designReport

T‐SQWRD BIKE RACK
BY TEAM TWO (TOO) TIRED
LUCAS BOLSTER
DUAN HARRION
DENISE NGUYEN
DR. JAMES SCHAAF
EME 150A
DECEMBER 9, 2014

Team Two (Too) Tired 2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................3
Problem Definition......................................................................................................................................3
Problem Scope .......................................................................................................................................3
Technical Review ....................................................................................................................................3
Hitch Mounted....................................................................................................................................3
Trunk Mounted ...................................................................................................................................5
Design Requirements..............................................................................................................................7
Design Description .....................................................................................................................................8
Overview.................................................................................................................................................8
Detailed Description...............................................................................................................................8
Hitch Rod............................................................................................................................................9
Crank Holder ....................................................................................................................................11
Vertical Support................................................................................................................................12
Chainstay Hook ................................................................................................................................13
Down Tube Hook ..............................................................................................................................14
Seat Tube Rest .................................................................................................................................15
Straps...............................................................................................................................................16
Assembly..............................................................................................................................................17
Use.......................................................................................................................................................17
Evaluation.................................................................................................................................................18
Overview...............................................................................................................................................18
Prototype..............................................................................................................................................18
Testing and Results ..............................................................................................................................19
2G Bump Factor of Safety & Fatigue Analysis...................................................................................19
1G Side-to-Side Acceleration FOS ....................................................................................................21
Fatigue Life Evaluation......................................................................................................................22
Mass Evaluation................................................................................................................................23
Space Constraint Evaluation.............................................................................................................23
Assessment..........................................................................................................................................25
Next Steps............................................................................................................................................25
References ...............................................................................................................................................26
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................27

Executive Summary
Almost every cyclist – at some point – has a need to carry their bicycle on their car. Be it a trip
to a road race or hauling their bike to the repair shop, they want their bike rack to be compact
and easy to use. They want the destination to be the focus of the trip, not a clunky bike carrier.
The T-Sqwrd bike rack addresses problems seen on current bike racks with a unique approach to
bicycle support.
Problem Definition
Problem Scope
Many cyclists are required to transport their bicycles to different locations for events or just to
see different geographies and typically rely on a hitch or trunk mounted bicycle carrier. Many of
these carriers are fraught with problems that make the act of taking a bicycle seem like a chore.
The T-Sqwrd encourages cycling more often because it eliminates the burdens of typical carriers
and blends seamlessly into the cyclist’s life.
Technical Review
Both professional and amateur cyclists need the ability to easily mount their bicycles on their
cars. They expect for their bicycles to be safely secured to their vehicles in many different
situations, from hauling it through a city center to take it for service to taking it through a
winding, dirt road for a camping trip. The commonality here is that the rack should not be the
center of attention. The sole purpose of the rack is to support the user on their trip.
There are three common varieties of bike racks for passenger vehicles: hitch, roof and trunk
mounted.
Hitch Mounted
Existing hitch mounted bicycle racks either support the bicycle’s weight at the top tube
or at the bottom of the two wheels.
Top Tube Support
Supporting the bicycle at the top tube is the cheapest and simplest solution. The
bicycles are free to swing as the vehicle accelerates and brakes so there aren’t
any moments translated on the rack. Another advantage to this style of rack is
that it isn’t dependent on any of the bike’s lower geometries. This can be a big
advantage with some eBikes and mountain bikes with rear suspensions. The
biggest disadvantage to this style of bike rack is that it is very dependent on the
top tube’s geometry and is often incompatible with some eBike frames, women’s
frames, composite frames, and mountain bike frames.

Figure 1: Thule Helium Aero hitch mounted carrier ($349.99)
To combat incompatibility with various top tube geometries, some companies sell
a device that creates a horizontal connection point by attaching to the stem and
seat tube. This device brings additional cost, complexity, and carries the bike
lower to the ground than it should be.
Figure 2: Yakima TopTube ($39)
Platform Bike Carrier
Some hitch mounted bike carriers primarily support the bike at the base of the
two wheels with a third connection to the top of the front wheel to keep the bike
from tipping. This type of carrier virtually guarantees bike compatibility and ease
of use because they secure the bikes at the most consistent part of their design:
the wheels. These racks are not reliant on any section of the frame geometry so
they’re a great choice for users with composite frames or mountain bikes.
Because these types of carriers already have a platform, they often also offer a
foldable ramp to make loading heavy bikes easier.

