Team Vision
Here are some of the deliverables we have completed since our last review!- We met with Dong to get further input of GUI, and then added these features to the GUI
- High level feedback of the motor is now operational
- Finalized SW model and made drawings of all the parts to be machined
- Submitted parts to the machine shop
- Modified BOM to reflect the most current design and made all of the remaining purchases
- Received bearings for the device
- Continue to make updates to the poster for Imagine RIT
- Made edits to the technical paper
- Picked up the aluminum for the side walls of device and began machining it
- Discussed motor shaft-pulley connection with Rob in machine shop.
- Created a handbook/user guide for the robotic eye
- Designed a device to be used as a vertical angle adjustment mechanism in SW
- Created a priority list of parts to be machined, with criteria such as part names, material, estimated time to complete, etc. Also included an additional priority list For sub-assemblies for the device
- Calibration device has been 3D printed and it as then submitted to the ME shop for boring of the center hole for the laser
- Spoke with John Bonzo in the Brinkman Lab about the possibility of 3D printing an additional enclosure for the power supply. He said that it's possible, but first suggested looking into using sheet metal instead or searching for if a box specific to the power supply model exists.
- Sent our rough draft of paper to Susan for review, and changes have since been implemented
Software Updates and Tests
Several features were added to the GUI. Alternate speed settings are now useable by selecting different speed profiles. In addition to this, the high level feedback (HLFB) from the motor is now operational which allows the motor to communicate to the GUI when the movement has finished.
Encoder Count Error Analysis
A test script was created in order to simulate movements that the user would use. The script involved traversing from 30 degrees to -30 degrees and then decreasing increments until 0 degrees was reached. At 0 degrees, the motor will ideally be at encoder count 0 with no offset. This script of 13 movements was run 25 times and the motor was re-zeroed after each run.
The tallied data was analyzed and the mean expected value was found to be 1.52 counts with a standard deviation of 1.89 and standard error of 0.38. With this, the user can expect +/- 2 encoder counts of offset after running a script similar to this one with a maximum offset of +/- 4 encoder counts being the worst expected case.
GUI Timing Error Analysis
There was some discrepancy between our GUI timing method for measuring movement duration, and when the motor actually moved and came to a rest. This we believe is due to the execution time on the Arduino and the execution time in the program. This graph represents an effort to quantify and correct for the error.
Risk and Problem Tracking
SW Model Images
Angle Setting Mechanism
We had the idea to just use a very simple method to alter the angle of the entire device. We slip an "aluminum door stop" under it with graded steps and there is a small notch in the base plate that straddles each step. Each step would correspond to an angle.
COMSOL Analysis
We changed the base plate design slightly and ran a COMSOL analysis to make sure the deflection due to the loads on top was still very small. We found the maximum deflection was in the nanometer scale.
Bill of Materials
Download the Bill of Materials.
Update on Manufacturing
All of the system components have been either ordered, submitted to be machined, are planned to be machined by the team, or are already complete.
Parts That Are Complete and On Hand
- Eye Clamps
- Sprockets
- Acrylic Walls
Parts That Have Been Submitted
- Baseplates
- Yoke
- Eye Shaft
- Shaft Opposite Motor - to be coupled by small sprocket
- Calibration Unit - bore hole to embed laser
Parts To Be Machined By Team
- Aluminum Siding
- Vertical Angle Mechanism
Meetings with Topic Specialists
ME Shop - Rob Kraynik, Jan Maneti
Unfortunately, one of the parts that the team submitted to be machined was taken by someone, leaving us without our part. Due to this, the part had to be re-machined, which put the machining progress several days behind schedule.
Consulting on Machinability of Components
- Helped determine a method for connecting shafts to sprockets
- Pros/Cons of securing components using pins vs. set screws
- All parts mentioned above have been submitted this phase
Brinkman Lab - John Bonzo
The Calibration Unit has been 3D printed in the Brinkman Lab by John Bonzo. Since receiving the part, we have submitted it to the ME shop to have a hole bored to embed the laser.
Consulting on New Enclosure for Power Supply
- Enclosure should not be 3D printed, due to high temperature operation of power supply
- Many power supplies have enclosures made specifically for them. Unfortunately, this was found to not be the case for our power supply
- Generic power supply "boxes" also exist, but these would not fit in our budget
- Sheet metal bending was also an option, but material for this will cause a slight budget overshoot as well
Finalized Design!
Isometric View of the Device
Front View
Top View
Paper, Poster and Design Competition Information
Our current versions of our final paper, poster, and design competition proposal can be found here!
Functional Demo Materials
Plans for next phase
Problem Definition | Systems Design | Subsystem Design | Preliminary Detailed Design | Detailed Design
Build & Test Prep | Subsystem Build & Test | Integrated System Build & Test | Integrated System Build & Test with Customer Demo | Verification & Validation | Final Gate Review
- Viewing the latest revision
- Node updated 2016-05-16 17:24 by amz8073