william enns bray, mitch sharpe, mike kryski, andrew mattson, nicole marshall, ashton johnson
DESCRIPTION
William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson Sponsor: Dr. Bertram Design Review 1. Human Locomotion Research. Millennium Bridge in London. Design Goal. To design a wearable device that shifts the centre of mass of a subject. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski,Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson
Sponsor: Dr. Bertram
Design Review 1
![Page 2: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Human Locomotion ResearchMillennium Bridge in London
![Page 3: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Design Goal
To design a wearable device that shifts the centre of mass of a subject.The device will involve a mass of 2 kg oscillating at a frequency of up to 4 Hz with a full cycle amplitude of 8 cm.Normal motion should not be affected when device is worn and not turned on.
![Page 4: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Functional Objectives
Oscillate a 2 kg massAmplitude of 8 cmFrequency of 4 HzAdjust mass so that it sits on test subjects centre of gravityAdjustable device to fit most body types
![Page 5: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Double Slider MechanismRotating arms to raise and lower mass
Duel motor or single motor configurations
Motors reverse direction to create oscillation
Vertical guide to keep masscentered / level
Controlled by monitoring arm angle.
![Page 6: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Double Slider MechanismTorque requirement :
400 Nm on each side
89° rotation to achieve 8 cm vertical amplitude
3.1 rad/s (30RPM) to achieve 4Hz
Direction change 8 times per second
Approx. dimensions: 30 cm W x 18 cm H
Depth to be determined by motor requirements.
![Page 7: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Double Slider Mechanism
Advantages Disadvantages
Simplistic Width may cause a poor fit on narrow body types
Fully controllable frequency and amplitude
Duel motor configuration requires synchronization
Duel motor configuration -- can use small motors
Single motor configuration requires additional system to prevent binding
![Page 8: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Crank-Slider MechanismModification of classic 4-bar mechanismConverts angular motion to linear motion
![Page 9: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Crank-Slider Mechanism
Torque requirement: 800 Nm
Crank length: 4 cm
Minimum rod length: 8 cm
Approx. dimensions: 8 cm W x 20 cm H
(excluding mass dimensions)
![Page 10: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Crank-Slider Mechanism
Advantages DisadvantagesSimplistic Fixed amplitude
Rotational control only Large height requirement
Direction independent Relatively large torque requirements
Modular Design
![Page 11: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Cam ProfileForce-closed or Form-closed Design
Different cam profiles can be cut to achieve different types of motion
i.e (Harmonic, Cycloidal etc.)
Mass attached to roller follower
Follower slides vertically with respect to mounting bracket
![Page 12: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Cam ProfileCrossover Shock(For form-closed cam)
Possibility of “Follower Jump”(For force-closed cam)
Torque Requirement
Motion Amplitude:
8 cmBase Circle Diameter
Maximum Pressure Angle
1 cm 59.9°4 cm 40.7°6 cm 34.2°8 cm 29.5°
Cam Profile(Simple Harmonic)
![Page 13: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Cam Profile
Advantages Disadvantages
Simplistic Amplitude and motion type only controllable by use of different cams
Constant rotation then perfect vertical oscillations can be
guaranteed
Expensive to manufacture(especially form-closed cam)
Single direction of rotation:Higher frequencies are easier to
achieve
To lower torque requirements must make device larger (lower pressure angle)
![Page 14: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Rack & Pinion Mechanism3 major components:
Rack, Pinion, Motor
Mobile Motor vs. Fixed Motor
Modular vs. Integrated design
![Page 15: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Rack & Pinion MechanismTorque Requirements
Normal Force:Clip vs. Spring
Angular velocity control
![Page 16: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Rack & Pinion Mechanism
Advantages DisadvantagesCustom Dimensions Motor Specifications
Fully adjustable motion & mass Stability, gear normal force, linear path
Easily available parts & materials Difficult to verify performance
Easy to control
Simple Design and low cost
![Page 17: William Enns Bray, Mitch Sharpe, Mike Kryski, Andrew Mattson, Nicole Marshall, Ashton Johnson](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022070421/56816150550346895dd0d578/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Thank you from team BALTE!