senior design leads to real-world...

w w w. g s o e j s r. o r g 68 J O U R N A L O F S T U D E N T R E S E A R C H

E N G I N E E R I N G D E S I G N & E N T R E P R E N E U R I A L T H I N K I N G

68 J O U R N A L O F S T U D E N T R E S E A R C H

Senior Design Leads to Real-World Engineering

GLEN KLEINSASSER, Class of 2012, Major: Mechanical EngineeringDR. ALI SADEGH, Professor, Mechanical Engineering

DR. ALI SADEGH: ME SENIOR DESIGN CLASSThe mechanical engineering two semester Senior Design Projects courses culminate the four years of ME student education. The first course involves conceptual design, analysis and virtual engineering while the second course deals with product development, fabrication of a prototype and testing. I have been teaching this course since its conception. I structured the courses to simulate a typical engineering practice environment found in industry.

The projects in class have been sponsored and provided by many companies. The present sponsors are Alcatel Lucent, Alcoa, Con-Edison, Roanwell, US Army, to name a few. For each project a team of four to five students are formed, and among the team members a supervisor for the team is selected. The team work and communication skills that are highly desirable in industries are emphasized in this course. The instructor of the course plays the role of employer and the manager of the project who provides advice and mentoring, while and the sponsor of the project is the customer who is requesting a product. The teams, through their supervisors, must present a monthly update to their respective sponsors at conference calls and meetings. Project management techniques used in industry are implemented in this course to assure the projects are completed in a timely and realistic manner. At the end of each term, each team will formally present the results of their design to respective industries along with a professional report.

Presently the courses work as a cooperative program between CCNY and industries which provides a unique opportunity for students to gain experience that is much more representative of development in an industrial environment. At the same time, the results of these projects will have direct utility to the sponsored industry’s engineers and designers. The program is very appealing to companies since this is the most cost effect way of product development.

The students’ creativity resulted in many innovations. Some projects are being patented and some are being implemented by the industries into their work. The experience of developing a project under this cooperative effort has played a significant role in the student’s future engineering career. The students use their experience in this course as a selling point in their job interviews. The feedback from students indicated that the senior design courses prepared them for work. This is due to the fact that the projects in the proposed program are real life

industrial problems. The projects for the academic year of 2011-2012, listed

below, reflect typical senior design activities and level of the students’ innovations:1. Re-engineering of Printed Circuit Boards. This project

was sponsored by Alcatel Lucent. The students developed a new process of reverse engineering where the circuitry of a circuit board was explored.

2. Water level detection in steam pipe manholes. This project was sponsored by Con-Edison. The team designed and manufactured a prototype for the water level measurement at a hostile environment of steam pipe manholes in the City of New York.

3. Stand alone biaxial & shear test fixture for fabrics. This project was sponsored by the Navy and the University of British Columbia. This team designed and manufactured a novel table top, stand alone, testing fixture cable of simultaneously applied biaxial and shear stresses on planar materials such as fabrics.

4. Inflatable vertical wind turbine. This project was sponsored by the Army. A hybrid inflatable blade was developed as part of a collapsible vertical turbine. This is a mobile and light weight wind energy harvesting turbine.

5. Fire Fighter Robot. This project was sponsored by Alcoa. A remotely controlled 150 pound robot capable of carrying a fire hose to a hostile environment was designed and manufactured.

6. Automation of headphone testing process. This project was sponsored by Roanwell Corp. An automatic workstation capable of testing the pressure seal of headphones for military and aviation applications was developed. The company is presently using this testing device that the students developed.

7. Design of a Baja car for the SAE competition. This project was sponsored by the Grove School of Engineering and several manufacturing companies, further explained in the next page.

