130 likes | 253 Views
Moonavators Spring Semester Design Review. Team Members: Caitlin Flynn Michael Mahlum Craig Craviotto Shane Duff Hans Leidenfrost Jake Conn. Second Semester Design. Presentation Review. Electrical/Control System Direct Drive Base Motor Choices End effecter development and plan
E N D
Moonavators Spring Semester Design Review Team Members: Caitlin Flynn Michael Mahlum Craig Craviotto Shane Duff Hans Leidenfrost Jake Conn
Presentation Review • Electrical/Control System • Direct Drive Base • Motor Choices • End effecter development and plan • Review
Electrical / Control System • User interface • RF control comes with receiver (analog input to microcontroller). • Gamepad USB. Ran into problems with slave – slave connection. Would have to add additional USB host hardware/ software. • Hardware changes • Change from BasicStamp to Rabbit microprocessor. • Rabbit has interrupts, Pulse Width Modulation (PWM), we are familiar with programming it. • Motor controllers • Reuse motor minds where necessary • Shoulder motor comes with new motor • Remove unused hardware • Mini- ITX • Rebuild avionics box • Software Tasks • Program Rabbit • User input to Rabbit • Rabbit to controllers • Control algorithm
Bearing Mounting Frame Fastener Motor Rotor Mounting Frame Motor Stator Base Frame Direct Drive Base
Weight of Motors and Gearboxes New Design Base Rotation: - Motor: 0.8 lbs - Housing: 0.5 lbs Shoulder: 5.3 lbs Elbow Joint: - Motor: 1.3 lbs - Gearbox: 0.5 lbs Wrist Joint: - Motor: 0.6 lbs - Gearbox: 0.4 lbs Percussive Poker: - Motor: 0.2 lbs - Gearbox: 0.4 lbs Total Weight: 10 lbs Previous Design Base Rotation: - Motor: 2.6 lbs Shoulder Joint: - Motor: 1.5 lbs - Gearbox: 14 lbs Elbow Joint: - Motor: 1.5 lbs - Gearing: 0.5 lbs Linear Actuator: - Motor: .2 lbs - Gearbox: 0.7 lbs Total Weight: 21 lbs
Percussive Poker Design • Goals • Design and build a percussive poker prototype • Finish it within two weeks • Test Goals • Determine motor torque and rpm necessary • Optimum poker stroke • Test different tips tips
Design options • #1 Sewing machine drive
Design options • #2 Cam drive
Design Choice • Sewing machine action • High bearing tolerances • More moving parts • Less torque than cam design • Cam action • Simpler to machine and assemble • Less moving parts • Slightly more torque than sewing machine
Semester Goals • Poker Design • Correct any major design flaws • Design much lighter case • Choose a suitable motor • Most/all of parts machined and assembled by March 7th • Rest of semester for testing and improvement • Arm design completed when final motor decision made • Senior Design Expo April 25th