Platform bike carriers typically have the highest cost, complexity, and bulk of the
hitch mounted carriers. Many platform carriers are not designed to fold down as
compactly as their top tube counterparts making it difficult to store. Those that
are able to fold down often come with exorbitant costs as we see with the $699
Thule EasyFold.
Figure 3: Thule EasyFold 9032 ($699.95)
Trunk Mounted
Trunk mounted bicycle carriers rely on 6 straps (top, bottom, and side of trunk) and 4
soft rests on the trunk surface itself. These racks vary slightly in geometry but uniformly
secure the bike by the top tube and attach to the same sections of the trunk. This type of
rack is very compact to store. It has similar limitations to top tube support bike carriers
in that it attaches to the top tube of the bike and can be incompatible with some bike
frames. Many users also worry about the risk of damaging the car with this type of
carrier. Additionally, these carriers are usually complicated and require time for set up.
Figure 4: Thule Raceway 9001XT ($279.95)

Roof Mounted
Roof mounted bike carriers are very common because they easily attach to the car’s roof
without much risk of damaging the car. These carriers remove the extra footprint other
designs have, which can be a concern when driving in a city center. The main drawback
of a roof mounted bike carrier is that the cyclist has to lift the bike on top of the vehicle.
For this reason, they are most popular on smaller cars rather than SUVs. Roof mounted
racks either attach to both wheels or to the back wheel and the front dropouts.
Two Wheeled Support
Like the platform hitch rack, this form of support is the most compatible with
different frame geometries. The only downside to this design is that there is less
support for the bike without the front dropout attached to the carrier.
Figure 5: Thule Criterium 598 ($189.95)
Front Dropout & Rear Wheel Support
This form of support, which relies on the front dropout for both longitudinal and
lateral support is very rigid. It also makes the bike less attractive to thieves as the
wheel is usually stored inside the vehicle. The main problem with this rack design
is the need to take off and re-install the front wheel when using the rack.

Figure 6: Thule Paceline 527 ($199.95)
Design Requirements
The primary user need for this product’s success is that it seamlessly integrates into their active
lifestyle. From this user need, we can deduce a number of design requirements:
1. Supports two 60-lb bicycles
2. Weighs less than 144 pounds (more realistically, less than 30-lbs)
3. Must secure the bicycles from road forces and theft
a. Must have infinite life for a 2G bump
b. Must support a 1G acceleration in the side-to-side direction
4. Must be stored in an area that is 14” x 17” x 36”
5. Should be cost competitive with other bike racks
a. Use common aluminum and steel materials
b. Be manufactured using common techniques

Design Description
Overview
The T-Sqwrd Rack is designed to carry two 60-lb bicycles behind a car using a standard 1.25”
hitch receiver. Unlike many other hitch style bike racks, the bicycles are supported from the
bottom of the frame. The main, weight-bearing support is at the crank tube, where the down
tube, seat tube, and rear drop out originate from. Additional supports for balance, and turning
forces are attached to the down tube, seat tube, and rear drop out.
Figure 7: The T-Sqwrd Rack
Detailed Description
The T-Sqwrd rack needs to support the bicycles from gravity forces, bump accelerations, and
turning accelerations. To do this, it supports the bicycles in four primary locations: at the crank
tube, on the down tube, against the seat tube, and on one chainstay.

Figure 8: T-Sqwrd Part Callout
1. Hitch Rod
Function
The hitch rod’s main functionality is to support the weight of the bikes through
the crank holder and vertical support. This part inserts into the 1.25” square hitch
receiver at the rear of the car. While the size of the hitch receiver is standardized,
its height from the ground is far from normalized. Due to the desired space
constraints, the T-Sqwrd will not work well on vehicles that have a hitch that is
low to the ground.
Geometry
Full Geometry in Appendix

