1 / 37

COMPACT MOBILE LIFTING DEVICE

COMPACT MOBILE LIFTING DEVICE. Innovative Lifting Solutions. Team 3 Michael Shaffer, Ken Kammerer, Dave Geesaman, Jin Ko Sponsor: Fraunhofer Advisor: Dr. Michael Keefe. Summary. Background and Problem Description Mission & Approach Customers, Wants, Constraints

alayna
Télécharger la présentation

COMPACT MOBILE LIFTING DEVICE

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. COMPACT MOBILE LIFTING DEVICE Innovative Lifting Solutions Team 3 Michael Shaffer, Ken Kammerer, Dave Geesaman, Jin Ko Sponsor: Fraunhofer Advisor: Dr. Michael Keefe

  2. Summary • Background and Problem Description • Mission & Approach • Customers, Wants, Constraints • Metrics , Target Values • System Benchmarks, Functional Benchmarks • Concept Generation - Derivation from Critical Functions • Concept Development • Concept Selection - Evaluation against Metrics • Working Model • Schedule • Budget

  3. Fraunhofer has three machines which utilize molds to process plastics and metals. The molds are heavy and large, making it difficult for a person to install and remove them from the machines. They desire a device which will provide mechanical help in transporting these heavy objects.

  4. Hot Press Thermal Technology Inc. Loaded / Unloaded daily

  5. Injection Molding Machine Arburg AllRounder S-Series

  6. Injection Mold Storage Rack Lowest Operating Height: 25 to 30 inches; adjustable

  7. Vacuum Oven Centorr Vacuum Industries Highest Operating Height: 52 inches; fixed

  8. Approach: We will use the engineering method to obtain a conceptual design based upon the wants and constraints of the customers. From this we will construct and test a prototype in order to obtain our final product. Mission and Approach • Mission: • To design and build a mobile device which will aid a user in lifting, moving, and placing heavy molds into an injection molding machine, a hot press, and a vacuum oven.

  9. Customers • Users of the device • James Adkins • Michelle Mattera • Brandon Fichera • Bernie McGuinness • Molding Equipment Manuf. • Centorr Industries • Thermal Technologies, Inc. • Arburg Manufacturing • Commercial Manufacturers • Wesco • Bishamon • Lee Engineering • Centorr Industries • Thermal Technologies • Arburg Manufacturing

  10. Wants • Versatility • Minimize Time for Operation • Maneuverable • Minimize Forces on Machines • Minimize the wear on objects • Inexpensive Prototype • Minimize Cost of Manufacture • Minimize Maintenance Cost

  11. Constraints • Must fit in front of the machines it needs to interface with • Must fit through doors at Fraunhofer • Must roll on tile floors • Must reach highest machine at 53” (max. height) • Must reach mold rack at 26” (min. height) • Must have provisions for locking of all mechanisms • Must be operable by a single user • Must withstand use in a commercial situation • Must be capable of moving the objects • Angle deflection of molds when supported must be less than 1 • Must not damage objects being manipulated

  12. Primary Wants and their Metrics Versatile: Interfaces with all devices (Target: Yes) Time to convert between modes of operation (Target: 0 sec) Fast operation: Time to load & unload (Target: 5 seconds) Maneuverable: Pushing forces (Target: 10 to 20 pounds) Overall weight (Target: 200 pounds) Minimize forces on Machines: Forces (Target: 0 pounds)

  13. Primary Wants and their Metrics Minimize cost of prototype: No. of standardized parts (Target: All) Minimize cost of Manufacture: No. of standardized parts (Target: All) Overall Weight (Target: 400 lb.) Minimize cost of Maintenance: No. of standardized parts (Target: All) Cost to replace failure-sensitive components (Target: $0)

  14. Prioritized Metrics

  15. System Benchmark Best and Only Practice • Wesco Hydraulic Lift Table and Manual Loading • Caster wheels provide good maneuverability • Hydraulic lift cylinder provides large lifting capacity • Disassembly necessary for large • molds

  16. Functional Benchmarks • Functions: Lifting and Moving • Bishamon ESX40 Scissors Lift • Related Metrics: • Allows interface with all machines • Commercially available • Low number of moving parts • Maneuverable • Low weight (229 pounds)

  17. Functional Benchmarks Functions: Lifting, Positioning • Yale powered chain hoist • Related Metrics: • Commercially available • Maneuverable • Motor powered for minimal operator work • Low positioning time

  18. Functional Benchmarks Function: Positioning • Heavy duty drawer slide • Related Metrics: • Low positioning time • Commercially Available • Inexpensive

  19. Functional Benchmarks Function: Positioning Thomson Pillow Blocks & Rails • Related Metrics: • Low positioning time • Commercially Available • Low user force required • High precision • Expensive

  20. Concept Generation 1) Investigated critical functions 2) Analyzed each function and found a particular, ideal solution 3) Pooled solutions and determined best combinations 4) Used SSD to analyze strength of each concept

  21. Concept Generation • Top Critical Function: Interface with all three machines • Concept must allow handling of differently shaped objects: • Cubical injection molds • Cylindrical hot press molds • Flat plates for Vacuum oven • Concept of fork design makes use of flat bottom commonality between all three objects

  22. Concept Generation • Other Critical Functions used in Concept Generation: • Lifting - Scissors Lift & Hydraulic Lift • Mobility - Caster Wheels & Air Cushion • Positioning - Drawer Slides & UHMWP

  23. Concept 1: Sliding Forklift • Strengths: • Time to convert is low • Uses commercially available parts • Can interface with all three machines • Low conversion time • Forks provide versatility • Drawer slides allow positioning • Scissors lift provides lifting and mobility via caster wheels

  24. Concept 2: Fold-out Low-Friction Tabletop • Strengths • Uses commercially available parts • Can interface with all three machines • Fast positioning • Utilizes UHMWP for quick and low-effort positioning of objects • Scissors lift provides lifting and mobility via caster wheels

  25. Evaluation of Concepts Against Metrics • Sliding Forklift Concept: • Time to convert between modes of operation is low • Forks are interchangeable and held on by wing nuts • Estimated time required: 5 minutes • Prototype, Mass Production, and Maintenance costs are low • Uses 70% commercially available parts • Estimated cost - $2300 • Object loading and positioning • User effort is low • Estimated 5 pounds force required for positioning • Weight is within acceptable limits • Estimated weight is 400 pounds • Estimated push force of 20 pounds

  26. Evaluation of Concepts Against Metrics • Low-Friction Table Top Concept: • Prototype and Mass Production costs are low • Uses 80% commercially available parts • Estimated cost - $2000 • Object loading and positioning • User effort is relatively high • Estimated 40 pounds force required for positioning • Weight is within acceptable limits • Estimated weight is 300 pounds • Estimated push force of 15 pounds • Time to convert between modes of operation is reasonably low • Fixtures for each machine provide interfacing • Estimated time required: 10 minutes

  27. 3-D rendering of Wooden Model Working Model Full scale wooden replica • Critical functions to prove: • Interfacing with all machines • Range of lifting height • Positioning system for objects

  28. Schedule to date

  29. Schedule: looking ahead

  30. Budget Fraunhofer Project Budget Goal: $3000

More Related