210 likes | 379 Views
Valve Design Project. Group 2. Erol Searfoss Rena Rudavsky Seth Karpinski Jason Lichtman. MECE E3409. 11/15/05. Design Objectives. Create a valve system that delivers air power to a pneumatic cylinder setup Must deliver power at appropriate timing Must have fewest parts possible
E N D
Valve Design Project Group 2 • Erol Searfoss • Rena Rudavsky • Seth Karpinski • Jason Lichtman MECE E3409 11/15/05
Design Objectives • Create a valve system that delivers air power to a pneumatic cylinder setup • Must deliver power at appropriate timing • Must have fewest parts possible • Must be cheaply and easily machined • Must produce the highest RPM and torque possible
History of CAM Decision 3 Design Paradigms • In-Line • Cam Follower • Custom Advantages of Cams • Historical Success • Less-complex machining (Pro-E aided) • Can design to reduce friction • Roller-Follower • Reduce shaft/housing interface
Valve Design • Shaft • Machining • Purchased shaft, then customized • Machining Hours: 1 • Anodized Aluminum, $2.16 • Robustness: • No tolerancing • Housing • Machining • Machined both sides at once • One position in CNC • Machining Hours: 1 • Aluminum, $7.45 • Minimal tolerancing • Small shaft/housing interface (low friction)
Valve Design • Cam • Design: slight concavity, large diameter • Unit Cost: $ 2.59 • Machining Cost: $ 62.50 • Mounting Bracket • Design: mounts valve system to breadboard • Unit Cost: $ 8.54 • Machining Cost: $ 50.00 • Back Bracket • Design: mounts spring • Unit Cost: $ 0.13 • Machining Cost: $ 37.50
Design and Cost Total Cost = $282.17 • Design Summary • Roller Follower • Unique Cam Design • Low Friction • Simple Machining • Minimal Tolerancing • Possible Alternatives • Over-the-Counter Bracket and Back Bracket • Overall Saving: ~ 30% of total cost
Design and Cost Total Cost = $282.17 • Design Summary • Roller Follower • Unique Cam Design • Low Friction • Simple Machining • Minimal Tolerancing • Possible Alternatives • Over-the-Counter Bracket and Back Bracket • Overall Saving: ~ 30% of total cost
Engine Performance Maximum Operating Speed: 458 rpm (7.73 Hz) Maximum Torque: 108 Lbf*in (12.2N*m) Maximum Torque while in motion: 30Lbf*in 240rpm Maximum Power 45kLbr*in/min • Maximum theoretical data exceeds maximum experimental data. • Why?
Engine Performance Cont.. • Average experimental data exceeds average theoretical data. • Why? • Experimental average torque vs. angular velocity while in motion is very similar to theoretical. • Why?
Summary • General Strengths of Design • Easily Machined • Fully Adjustable • Minimal Tolerancing • Minimal Friction • Total Cost: $282.17 • High Speed (458 RPM) • Torque (108 lbf·in) • Ability to Run at Low RPM (240 RPM)
In Action Please divert your attention to the valve system display at the front of the room