The Senior Design course covers not only technical aspects but also diverse topics such as team work, engineering ethics, safety, defects and liability, economics, time and project management, oral and written communications as well as many engineering design and manufacturing oriented topics, preparing students for engineering jobs.

w w w. g s o e j s r. o r g V O L U M E 5 , A U G U S T 2 0 1 2 69


GLEN KLEINSASSER: SAE BAJA COMPETITIONThe Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) sponsored collegiate design competition intended to simulate a real-world engineering design project where teams design a vehicle for a fictitious manufacturing firm. The goal of each team is to design and build a single-seat, all-terrain vehicle that is safe, reliable, maintainable, ergonomic, and cost effective to produce. Each year the CCNY SAE club competes in a competition. For 2012, we competed with 100 top engineering schools from all over the world. Design of the vehicle involved designing the optimal suspension and drivetrain configuration and geometry, stress analysis on the structure using Finite Element Analysis (FEA), and optimization of the suspension and transmission. Each team’s design is then tested against other team’s vehicles in design and performance evaluations followed by a grueling endurance race.

In addition to the design and construction tasks, each team must raise financial support to facilitate building the vehicle. Although many established teams have strong school support and large networks of sponsors, the CCNY BAJA team had to start from the bottom up. We received very limited funding from our school, so we had to work hard to garner as many sponsors as possible. Although the CCNY team is small and relatively inexperienced, with only one member remaining from our 50th place 2010 attempt, we were a dedicated team and worked hard

to stretch our resources.As many of our team members were also working on our

vehicle as their senior design project, we applied the design process and techniques that we were learning in our senior design class with professor Sadegh. We broke the design of our vehicle into key subsystems and held a brainstorming session for each to explore every possible approach to the design. We then examined the design from the 2010 team, and selected a few ideas to develop further. In many cases, a decision matrix was used to select the best idea. The basic subsystems that we divided the vehicle into were the frame/structure, suspension, steering, brakes, powertrain, and operator comfort. In addition to these subsystems, we brainstormed and analyzed methods of making our vehicle easily serviceable, and economical to mass-produce.

I. CONCEPTUAL DESIGNMuch of the general configuration of the vehicle is dictated in a 63 page rule and specification book. These rules mandate roll cage materials and basic geometry as well as many safety regulations, but left all the details including the transmission and suspension up to the team’s discretion.

After evaluating all our options for the vehicle’s suspension, we settled on using a Short-Long Arm double wishbone suspension (SLA) in the front, and independent trailing arms in

the rear, with a torsion bar to help reduce body roll when cornering.

Each team is required to use the same 10 HP Briggs and Stratton engine but can use any transmission configuration that they choose. We chose a CVT transmission made by CV-Tech IBC. To get the correct final drive ratio, we decided to design and build our own custom gearbox with an integrated Detroit Locker differential made by Eaton Corp. This differential supplies power to both wheels, but allows the outer wheel to turn faster, improving our steering without sacrificing traction.

We set up our steering with a fast ratio steering rack (4.3:1) and full Ackerman steering geometry.

During our brainstorming session for the brakes, our team came up with a novel idea for a mechanical traction control system. Using a custom designed bias bar with a sliding pivot, our system used the steering input to dynamically adjust the brake force to bias toward the inside of

The CCNY BAJA team members (from left to right): Aulio Diaz, Carlos Carazas,

Ravindra Deonauth, Shawn Calvagno, Do Hyun Kim, Glen Kleinsasser, Yan Carlos

Almonte, and Suad Husic.



70 J O U R N A L O F S T U D E N T R E S E A R C H

the turn, allowing the driver to turn very tight corners at high speeds.

Once the general design configuration of each component was chosen, we generated a CAD model using Solidworks 3-D design software. Careful calculations and FEA were performed on each part to determine where weight savings could be made and avoid part failure.

II. CONSTRUCTIONOver winter break and the beginning of the Spring 2012 semester, our team built and assembled all of the parts that we had designed. Almost all the components were manufactured in-house in the SAE shop (ST-C4) and the other manufacturing labs. The only outsourced manufacturing on our vehicle was several custom hardened and ground 4340 steel shafts and one of the gears in our gearbox. One of our sponsors, Ancon Gear, out of Farmingdale, NY made these parts for us.

The frame was fabricated out of 1 ¼“ OD x 0.065“ W 4130 steel tubing that we bent, notched and welded in-house. As per BAJA rules, this material is the structural equivalent of 1“ OD 0.125“W 1018 steel, while 30% lighter. To keep the tubes from collapsing while bending we had to fill them with sand, weld the ends shut, and heat up the tube while bending them in our pipe bender.

