ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    1/11

    Manatee Mining Systems

    Feasibility Study

    Rafael Arndt Jonathan Block Zachary Griffa Michael Riley

    David Swanson Michael Varga Ryan Waldmann Eugen Zinn

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    2/11

    2

    1. Awareness

    WebCameras

    Web Cameras can offer a wide range of visibility for the robot. Currently they are used on space

    stations, autonomous robots and other projects by NASA. These cameras can be of great use to an

    operator. The operator can used the cameras to navigate the robot through rough terrain, check to see if

    certain robotic parts are in position, or even to measure the Lunar Regolith material gathered by a

    mining machine. Depending on the quality of the picture, and the refresh rate, the cameras could be

    very inexpensive or quite pricey. Regardless of the cost associated with a particular web camera, the

    device will not be of much use in a low visibility environment. A high amount of dust will leave the

    operator at a great visibility loss if a web camera is used in a low visibility environment. One way to

    combat this down side is the variety of ways the camera can be mounted. The cameras can be placed

    on almost any stationary part of the robot due to its light weight.

    Revisiting the Potential Downfalls of a Typical Web Camera:1. Dust may hinder visibility or damage cameras.

    2. Low quality cameras may not provide a reliable picture for the operator.

    3. Having many web cameras on the same network could limit the bandwidth available for the more

    important applications, such as the robotic motion control system.

    Simple experiments could be run with sand and dust to determine the effectiveness of cameras in harsh

    environments.

    Laser Range Finder System

    A laser mapping system could allow for an environment to be seen in 2D by an operator. This would

    help the operator to avoid obstacles. This technology has been proven time and time again by

    autonomous vehicles such as the infamous National Instruments autonomous SUV or the lowly

    autonomous tram system in use by many large manufacturing companies. Currently the Manatee

    Mining Systems Team is in procession of a SICK MS200 Laser Range Finder System. has access to a

    laser range finder device.

    Potential downfalls of a Laser Range Finder

    1. The SICK Laser Range Finder is contained in a heavy, bulky enclosure.

    2. The system utilizes a serial port as its main method of communication. This could pose a

    communications issue.

    3. Typically, high level measurement technology such as the SICK Laser finder is very susceptible to

    electrical noise. This could pose a problem with multiple motor controllers in the same electrical

    circuit.

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    3/11

    3

    Switches

    A major portion of the excavation is dumping the contents from the hopper. Knowing exactly when the

    right height is reached is very important. Switches could be used to notify the operator when the bucket

    or other portions have reached designated locations, or to stop the motion of said parts. Switches can

    be very inexpensive, easy to operate, and require very little power to use. There can be some problems

    with the switches though.

    Potential Problems:

    1. Switches dont tell the operator how far the hopper is from the dumping location.

    2. If the switch is supposed to stop the machine at a certain point and fails, there is no other failsafe.

    GPS

    A thesis dissertation I found online combined a GPS system with a laser mapping system for lunar

    robotics. The system could accurately pinpoint the location of the robot and allow the operator theopportunity to track the machine through all stages of operation.

    Potential Problems:

    1. GPS in a confined space would not be as useful as a robot in open lunar terrain.

    2. Does not help operator know the initial robot position, just its position related to other locations.

    Position Encoders

    Using a position encoder, position is measured by a laser reading a passing encoder strip. The encoder

    strip is marked in regular increments and provides accurate measurements of position with minimalerror.

    Potential Problems:

    1. Dust on the encoder strip could cause a misreading.

    2. Should the assembly malfunction and move opposite of the direction intended, the operator would

    be unaware.

    Potentiometers

    Potentiometers measure position using electrical resistance. An electrode linked to the moving part

    moves across a plate of known resistance and the voltage drop is used to calculate position. Both rotary

    and linear potentiometers exist.

    Potential Problems:

    1. Dust inside the potentiometer could increase electrical resistance or even cause it to stick and fail.

    2. If used along a linear actuator, a relatively large potentiometer would be required.

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    4/11

    4

    Position Resolver

    Similar to a linear potentiometer, a position resolver employs several input signals to determine

    position along two axes. This sensor may be too complex for our purposes.

    Strain Gauges

    Strain is measured using the voltage drop across a resistance which increases with deformation. A

    common device, it can be used to detect potential failures during operation.

    2. Structure

    The structure of the robot will depend greatly on the excavation method, the hopper design, and the

    size constraints imposed by NASA. Determining the correct material, cross-section and geometry for

    the a specific part of the structure is largely dependent on the application. At this stage of the design, it

    is very difficult to determine the right part without knowing the characteristics of the components that

    it is required to support.

    Support Method

    Probably the most practical support method would be a four corner vertical beam assembly or a similar

    design. Several types of methods could be utilized to strengthen the base support rods, such as

    horizontal cross beams, light weight panels such as sheet metal, or gussets. The support beams could

    support internal machine components using a variety of different internal beams.

    Another method could be to use panels with weaker internal support beams, something similar to

    fuselage. Although this method is very impractical since many of the internal components would have

    to move in and out of the frame assembly and would require numerous clearance holes which wouldreduce the overall strength of the structure.