Figure 9: Geometry of Hitch Rod
Manufacture
Figure 10: Tube Mill Features
Figure 11: Hitch Bar manufacturing process
The hitch bar will be manufactured using a tube mill similar to Figure10 above. Coiled
1045 steel is rolled out and flattened before entering an overhead loop spiral
accumulator. The flattened steel then enters the rollers where it is formed into the
desired thickness before the edges of the strips are heated to a molten state before they
are forged welded together. The member is cooled before entering the squaring stand

where it is shaped as a 1.25” sided square and cut off by a saw at the desired length.
Afterwards, the hitch bar is placed in a drill press to tap and drill the holes.
2. Crank Holder
Function
The crank holder will relate all of the bicycle’s weight into the hitch rod. The crank
holder directly support the bicycles weight at the crank tube and translates all
dynamic forces through the vertical support. Although not included in the solid
model, the production version would have a medium-density foam on it to cushion
the bicycle’s frame.
Geometry
Figure 12: Isometric view of Crank Holder
Manufacture
Figure 13: Crank Holder manufacturing process
The 6061 aluminum alloy crank holders will be molded and finished in a C.N.C.
Liquid 6061 Aluminum Alloy will be poured into a cast iron mold where it will
harden. Afterwards, the piece will be placed into a C.N.C. where the top will be
finished and the holes will be drilled and tapped.

3. Vertical Support
Function
The vertical support is used to support the imbalance of the bike and to resist
dynamic forces. It also offers a loop to secure the bike to the rack using a u-lock.
Geometry
Figure 14: Isometric view of Vertical Support
Manufacture
Figure 15: Vertical Support manufacturing process
The easiest way to manufacture this part is to have a cast iron mold of the three
walls and pour liquid aluminum alloy into the mold. After the aluminum alloy
hardens , it is cut down to the desired thickness using a water jet (water jet
cutting is more precise than a laser cutting). Then 6061 aluminum sheet metal is
placed on top of the open-faced, three walled support and both pieces are placed

in a stamp die to stamp the last wall. The holes are then tapped and drilled in a
drill press before the stamped sheet metal and open-faced, three wall support are
welded together along with the locking loop (which is molded separately).
4. Chainstay Hook
Function
The chainstay hook supports the bicycle’s chainstay and is primarily used to
support the imbalance of the bicycle. It also is where we expect the user to use
this hook to rotate the bike into position on the rack.
Geometry
Figure 16: Isometric view of Chainstay Hook
Manufacture
Figure 17: Chainstay Hook manufacturing process
The chain stay hook will be forged using a closed die similar to the Figure 17
above. A strip of steel is enclosed in a die and forged on an anvil in order to

create a rectangular steel hook. A drill press is used to create the holes for the
M3 bolts and nuts in the hook which is then affixed to the vertical support.
5. Down Tube Hook
Function
The down tube hook supports the bicycle’s down tube and is used primarily to
support the imbalance of the bicycle. It also is primary in translating forces from
the vehicle cornering.
Geometry
Figure 18: Isometric view of Down Tube Hook
Manufacture
Figure 19: Down Tube Hook manufacturing process
Similar to the chain stay hook, the down tube hook will also be forged using a
closed die and then put into a drill press to tap and drill the holes. The down tube

hook also has an anchor which is made by milling a block of 1045 steel down to
the desired shape and welded onto the down tube hook.
6. Seat Tube Rest
Function
The seat tube rest supports the bicycle at the seat tube. It is intended to keep the
bike from rotating at the bottom during acceleration and braking maneuvers.
Geometry
Figure 20: Isometric view of Seat Tube Rest
Manufacture
Figure 21: Manufacturing Process for the Seat Tube Rests

Liquid 6061 Aluminum Alloy will be poured into two cast iron molds and welded
together once it hardens to create the seat tube rests. After the piece is welded
together, the anchor will be milled from a block of 1045 steel and welded to the
seat tube rest.
7. Straps
Function
The rubber straps (roughly modeled in SolidWorks) are attached via the cylindrical
anchors at the seat tube rest and the down tube hook. They are used to keep the
bike from moving in the direction opposite the hook/support. An example of the
style of rubber straps are shown in Figure 21 below.
Geometry
Figure 22: Isometric View of Rubber Straps
Manufacture
Figure 23: Manufacturing Process for Straps
To manufacture the straps, we would use liquid injection molding where liquid
silicone rubber is injected via nozzle into a mold and removed when it solidifies.

