1 / 14

Progress Report

68K Blade Process Handling. Progress Report. Team 9. Michael Brantley 2 , Ryan Ferm 2 , Nadia Siddiqui 2 , Jason Newton 1 , Reginald Scott 1 1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

tivona
Download Presentation

Progress Report

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. 68K Blade Process Handling Progress Report Team 9 Michael Brantley2, Ryan Ferm2, Nadia Siddiqui2, Jason Newton1, Reginald Scott1 1Department of Mechanical Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 2Department of Industrial Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

  2. Background • 68K Forging • 45lbs prior to broaching • Project scope • Encompasses process from storage to first broaching machine Storage ~300ft Broaching Pictures Courtesy of TECT Power

  3. Background • Critical Customer Requirements • Design mechanism to eliminate lifting from the process • Constraints • Budget: $2,000 • No industrial size cranes • Storage Container Design • Stationed on ground • Disorganized • Blade Handling Methods • Frequent lifting involves strain on back • Machine loaded manually Pictures Courtesy of TECT Power

  4. Fall 2011 -Summary • Original Design • L-Cart & Barrel Cart • Elevated Table for Storage • Budget Problems • Over limitations Pictures Courtesy of Titan Conveyors

  5. New Criteria • Single Cart Design • Compact • Holds a minimum of four forgings • Remove forgings from container shown • Load onto milling machine • Meet budget constraints Side View

  6. Concept Generation • Spring Loaded Container • Springs level forgings for extraction • Pros • No variable height • Cons • Requires custom springs • Safety • Complex for shipping container

  7. Concept Generation • Spring Loaded Container • Mount L-Cart to Milling Machine • Container adjacent milling machine • Mobile platform extends from container to milling machine • Pros • Simplified for no variable height • Transport unnecessary • Cons • No capability to transport after milling • Refilling storage requires lifting mechanism • No room for container

  8. Concept Generation • Spring Loaded Container • Mount L-Cart to Milling Machine • Mobile Lift Station & Conveyor • Pros • Allows for simple container design • Eliminates all lifting • Cons • Could be complex to design • Could be expensive

  9. Mobile Lift Methodology • Mobile Lift • Contains four blades during travel and loading • Multiple level for compact design • Conveyor System • Curved conveyor • Allows sliding motions • Pivot and rails prevents falling

  10. Make or Buy • Design and Fabricate Cart • Insufficient time to design, order and manufacture a new cart design • With budget constraints, not economically feasible to purchase material • Purchase Pre-Made cart and Modify • Works with time constraint • TECT Power may assist with purchase of elevated roller table for storage Pictures Courtesy of Mcmaster

  11. Current Phase • Finalize Design • All Parts from Mcmaster • Short lead time • Small Amount of Fabrication • Mounting the forging holders to cart • Building trays • Finalize with Sponsor • Order Parts

  12. Next Steps • Begin Fabrication • Implement Design • Product testing • Control Phase • Ensure goals are met • Maintain quality levels

  13. Sources • http://www.tectcorp.com • http://www.titanconveyors.com/assets/images/Assembly-1.jpg • http://www.mcmaster.com

  14. Questions?

More Related