The gearbox casing was machined from two 45 lb billets of Aluminum on our CNC milling machine, resulting in two halves weighing 5 lbs each. The bearings and gears for the gearbox were provided by two additional sponsors, SKF and QTC gears. Eaton provided the gearless locker differential internals, and we designed and fabricated the differential carrier using the CNC lathe and mill.

III. COMPETITIONAfter finally completing construction of our vehicle only a few days before the competition, we got in about an hour of testing in the South campus parking lot. The vehicle performed significantly better than the 2010 vehicle, and we were excited to compete against other schools.

On Wednesday, April 18, we loaded the truck and headed for Alabama. After an 18 hour drive, we arrived in Auburn at 1:30 pm central time for registration and to have our engine checked by Briggs and Stratton technicians.

Friday was technical inspection and design evaluations. We had been given line number 22 for technical inspection and had a design evaluation appointment at 8:45 am. The design judges, all previous Baja team members and current engineers at companies such as Honda and Polaris, grilled our team members about every aspect of our design. Even with our small, inexperienced team, we were very competitive against the perennial contenders of Cornell, RIT, Oregon State, and others,

placing 5th in our design report, and 17th in overall design.One of the drawbacks of an early design appointment was

that we missed our slot in technical inspection and had to get a new line number when we completed design evaluations. Our new number was 68, and we had to wait until 4:00 pm in the afternoon before we got in for inspection. During technical inspection, inspectors check each vehicle to ensure that it complies with every aspect of the 63 page rule book. Due to the complexity of many of the rules, teams rarely pass technical inspection on the first try. We cleared almost every item, but had two minor changes to make: changing two small frame members to thicker tubing, and notching the seat so that it would not redirect the seatbelt. Technical inspection closed at 5:00 pm, and although we had finished making the necessary changes, they closed the recheck line two teams in front of us. This meant we had to return to inspection in the morning, but we were quickly cleared 10 minutes after inspection opened at 8:00 am. After passing our brake test, where we had to demonstrate that we could lock up all four wheels, we went off to get in a few laps on the practice track before competing in the dynamic events.

Although we knew it would not be one of our strengths, our first dynamic event was acceleration, where we pulled off a 4.865 second run, good for 49th place, and only 0.7 seconds slower than the first place team.

Following acceleration, we headed to the hill climb event where we had to drive up a steep dirt track with several hairpin turns. Many teams were unable to make it up around the sharp turns, but our car handled it with ease, cruising to a 23rd place finish.

After the hill climb event, we drove over to the suspension and traction and maneuverability courses, two gnarly tracks that broke many teams’ vehicles. Before we had a chance to attempt either of the courses, our gearbox began malfunctioning. With only 4 hours remaining to complete the dynamic events, we quickly headed back to our truck to identify the problem. After disassembling our entire gearbox on the liftgate of the truck,

Start of the Hill Climb.

w w w. g s o e j s r. o r g V O L U M E 5 , A U G U S T 2 0 1 2 71



we discovered that our differential was getting stuck in the disengaged position and was not driving the wheels properly. Some quick sanding of the differential clutch blocks rectified the problem and we had the gearbox reassembled in working order in about an hour.

Back at the suspension and traction course, things didn't go quite as well as planned. On the first run, we got stuck near the beginning of the course, but then continued through the remainder of the course fairly easily. On our second run, we got through the section that had stopped us the first time, only to get stuck farther on in the course whereas we had had no problems on the run before.

Although we were slightly disappointed with our dynamic event performance, we were still confident we would have a strong finish in the main event, a four hour endurance race the next day. We had built our car emphasizing toughness and reliability over possible weight savings and that would help our vehicle hold up to the 4 hours of abuse on the track.

Although it rained hard that night, Sunday dawned a beautiful sunny day for racing. Our team was at the track at 7:15 am to set up our pit, and get our vehicle gridded for the race. The grueling 4 hour race began slightly before 9 am, but was soon red flagged due to a spectator injury on the track. When the race resumed, we had one of the fastest cars on the track. We passed several cars on the first lap, and continued at a fast pace throughout the race. The course was extremely rough, and out of the 89 teams to pass technical inspection, twenty did not manage to complete a single lap.