This process is extremely fast and allows for high production rates which is
necessary since we need two straps per bicycle rack.
Assembly
The rack will require some assembly after individual part manufacture. The steps are:
1. Connect the Crank Holder and Vertical support with three M4 screws to secure the
two members.
2. Weld the Crank Holder to the Vertical Support.
3. Install Chainstay Hook to Vertical Support with two M3, countersunk machine
screws, two washers, and two nuts. Apply Loctite to nut.
4. Install Down Tube Hook to the Vertical Support with two M3, countersunk machine
screws, two washers, and two nuts. Apply Loctite to nut.
5. Install the Anchor to the Vertical Support with one M3, countersunk machine screw,
one washer, and one nut. Apply Loctite to nut.
6. Put the Seat Tube Support on the Vertical Support and weld them together.
7. Slip each assembled Crank Holder onto the Hitch Rod.
8. Secure the Crank Holders onto the Hitch Rod with M5 machine screws, washers, and
nuts. Each nut should be secured with Loctite.
Use
To use this rack, the hitch bar should be inserted into the receiver and the pin should be
installed. Following the rack installation on the car, the bikes can be placed on the rack and they
should then be secured with the rubber straps. If security is desired, the user can use their U-
Lock to attach the bike frame to the included loop on the vertical support.

Evaluation
Overview
The primary evaluation criterion for the T-Sqwrd is that it seamlessly blends into the life of the
user. To ensure that the rack do this, we have planned a rigorous FEA analysis to ensure the
product will not fail on the user. Additionally, real world durability and user interfaces will be
required before the product should be sold.
Table 1: Design requirement evaluation
Requirement Target Value Test Procedure
Supports 2 60-lb bikes FOS > 2 in static loading Perform FEA analysis and
evaluate FOS of entire
assembly
Weighs less than 144-lb 35-lbs Evaluate mass properties of
solid model
Infinite Life for 2G Bump Fatigue Life > 106
Carry out FEA fatigue model
to determine minimum life
Support 1G Acceleration
Side-to-Side
FOS > 2 in side loading Perform FEA analysis and
evaluate FOS of entire
assembly
Fit a 14”x17”x36” Space Fits in box without
disassembly
Evaluate overall geometry of
assembly
Use Aluminum or Steel Use available materials Evaluate material selection
Common manufacture
techniques
Prototype
The primary prototype of our design is a SolidWorks assembly. It contains all relevant parts with
accurate geometries and material properties. Of course, some factor of safety should be
included for inconsistencies in materials and manufacturing. The model is fixture over the
surfaces of the last 5 inches of the hitch rod, which would be inserted into the receiver. The only
portion of the assembly that isn’t perfectly modeled is the rubber strap that secures the down
tube and seat tube. This deficiency is due to an inability to thoroughly model the elastic design
and the rubber material. Real world testing would be needed in this region before the product
should be sold.

Figure 24: Illustration showing the location of the fixtures and where the forces are applied
To ensure the product meets its ultimate goal – to blend seamlessly into the user’s lifestyle – our
team would like to see real world product testing take place at the boundary conditions of the
design. Although the hitch design is well standardized, the forces it exerts on the hitch rod can
vary drastically depending on the vehicle’s wheel base, mass, spring rate, suspension travel, and
damper setup. To ensure the product will keep the bikes safe and secure under all realistic use
conditions, the rack should be subjected to those same conditions and worse until it fails.
Should failure occur in a reasonable use case, that portion of the product needs to be revised.
Testing and Results
2G Bump Factor of Safety & Fatigue Analysis
Introduction
The largest expected forces on our rack are during a bump case. This event is
dependent on the vehicle’s suspension setup and the actual geometry of the
bump on the road. To prevent failure when the rack is in the field, we have
modeled a fairly large bump as a 2G acceleration in the vertical direction. While
the wheel and tire package will accelerate at a greater rate than 2G in many
bump cases, we are making the assertion that the body of the vehicle will be
insulated to an acceleration of less than 2G. This value will be validated in real
world testing.
Test Procedure
To test this event, the following forces were exerted on the rack:
Y
X
Z

Table 2: Loads applied in 2G bump event
Location Magnitude Direction
Inner Crank Holder 120 lb -Y
Outer Crank Holder 120 lb -Y
Inner Seat Tube Rest 5 lb +X
Outer Seat Tube Rest 5 lb +X
Inner Down Tube Hook 3 lb Directly into hook (-Y, +Z)
Outer Down Tube Hook 3 lb Directly into hook (-Y, +Z)
Inner Chain Stay Hook 3 lb -Y
Outer Chain Stay Hook 3 lb -Y
Entire Assembly Gravity 36.29 lb -Y
Results
The maximum stress in this event is the portion of the rod just before the hitch
support starts. It registers a maximum stress using von Mises of 25.75 ksi.
Factoring in the material properties of the 1045 CD Steel the hitch rod is
constructed of, the lowest FOS is 2.986.
Figure 25: Stress Plot of 2G Bump Event
Discussion
The results of the FEA analysis satisfy the requirement to secure the bicycles to
the vehicle while on the road. As mentioned earlier, this results should be

validated by some real-world information about vehicle body acceleration over
bumps.
1G Side-to-Side Acceleration FOS
Introduction
To model the loads placed on the rack in a turn, we used a 1G acceleration in
each direction. This is an appropriate maximum load as it serves as a fairly
common max limit of adhesion for road cars with summer performance tires.
Test Procedure
To test this event, the following forces were exerted on the rack:
Table 3: Loads applied in 1G Turn Event
Results
The resulting max stress is 28.62 ksi. Taking materials into account, the minimum
FOS is 3.145

