1 / 17

Team John Deere Weekly Status Report Week 4

Team John Deere Weekly Status Report Week 4. Josh Ebeling Jamari Haynes James June Mike Reno Ben Spivey Gary Twedt Wade Burch. Project: Modification of Gator for Handicap Accessibility.

lou
Download Presentation

Team John Deere Weekly Status Report Week 4

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. Team John DeereWeekly Status ReportWeek 4 Josh Ebeling Jamari Haynes James June Mike Reno Ben Spivey Gary Twedt Wade Burch

  2. Project: Modification of Gator for Handicap Accessibility • Task assigned by John Deere is the open-ended modification of their six wheeled Gator Utility Vehicle to facilitate handicapped accessibility • Two primary suggestions: wheelchair hoisting mechanism and controls modification

  3. Review of Previous Action Items • Two new additions to our team from the ID department: Wade and James • Group meeting scheduled for Friday to meet as a whole and to teleconference with other schools. Responsibility: Gary Twedt and Ben Spivey • Designed preliminary wheelchair storage compartments for bed of gator. Responsibility: James June

  4. Review of Previous Action Items • Created preliminary design possibilities for wheelchair hoisting mechanism. Responsibility: Gary Twedt, Michael Reno and Jamari Haynes • Designed steering wheel-controlled gas and brake pedals. Responsibility: Josh Ebeling, Michael Reno and Ryan McFerrin

  5. Problem Statement: Hoist • Product Idea: semi-automatic hoist that lifts wheelchair into bed while retaining a majority of bed storage space. • Functional Goals: Lifting and lowering wheelchairs, positioning wheelchair, and collapsing hoist when not in use. • Challenges: robustness under moment loading conditions, minimize usage of cargo space

  6. Side-Hinged, Gear Driven Hoist (Rotating Chair) • Hinged device at side of bed that hooks to wheelchair and rotates over into the bed. • (+) Used for either collapsible or non-collapsible chairs. • (+) Fully collapsible when not in use • (-) High torque on edge of bed and on powering mechanism • (-) More space used than with collapsible chair

  7. Side-Hinged, Gear Driven Hoist (Vertical Chair) • Hinged lever arm at side of bed that hooks to wheelchair seat, collapses chair and rotates over into bed. • (+) Can automatically collapses chair for less space • (+) Fully collapsible when not in use • (-) High torque on edge of bed and on powering mechanism

  8. Parallel Pole, Gear Driven Hoist • Hinged device at side and middle of bed that hooks to wheelchair and hoists over into the bed. • (+) More robust than single arm design. • (+) Can automatically collapses wheelchair. • (+) Fully collapsible when not in use • (-) High torque on edge of bed and on powering mechanism

  9. Wench Driven Hoist • Hinged at bottom of bed, lever picks up chair and places in bed. • (i) Wench decreases torque on side of bed • (+) Can be used for collapsible and non-collapsible chairs • (-) Not fully collapsible when not in use

  10. Crane Design • Rotating at base of bed, crane picks chair up using retractable cable and rotates into place. • (+) Can be used for collapsible and non-collapsible chairs • (-) Not fully collapsible when not in use • (-) Has to swing through cargo space.

  11. Problem Statement: Controls • Product Idea: Gas and brake hand controls that can be effectively operated by the user. • Functional Goals: Pushing and releasing of the gas and break pedals and a high amount of usability for the user. • Challenges: Decreasing the amount of force needed by the user to operate the controls by hand instead of foot, making the controls dependable and making them safe.

  12. Steering Wheel Controls • Break located in middle of steering wheel and gas located along wheel outer radius • (+) Pushing of break utilizes high force capability of user • (+) Gas easily accessible • (-) Hard to control while steering

  13. Motorcycle/ATV Controls • Break by squeeze and gas by turning handlebar. • (i) Widely used and familiar configuration. • (+) Easy to break and gas while steering • (-) Possible high squeezing force needed for break.

  14. Lever Arm Design • Break and gas by pulling large lever. • (+) Low force required for user to operate • (+) Steering wheel need not be replaced • (-) Hands must be removed while driving

  15. Project Plan • Project Responsibility Assignment • Group Management: Gary Twedt • CAD/FEA Support: Ben Spivey • All members will be involved with concept development, drawing support, report writing, etc.

  16. Project Plan • Short-term Project Timeline • 9/15- Patent Search Completed • 9/22- Selection Analysis • Long-term Project Timeline • 9/29- Mid-term Presentation • 10/20- Engineering Analysis • 11/24- Prototype Review Completed • 12/1- Final Project Submitted

  17. Current Action Items • Conduct patent/product search for products similar to wheelchair hoist. Responsibility: All team members • Perform a selection analysis on the five best designs, possible using the evaluation matrix technique.

More Related