1 / 19

Sandia M.A.S.T.

Sandia M.A.S.T. Miniature Automated Shock Tester. TEAM PICTURE HERE. Nicholai Olson, Cameron Hjeltness, Travis Nebeker, Michael Brewster, Fernando De La Garza. Client: Dr. Scott Whalen - Sandia National Laboratories Faculty Advisor: Dr. Steve Beyerlein

jalila
Download Presentation

Sandia M.A.S.T.

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. Sandia M.A.S.T. Miniature Automated Shock Tester TEAM PICTURE HERE Nicholai Olson, Cameron Hjeltness, Travis Nebeker, Michael Brewster, Fernando De La Garza Client: Dr. Scott Whalen - Sandia National Laboratories Faculty Advisor: Dr. Steve Beyerlein Graduate Student Mentor: KysenPalmer

  2. What is a Shock Tester? • Used for testing hardware under impact loading conditions • Come in different sizes for testing a variety of objects • Typically use pneumatics, gravity, electric actuation

  3. Background Dr. Whalen – Sponsor and Client • Needs personal, bench-top sized test apparatus • Measuring shock levels on small electronics • Safety conditions exist • Lab constraints

  4. Benefits of this Project • Unlimited access to a personal tester reduces design cycle time • Smaller apparatus than commercially available • High accuracy ensures design reliability • Specific design constraints are tailored toward the specific needs of Dr. Whalen.

  5. Project Targets • Measure shock of magnitude 100g to 200g • Haversine waveform required • Maximum dimensions: 30” W x 30” L x 72” H • Smallest possible design preferred • Device under test (DUT): D = 5 cm L = 8 cm M = 0.3 kg • Fixture to conform to Sandia standard bolt pattern • LabView software used to collect data • Safety shields and safety mechanisms to be installed

  6. Morphological Chart

  7. Prototype Development Slide Rails Accelerometer and DUT Mounting Galvanized Steel Pipe Construction

  8. Prototype Goals • Verification of design calculations • Debug accelerometer & hardware • Develop data acquisition program

  9. Accelerometer Target Values • Large frequency range (upper end ~10 [kHz]) • Data filter included within the unit • Small form-factor • Resists influences by temperature changes • Relatively low price (Under $1,300.00) • Accessories included

  10. Accelerometer Purchased X-Y-Z Outputs and Constant Current Inputs Triaxial Accelerometer • PCB Piezotronics Model 356A24 • 500 g peak acceleration measurement • 1 - 9000 Hz Frequency Range

  11. Structural Considerations • Four Post • Stable • Possible galling • High cost • Machining time • Two Post • Low chance of galling • Medium-Low cost • Requires higher strength material

  12. Reduction of Energy Loss • Bearings • Less friction • Higher cost Both options may be viable. • Bushings • More friction • Lower cost

  13. Viable Design Options Option B: ACME Screw Actuation Option A: Linear Motor / Solenoid

  14. Table Lift System Option A: Option B: • Solenoid • Medium cost • Easily Programmable • Linear motor • High cost • High difficulty of Programming • Both • Accurate and repeatable • Simplify system • ACME Screw • Strong • Low cost and high reliability • Low repeatability

  15. Release Mechanism Option A: Linear Motor / Solenoid • Solenoid and Pin • High Cost • High Safety • Difficult control system • No release mechanism needed Option B: ACME Screw • Magnetic Release • Works with ACME screw idea • Requires dual control to re-couple

  16. Downward Acceleration Option A: • Linear Motor /Solenoid • Variable Force Input • Very Controllable Option B: • Gravity • No cost • Longer travel required • Springs/Elastic • Low cost • Workable area reduced

  17. Post-Impact Energy Dissipation Option A: Linear Motor / Solenoid • Controls can be reversed to prevent ringing • Viscoelastic Dampers • Typically Low cost • Easy to install/vary • Locking Mechanism • Fast stop • May cause ringing • Increased machining time Option B: ACME Screw • Solenoid • Medium cost • Highly controllable • Electromagnetic Stopper • Easily Programmable • Medium cost • May cause ringing

  18. Method to Vary Shock / Waveform • Variable Elastic Stiffness • Springs in parallel • Increase Spring Constant • Acceleration at Impact • Vary Drop Height • Change force input • Few components required • Vary Stiffness of base • Changing modulus of elasticity • Adding or subtracting material can change pulse length and wave form. A combination of these may be used.

  19. Next Steps • Develop data acquisition program • Prototype testing • Develop detailed design • Purchase components • Fabrication • Testing and validation • Deliver finished product to Dr. Whalen

More Related