Figure 26: Stress Plot for 1G Turn
Discussion
Again, the results of the FEA analysis satisfy the requirement to secure the
bicycles to the vehicle while on the road.
Fatigue Life Evaluation
Introduction
Due to varying road loads, several components on the rack will see cyclical
loading. We did not consider the forces of loading the bicycles to be anywhere
near a fatigue limit. The primary focus is the loading caused by road irregularities
and bumps. We expect the rack to see a large number of these cycles as it is on
the road.
Test Procedure
To test this event, the following forces were exerted on the rack and a zero based
fatigue study was run to evaluate the life of the rack.
The zero based study is a “worst case” as the bike will not pull up on the crank
holder.
Table 4: Loads applied for 1.5G fatigue analysis

Results
The hitch bar, which is the critically stressed component does have infinite life
under these conditions.
Discussion
This is a pleasing result, as we see that even fairly tough, daily use will not fatigue
the rack and it will go on to serve the user until they no longer want to use it.
Mass Evaluation
Introduction
The mass of the bike rack is critical to the primary goal of integrating into the
user’s life seamlessly. In order for the user to not be bothered by the rack, it
needs to easy to lift and install on the hitch.
Test Procedure
To evaluate the mass of the rack, we selected the appropriate material properties
in SolidWorks and used the Mass Properties Function to determine the weight of
the rack.
Results
All in, the rack weighs 36.29 lb.
Discussion
We consider 36.29 lb to be a very reasonable weight for the rack. It is reasonable
to assume that the user has should have no problem lifting or moving this rack as
its weight is consistent with that of a medium-light bike.
Space Constraint Evaluation
Introduction
Our user will need to store the rack when it isn’t in use so it’s important that it be
easy to store and not take too much of their space up.
Test Procedure
To evaluate the footprint of our rack we used the Measure tool in Solidworks to
see our dimensions.
Results

Figure 27: Front view showing package dimensions
Figure 28: Bottom view showing package dimensions
Discussion
The resulting assembly does fit into the initially stated size constraints and
shouldn’t take up a huge amount of room in the user’s home.

Assessment
The T-Sqwrd rack thoroughly and creatively addresses each of the design requirements. The
unique approach of securing the bike frames from the bottom has definitely resulted some
definite advantages and disadvantages that we didn’t see coming.
This rack’s main advantage is that it doesn’t have to make the use of any complicated folding or
telescoping mechanisms to fit into the desired size constraint. These mechanisms are often
complicated and increase cost, decrease rigidity, and can prove unreliable. These traits go
against our goal of blending in with the user’s life. Our users do not want to be burdened by a
stuck hinge due to corrosion.
Another advantage of the rack is that it is compatible with various top tube geometries because
it doesn’t interact with that part of the frame. This advantage, though, can work perfectly for
some users and wouldn’t work at all for others. If the bike user has a bike with uncommon crank
tube geometry, the bike will not be compatible with the rack.
The largest current roadblock to the design’s success is that it carries the bikes close to the
road – in some vehicles the bikes may actually touch the ground. This is a major problem and
could prove to be something that would deem this style of rack a “no go.” There are a number of
things that could be done to address this issue but each brings with it some definite
disadvantages. One solution would be to put a bend in the hitch rod, but this would either
increate the package size or necessitate disassembly or complex mechanisms to keep the form
factor.
Next Steps
The first step that should be taken is a collection of some real world hitch height data. This
should then be collected and modeled with several various bike models to see the distance from
the wheels to the ground in various pairings. If the outcome of this data is that the bikes are too
close to the ground, a decision must be made about scrapping the design or including some
mechanisms to make the design more compact for storage.
Should the design move past the height evaluation stage, a physical prototype should be
manufactured and rigorously tested with various vehicle suspensions systems and in various
environmental conditions. Revisions should be made for any failures.
Following the physical testing stage, the design should be verified and improved using customer
evaluation programs. Further development can also take place with this product to make it more
compatible with other bike designs by making multiple crank holder and down tube hook
designs for purchase.

