1 / 33

Drop Testing Apparatus

Drop Testing Apparatus. Team Members: Deatly Butler Mark Clouse Chris Dux Kris Honas Shaun Scott Drew Stephens. Client: Itron, Inc. Brian Priest. Technical Advisors: Steve Beyerlein Mike Severance.

chico
Download Presentation

Drop Testing Apparatus

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Drop Testing Apparatus Team Members: Deatly Butler Mark Clouse Chris Dux Kris Honas Shaun Scott Drew Stephens Client: Itron, Inc. Brian Priest Technical Advisors: Steve Beyerlein Mike Severance

  2. Presentation Overview • Customer Needs • Mechanical Components • Table Drop Design • Orientation Devices • Height Adjustment • Electrical Components • Data Acquisition • CPU • Interface • Software • Camera • Costs • Recommended Design • Work Remaining • Questions?

  3. Needs • Repeatable Impacts ( 45 +/- 5 deg) • Adjustable Drop Height (18-60 inches) • Portable (Wheels) • Short Setup time (<1 min) • Video Data Acquisition (automatically named and stored)

  4. Mechanical Components • Table Drop Design • Orientation Devices • Height Adjustment

  5. Table Drop Design Using Pneumatics • Fast Acceleration • Simple • Inexpensive • Non Electrical • Long Life

  6. Table Drop Design #1Frontside Pneumatic • PROS • One Pneumatic • Four Linear Bearings • CONS • Table Only Rotates – Could Potentially Cause Slight Rotation On Dropped Objects • No Initial Vertical Motion

  7. Table Drop Design #1Frontside Pneumatic

  8. Table Drop Design #2Backside Pneumatic • PROS • One Pneumatic Device • Four Linear Bearings • Pneumatic Does Not Interfere With Table Space • CONS • Table Only Rotates – Could Potentially Cause Slight Rotation On Dropped Objects • No Initial Vertical Motion

  9. Table Drop Design #2Backside Pneumatic

  10. Table Drop Design #3Double Pneumatic • PROS • Vertical Pneumatic Prevents Rotation on Test Device • CONS • More Linear Bearings • More Pneumatic Cylinders • Increased Chance of System Malfunction

  11. Table Drop Design #3Double Pneumatic

  12. Orientation DevicesCradle Block Design • PROS • Simple Block Design • Inexpensive • Simple Operation • Minimal Setup Time • Easily Removable • CONS • Works Best for Smaller Devices • Additional Testing Required to Confirm Functionality

  13. Orientation Device Design #1Edge Testing

  14. Orientation Device Design #2Corner Testing

  15. Orientation Device Design #2Corner Testing

  16. Height Adjustment Design #1Manual Hand Crank • Pros • Smooth Adjustment For Any Height • Able To Raise And Lower Heavier Loads. • Cons • Slow Adjustment • Involved Manufacturing Process • Increased Cost

  17. Height Adjustment Design #1Manual Hand Crank

  18. Height Adjustment Design #2Pin and Collar • Pros • Quick Adjustment • Predetermined Standard Heights • Secure Locking Mechanism • Cons • Operator Must Be Able To Support Weight Of Table And Mechanism

  19. Height Adjustment Design #2Pin and Collar

  20. Electrical Components • Data Acquisition • CPU • Interface • Software • Camera

  21. Importing to a PC • Video for each test will be imported to a PC by using GPIB interface. • Instrument controlled by Labview. • Automatically will name and store video clips for each test.

  22. CPU • Zero Footprint PC - $500 (w/o monitor) • LCD PC - $1000

  23. GPIB Interface • General Purpose Interface Bus • Standard interface between instruments and controllers from various vendors. • 8-bit parallel communication. • 5 bus management lines (ATN, EOI, IFC, REN, & SRQ) • 3 handshaking lines. • 8 ground lines.

  24. LabVIEW Software • Uses VI’s (Virtual Instrumentation) • Imitates physical instruments. • Cheaper than Hardware. • Modular Program design. • Will be used with GPIB to control the video.

  25. Video Camera • Handheld will fall in about 0.5 seconds • Video below 200 fps may be able to capture enough images

  26. Camera Option #1 Machine Vision System Pros High Speed Acquisition (>10000 fps) Cons Small Picture Area (1.5” x 1.25”) Designed as an Automatic Inspection Sensor Doesn’t capture video

  27. Camera Option #2 High Speed Video Camera Pros Easily interfaced and controlled with LabVIEW software Could be tested with lower quality cameras Cons High Cost Low Acquisition Speeds (< 500 fps)

  28. Mechanical Costs • Pneumatic Cylinder (1-3) $50ea • Shafts (1-2) $40ea • Raw Materials • Sheet Metal $70 • Metal Tubing $20 • Misc. Hardware $60 • Linear Bearings (2-6) $60ea • Spur Gear and Rack $200 • Valves and Fittings $100 • Compressor (Optional) $300 • Total ~$1400

  29. Electrical Costs • Computer ~$1500 • GPIB $300 • Misc. $200 • Camera ~$800

  30. Recommended Design • Single Pneumatic Operation (Back Side) • Track Mounted Block Orientation Device • Pin and Collar Height Adjustment • LCD PC or Laptop • GPIB Interface • LabVIEW Software

  31. Spring 2006 Detail Design: (Jan. 9th 2006 – Feb. 1st 2006) - Order parts. - Assess Drawing package. - Complete drawing package. Fabrication: (Feb 2nd 2006 – March 20th 2006) - Build product. Validation: (March 21st 2006 – April 20th 2006) - Debug and fix product. - Validate performance of product. - Draft final project report. Delivery: (April 21st 2006 – May 9th 2006) - Archive project documentation. - Deliver product. - Write final report. Work Remaining

  32. Our Questions for Itron • Will ~200 fps be enough for the video? • Computer? • Camera? • GPIB? • Labview license?

  33. Questions?

More Related