Objective

• Design, analyze, and fabricate

a wiper mechanism.

• Minimize the driving torque,

shaking force and shaking

moment.

• Apply de-icing mechanism.

An Exceptional Windshield Wiper Mechanism

Conventional

Mechanism • Constructed simplified system based

off of wiper mechanism from 1990

Caprice

• Mechanism is tested at high and low

speeds

• Forces determined using force

sensors and Pasco Data studio

Optimized

Mechanism • Fmincon function in Matlab used to

find optimized link dimensions

• Linkages used to verify reduction in

shaking force and driving torque

• Force determined at low and high

speeds

• Heated Blade added to the system

Results • Observed decrease in shaking

force and driving torque in optimized

system

• Unable to test shaking moment,

can be inferred that there is a

decrease based on the observed

results

Conventional system - simplified geometry

Team ME 16, Members: Dave Lynch (Team Leader, ME)

Matthew Cross (ME)

Nick Girken (ME)

Andrew Lasko (ME)

James Lee (ME)

Link Dimensions

L2 (in) 2.06

L3 (in) 19.08

L4 (in) 3.96

M2 (lb) 0.12

M3 (lb) 0.61

M4 (lb) 0.48

Cg2 (ft) 1.03

Cg3 (ft) 9.54

Cg4 (ft) 1.98

I2 (lb-in2) 0.04

I3 (lb-in2) 18.50

I4 (lb-in2)) 3.92

Conventional (LINKAGES)

Fs (lbf) 4.87

T12 (lb-ft) 1.76

F14x (lbf) 15.44

F14y (lbf) 3.15

F14 (lbf) 15.69

Optimized (LINKAGES)

Fs (lbf) 2.92

T12 (lb-ft) 1.28

F14x (lbf) 5.68

F14y (lbf) 0.68

F14 (lbf) 5.68

Percent Difference

Fs (lbf) 40.13

T12 (lb-ft) 27.00

F14x (lbf) 63.22

F14y (lbf) 78.47

F14 (lbf) 63.80

Link Dimensions

L2 (in) 2.27

L3 (in) 18.68

L4 (in) 3.56

M2 (lb) 0.11

M3 (lb) 0.55

M4 (lb) 0.52

Cg2 (ft) 0.93

Cg3 (ft) 9.50

Cg4 (ft) 2.18

I2 (lb-in2) 0.00

I3 (lb-in2) 16.69

I4 (lb-in2)) 0.46

Optimized system - simplified geometry

Faculty Advisor:

Prof. Abbas Fattah, (ME)

Instructors:

Professors Victor A. Marcus

Supporting Partner:

John Kennedy Ford of Conshohocken

Design

• Concepts considered to reduce

the shaking force/moment:

i. Optimization.

ii. Counter Rotation

iii. Counter Weight

iv. Elastic Components

v. Flywheel

• Based on a Performance Matrix,

optimization proved to be best

method

Conclusions • The results indicate that the

shaking force and driving torque

were decreased by over 27%

19 April 2013