References
http://www.carid.com/images/thule/bike-carriers/9009xt-6.jpg
http://www.yakima.com/shop/bike/trunk/tubetop
http://www.rei.com/zoom/qq/2df445a4-5211-43fc-93bf-c5e3716af7d7.jpg/330
http://www.thule.com/en-us/us/products/carriers-and-racks/bike-carriers/hitch-mounted-
bike-carriers/thule-easyfold-9032-_-1684676
http://shop.espokes4folks.com/images/Thule_Easy_Fold(1).jpg
http://www.thule.com/en-us/us/products/carriers-and-racks/bike-carriers/roof-mounted-
bike-carriers/thule-criterium-598-_-13898
http://www.thule.com/en-us/us/products/carriers-and-racks/bike-carriers/roof-mounted-
bike-carriers/thule-paceline-527-_-1684640

Appendix

13.980
15.499
35.739
3.000
15.000
17.000
20.500
29.650
31.650
35.150
AssemblyDenise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
36.29 lbs
Lucas Bolster
WEIGHT:
A4
SHEET 1 OF 1SCALE: 1:8
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
NAME
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
FINISH:UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED:
DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:
SolidWorks Student Edition.
For Academic Use Only.

R4.747
2x
0.118
2x0.118
2.000
R0.300
R0.300
0.800
2.000
0.800
0.400
1.6002.000
0.795
1.500
1.500
1.000
0.795
0.858
1.291
0.187
2.000
8.749°
0.200
0.200
R0.407
R0.593
8.013
7.5856.667
6.599
1.000
2.774
0.118
0.200
3x
0.157
Vertical SupportDenise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
3.8 lbs
Lucas Bolster
WEIGHT:
6061 Aluminum Alloy
A4
SHEET 1 OF 1SCALE:1:5
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
NAME
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:

R0.78
R0.38
R0.20
0.40
1.60
2.00
2x 0.13
0.80
0.40
Chain Stay HookDenise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
0.41 lbs
Lucas Bolster
WEIGHT:
1045 CD Steel
A4
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
NAME
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:

R1.000
ALL
0.600
7.000
AA
R0.100
R0.100
0.250
ALL R0.100
ALLR0.100
SECTION A-A
SCALE 1 : 3
Tube StrapDenise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
Lucas Bolster
WEIGHT:
A4
SHEET 1 OF 1SCALE: 1:3
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
NAME
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:

R1.414
R0.230
R0.200
0.811
1.700
0.150
0.150
0.239
R0.448
2.000
2.000
0.300
0.100
2.300
0.8000.6003.200
1.00
Seat Tube Rest
0.62 lbs
Denise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
Lucas Bolster
WEIGHT:
6061 Aluminum Alloy
A4
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
NAME
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:

0.800
0.134 THRU0.250 x 90
0.600
0.100 0.300
AnchorDenise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
0.04 lbs
Lucas Bolster
WEIGHT:
1045 CD Steel
A4
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
NAME
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:

R0.300
R1.250
R1.850
0.600
0.300
0.100
0.800
2x 0.134
0.400
1.600
2.000
0.600
0.800
Down Tube HookDenise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
1.16 lbs
Lucas Bolster
WEIGHT:
1045 CD Steel
A4
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
NAME
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:

0.100
1.250
R0.100
R0.100
3.000
17.800
19.700
32.450
34.350
35.150
0.31
2x
0.26
2x
0.26
Hitch BarDenise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
4.57 lbsWEIGHT:
1045 CD Steel
A4
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
Lucas Bolster
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:
NAME

R0.375
R0.419
R1.795
1.250
R0.100
3x 0.177
1.000
1.25
R2.12
R1.371
6.319
6.875
0.800
2.700
3.500
2x 0.260
1.625
4.500
0.500
Crank HolderDenise Nguyen
Duan Harrion
Lucas Bolster
WEIGHT: 8.11 lbs
6061 Aluminum Alloy
A4
DWG NO.
TITLE:
REVISION
MATERIAL:
NAME
DEBUR AND
BREAK SHARP
EDGES
SURFACE FINISH:
TOLERANCES:
LINEAR:
ANGULAR:

designReport

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to designReport

Similar to designReport (20)

designReport