wooden replica • Critical functions to prove: • Interfacing with all machines • Range of lifting height • Positioning system for objects

28. Schedule to date

29. Schedule: looking ahead

31. Budget Fraunhofer Project Budget Goal: $3000