Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Advanced Robotics
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Advanced Robotics

463

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
463
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Capstone in Technology<br />Tech 499<br />Department of Technological Studies<br />College of Arts and Sciences<br />Jordan Hites<br />
  • 2. Project Description<br />Sumo robot being built for a Society of Manufacturing Engineers’ National robotics Challenge.<br />Location: Marion Ohio County Fairgrounds<br />Date: April 18th, 2009 <br />
  • 3. Competition Rules<br />Robot must be smaller than 2’ x 2’ x 2’<br />Robot must weigh 125 pounds or less<br />Must be fully autonomous (no remote control)<br />
  • 4. Competition Objectives<br />Two robots are set one foot apart in a 15’ 2” ring<br />One of four starting positions is randomly selected<br />Head to Head<br />Back to Back<br />Side to Side facing the same direction<br />Side to Side facing opposite directions<br />Object is to push the opposing robot out of the ring <br />
  • 5. Economic Analysis<br />Electronic components, circuit board<br />Battlekit single drive modules, Ampflow E-150 motors<br />Colson wheels, rubber wheel swivel casters, <br />Proximity sensors <br />Twelve volt batteries, pillow blocks,<br />Square steel tubing, round aluminum stock, sheet metal,<br /> Emergency stop, and fasteners. <br />
  • 6. Economic Analysis<br />Final Cost: $717.64<br />Motors and battle kits sold separately, contrary to our initial inquiry to robotcombat.com<br />Added $160.00 to our total cost<br />
  • 7. Environmental Analysis<br /><ul><li>All of the components and manufacturing procedures of our robot are environmentally friendly.
  • 8. Our robot uses valve regulated sealed lead-acid gel cell batteries, which
  • 9. Do not need to be kept upright due to no risk of spilling and
  • 10. Also, virtually no electrolyte evaporation.
  • 11. Instead of using lead-acid wet cell batteries that vent hydrogen and oxygen gasses that might ignite</li></li></ul><li>Design<br />J<br />
  • 12. Problem Identification<br />Circuit Board design problems<br />Mounting the prefabricated battle kits<br />Machining and mounting of the custom axles<br />
  • 13. Circuit Board Design Issues<br />
  • 14. First Board Design<br />
  • 15. Battle Kit Modification Issues<br />
  • 16. Battle Kit Modification Issues<br />
  • 17. Custom Axle Solution<br />Implemented Axle<br />
  • 18.
  • 19. Optimization and Continuous Improvement<br />We continuously noticed small things that could be improved upon with our robot, so we would disassemble what was being improved upon, improve it, and then reassemble it. This also increased our fluency with disassembly and assembly, which was very useful when maintenance was needed.<br />
  • 20. Generation of Alternative Designs<br />The robot is actually the second design that we came up with. Our initial design was four wheel drive, used motors similar to the ones used last year, and was overall very similar to the robots used last year and the other groups robot.<br />Non conventional design and implementation.<br />2 motors with 4 wheels<br />4 motors 8 wheels<br />
  • 21. Circuit Board Design<br />Separation from previous designs involved a circuit board instead of a PLC.<br />
  • 22. Schematics<br />
  • 23. Relay Schematic<br />
  • 24. Circuit Board Design<br />
  • 25. Analyzing and Testing<br />We tested the motors and traction by placing roughly seventy to eighty pounds of scrap on top of our robot while trying to orient it towards the front. We also made sure to measure and re-measure everything that we were to model in Pro ENGINEER, so that our drawings could have the most accurate dimensioning.<br />
  • 26. Assessment of Solutions<br />We thought we had solved problems involving traction, maintenance, circuit board, axels and battle kits.<br />Views on robot before competition<br />
  • 27. Competition<br />Timing Delay<br />Failure of key <br />Circuit breaker flipping<br />

×