Upload
allison-caldwell
View
216
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
P16221 – FSAE Shock DynamometerPreliminary Detailed Design Review
November 13, 2015
• Aung Toe – EE• Jim Holmes – EE– Project Manager
• Sal Fava – ME– Chief Engineer
• Chris Batorski – ME– Facilitator
• Andrew Dodd – ISE
P16221 – MSD Team
• Address concerns from System Level DR• System Level Design Flowchart Updates• Engineering Spec Updates• Current Bill of Materials• Safety Considerations• User Interface (software)• Model Overview• Mechanical Systems Analysis• Electrical Schematics• Risk Management• Project Plan• Team Efficiency
Agenda
• Concerned about quantity of data transferred– Put two micros in: one for sensor read and one for dyno
control– Sample only important sections of track data
• Add internal frames to the energy chart that shows the internal resistances to energy transfers
• Verify that the load cell will not measure its own internal deflection, just the force applied to it– Verified by spec sheet
• Track the severity chart sum over time to show progress– Chart created and updated weekly (owned by Jim)
Resolved Issues From Previous Review
• Keep verification testing in mind during the design process to make testing easier at the end– Developing test plans now
• Customer movement metric needs to be better defined– Complete. See engineering specs
• Due to the dynamic nature of the dyno, a timing diagram should be created– Timing Diagram
• Need a reasonable life expectancy of the dyno and write a spec on it– See engineering specs for life cycle and maintenance interval
Resolved Issues From Previous Review (Cont.)
• What will keep the dyno from “walking across the floor” while it is running?– Open issue. Will need to perform isolation analysis from
dyno to floor
• Develop an Engineering Analysis vs. Risk vs. Verification Test metric to make sure everything is covered.– Still in progress
• Any function in the system functional block diagram with only one child should be combined into one block– Low priority, still in progress
Open Issues From Last Review
Engineering Requirements
BOM
Predicted Costs
System Level DesignFlowchart
• Goals of sub-system:– Protect user from serious damper failure– Not impede user activities within working zone– Low cost
• Important features– Enclosure– Emergency Stop Switch– Safety Door Lock– Safety Circuit
Subsystem DesignSafety
Major Components• Aluminum Extrusion Frame
– Minitec 45x45 F
• Plastic Shielding– Polycarbonate sheeting
• Door• Safety Latch• Safety Circuit
Interfaces• Test stand base
– Bolted to base
• Work Area– Surrounds the masts and test
area
• Emergency Stop Switch– Will be mounted to the frame
Safety Sub-SystemOverview
• Goals of Subsystem– Provide user with a way to control and program the test
stand– Post processes the raw data and saves it in .csv format
• Important Features– Car Parameter Inputs– Track Data/Profile Selection– Post Processing– Graph Display
Subsystem DesignSoftware Interface
Software InterfaceProposed Input Display
Total Vehicle Weight 235 kg Front Rear%F Weight Dist 48 % Wheel Rate Kw (N/mm) 21.7 28.9
F Unsprung (by Corner) 6.85 kg Ride Rate Kr (N/mm) 17.6 22.0R Unsprung (by Corner) 7.12 kg
F Spring rate 26.3 N/mmF Motion Ratio 0.909 shock/wheel Sprung Mass ωn(s) (Hz) 2.996 ccr(s) (Ns/mm) 2.282R Spring Rate 35 N/mm Unsprung Mass ωn(us) (Hz) 13.320 ccr(us) (Ns/mm) 1.799
R Motion Ratio 0.909 shock/wheel Sprung Mass ωn(s) (Hz) 3.214 ccr(s) (Ns/mm) 2.180F Tire Spring Rate 91.8 N/mm Unsprung Mass ωn(us) (Hz) 15.086 ccr(us) (Ns/mm) 1.901R Tire Spring Rate 91.8 N/mm
Front 25.40 Low Speed High Speed Ns/mm N at 25.4 mm/s Ns/mm N at 25.4 mm/sRear 25.40 Front 3.00 1.25 Front 6.85 173.87 4.56 115.92
Rear 2.50 1.13 Rear 5.45 138.42 3.63 92.28
Rebound CompressionFront 1.00 1.50Rear 1.00 1.50 Ns/mm N at 254 mm/sec Ns/mmN at 254 mm/secFront 0.65 1.00 Front 2.25 571.17 1.46 371.26Rear 0.70 1.00 Rear 2.14 543.17 1.50 380.22
High Speed
Rear
ResultsDecisions Low Speed
Knee Speed (mm/s) Desired Damping Ratio (c/c crit) Compression Rebound
Compression/Rebound RatioHigh Speed
Low SpeedCompression Rebound
Damper CalculationsCar Parameters Calculations
Resonant Frequency Critical Damping
Front
Equations Variables
• Kw = Wheel Rate
• Ks = Spring Rate
• MR = Motion Ratio• ωs/us = Natural Frequency
(sprung/unsprung mass)• ms/us = Mass
(sprung/unsprung)• ccrs/us = Critical Damping
(sprung/unsprung mass)
Software InterfaceCalculations
Software InterfaceResults (Characterization)
Software InterfaceResults (Track Data)
• Large components placed in the model
• Safety enclosure not shown
Model Overview
• Overview of some simple design practices
Mechanical Design
• Forced on arm at Given locations
• Determine if there are any points of concern
Motion Ratio Arm
• Determine the min diameter shoulder bolts that can be used in each location
Shoulder Bolt Sizing
• Buckling Calculation
Hand CalculationsMast Sizing
Crossbar Clamping Calculation
Electrical System Schematic
Electrical System Schematic
Proof of Concept:Controller
• Safety Circuit Loop • Force sensor/ Potentiometer resolution test• IR sensor safety circuit test• UART and PC interface test
Proof of Concept:Testing to be done
• IR sensor test
Proof of Concept:Testing so far
=
• Additional testing required for higher temperature
• Serial Speed Analysis– Inputs
• Memory Requirements (64 bits of data in 0.002s)
– Output• 32,000 bits/s
– Conclusion- feasible baud rates:• 38,400• 56,000• 115200
Theoretical Models: Serial Interface (UART)
Theoretical Models: Data Flow
Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment
Updated Project Plan
• Atmel Temperature Sensor Test: Initially took 3 days; could repeat in an hour. Efficiency (3%)
• 3-D Model: Initially took 2 team members about 6 hours a piece; probably could repeat in about half of the time. Efficiency (50%)– Note: Still in progress
• Source Ball screw that will meet our needs: Initially took a few weeks; could repeat in an hour. Efficiency (1%)
Team Efficiency
Questions?