Every team had to come in for some kind of repair at some point during the race, and we were no exception. After 8 laps or so, our CVT guard began coming loose, and we pitted to fix that issue. After 20 minutes, we were back on the track, but unfortunately, our repairs didn’t hold up, and the guard came loose again after another 5 laps. This time, we bolted on an

additional bracket to hold it in place, and the repairs held for the remainder of the race.

At this point, we were in 29th place, with cars dropping like flies on the track. The sides of the track were strewn with vehicles waiting to get towed. After we completed our steering repairs, we got back on the track and took it a little easier for the remainder of the race to ensure that we could finish without breaking anything else. These last laps that we got in after our steering repairs moved us up from 29th place to 18th when we crossed the checkered flag with 22 total laps. We had survived the endurance race with our car still functional and never had to get towed off the track!

Even with our below potential performance in two of the dynamic events, we placed 24th overall for the competition, a huge improvement over our 50th place finish in 2010.

Our placement in each event was: 24th Overall, 18th in Endurance, 17th in Design, 21st in Cost, 23rd in Hill Climb, 60th in Suspension and Traction, 59th in Maneuverability, and 49th in Acceleration.

Our team was very pleased with our overall performance, and although we were not one of the top teams, our placement was impressive for a small, inexperienced team. Many teams compete in multiple competitions every year and have been through many iterations of optimizing their design.

We would like to extend special thanks to all our sponsors: Ancon Gear, QTC Gear, Eaton, Polaris, SKF, CV-Tech IBC, Solidworks, HSMworks, IGUS, Briggs and Stratton, Creative Engineering, and the Grove School of Engineering. Companies or individuals interested in sponsoring us for future competitions should contact [email protected]. Students are encouraged to stop by our office in ST 272 if you want to get involved, or to learn more about our projects. •

Gearbox Surgeons.

Catching some air on the tabletop jump during the

endurance event.



GLEN KLEINSASSER is a Senior Mechanical Engineering student

and current president of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). He has

been President for the past two years and spearheaded the CCNY SAE entry

into the SAE Supermileage collegiate design competition where they placed

5th in design out of 32 engineering schools.

In the Spring of 2012 the SAE Club won 24th place overall out of 100

colleges and universities competing in the SAJA BAJA competition. It is a very

competitive competition and the highest placement of any CCNY BAJA team

in the past was 50th place overall. Even though they had a small and relatively

inexperienced team, they were a dedicated group and came up with a very

innovative design that helped them earn a higher placement than past CCNY

vehicles.

Glen Kleinsasser has been awarded with many prestigious scholarships,

including the President Gregory H. Williams Scholarship, Whitford Scholarship,

Goldstein Scholarship, Machine Design Scholarship, and Alumni Medal Award.

He graduated in May 2012, and started a new position as an engineer in

Community Products LLC, Rifton, NY.Glen Kleinsasser with ME Chair Delale

DR. ALI SADEGH is the Founder and Director of the Center for Advanced Engineering Design and was the Chairman of the

Department of Mechanical Engineering at CCNY. He was the recipient of the Best Paper Award from the Bioengineering Division of the

American Society of Mechanical Engineers in 1992 and was the recipient of the Melville Medal from the American Society of Mechanical

Engineers in 1993. He is also the recipient of the Inventor Award from General Motors Corp.

Professor Sadegh has been elected to Fellow of ASME and Fellow of SME (society of Manufacturing Engineering). He is the reviewer

of many national and international journals. He was the director of the Selected Program in Science and Engineering (SPISE) at CCNY.

Dr. Sadegh has conducted research and has over 165 publications including 12 book chapters. He has 15 US patents. He is one of the three

authors of the 8th edition of “Roark’s Formulas for Stress and Strain”, and the 11th edition of “Marks’ Standard Handbook for Mechanical

Engineers”. Both books were published by McGraw-Hill. He has organized and chaired many technical sessions in conferences. He was an

Evaluator of Mechanical Engineering programs of the Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) 1996-2004.

Professor Ali Sadegh with wind turbine.

senior design leads to real-world...

Documents