    Support Beams

    Using prefabricated beams takes advantage of very efficient strength per weight ratios. The bar railing

    and the channel bar (shown below) have additional accessories that would allow for ease of assembly,

    especially in the middle of the beam. Custom beams would allow for limitless design possibilities, but

    given time constraints and cost, are mostly impractical for the base support beams.

    Figure 1: Possible support beams/bars sources: mcmaster.com, grainger.com

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    5/11

    5

    Connections

    There are four types of connections that need to be made to the support beams.

    1) Connections between beams

    2) Connections between strengthening elements (gussets, brackets)

    3) Connections to the robot base.

    4) Connections to internal components (hopper, battery)

    For most prefabricated beams, all four of these can be achieved using hardware accessories already

    manufactured.

    Material

    The types of material to use are largely dependent on the factors the part is required to endure. The

    three most practical materials to use are as follows.

    Aluminum:

    In general, aluminum is a strong, lightweight material which is useful for frames and brackets that willnot experience large gradients of stress. Aluminum is also very easily to machine, fairly inexpensive,

    and easy to find. Aluminum can be welded, but only with a TIG or a specially set up MIG welder.

    Potential downfalls of using aluminum:

    1. Aluminum has a low modulus of elasticity, thus it easily bends and can warp when machined.

    2. Aluminum has a high thermal expansion coefficient making it a poor choice for precision

    components that experience a large gradient of heat.

    Lexan:

    Also known as polycarbonate, Lexan is an industry standard for light weight low-stress components

    and safety guarding. Lexan is extremely impact resistant and easily machine-able. It is also relativelypopular and inexpensive.

    Potential downfalls of using Lexan:

    1. Low heat resistance

    2. Low wear resistance

    Steel

    There are many types of steel available all with varying properties. Steel generally has a much larger

    modulus of elasticity making it a must for high stress and shear applications. Steel should be

    considered for any shafts, gears and slide rails, as well as fasteners

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    6/11

    6

    3. Excavation

    A major part of the lunar excavator is the excavation process itself. To take advantage of the resources

    on the moon, the goal is to find a solution to collect lunar regolith. The digging process has to be

    efficient due to the limited available energy provided by the battery. Another aspect to consider is the

    limited time period available to collect the regolith.

    Bucket Wheel

    One possible solution is bucket wheel excavating. This technique has been used in surface mining for

    years. Bucket wheel excavators use a wheel consisting of a continuous series of buckets to scoop

    material as the wheel turns. The bucket wheel is fixed to a boom and is capable of rotating. The

    material picked up by the cutting wheel is transported back along the boom by a chute or a conveyor.

    Advantages:

    Widely used in real world applications

    Approved and reliable method

    Also applicable for solid material

    Disadvantages:

    Complex assembly (e.g. a separate conveyor is needed)

    Preferred operation for large-scale areas

    Figure 3: small Bucket Wheel

    (http://www.digitalspace.com/reports/sbir04-phase1-

    finalreport/)

    Figure 2: Bucket Wheel Excavator

    (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE4AD66L20081125)

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    7/11

    7

    Bucket Chain

    Another common possibility is the bucket chain excavator which is similar to the bucket wheel. Instead

    of buckets being placed in a ring, they are attached to a kind of a conveyor. Therefore they dig and

    transport the material at the same time with one device.

    Advantages:Simple construction (low cost assembly)

    Widely used in real world applications

    Approved and reliable method

    Excavating and transporting at the same time (no need for a conveyor)

    Disadvantages:

    Less applicable for solid material

    More power is required due to the forces

    Figure 4: Bucket Chain Conveyor (http://www.towercrane-

    cn.com/page/chain%20bucket%20conveyor.html)

    Figure 5: Bucket Chain

    (http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a793002

    866&fulltext=713240928#references)

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    8/11

    8

    Auger

    Device for moving material with a rotating helical screw. This principle is mostly applied in

    agriculture. There are many possible solutions.

    Advantages:

    Simple assembly

    Less power required

    Several application possibilities (e.g. flexible auger Archimedes screw)

    Disadvantages:

    Not used or only a few real world applications for collecting solid material

    Issues with large rocks due to the diameter of the tube

    Figure 7: Auger with enclosed tube

    (http://www.brockgrain.com/products.php?product_id=204)

    Figure 6: Auger with U-Profile(http://www.usairfiltration.com/parts/auger_conveyor

    s.htm)

    Figure 8: Auger perpendicular to direction of motion

    (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4912862.pdf)

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    9/11

    9

    4. Hopper

    For the hopper a few considerations must be addressed right away. The lunar regolith has a very high

    packing efficiency and fills the shape of the container that it is placed into. Because of this the hopper

    should be as flat and smooth as possible to prevent build up, possibly adding fillets to the edges tofurther prevent packing. The other consideration is that when dumping there will need to be some kind

    of process or action to help in releasing the regolith so that it can be placed into the collection box.

    Options include applying a vibration to the material to aid its release into the collection box, or simple

    motions such as shaking or hammering.

    While ensuring ways the regolith will remain loose and unpacked while in the hopper is important, the

    actual process of the material being transfered from the hopper to the collection box is essential to a

    successful excavation. Common designs include a simple rotating hopper that is rotated or tilted until

    the force of gravity begins to cause the material to fall out. This design is completely feasible and is

    seen in many robotic excavators today, as well as in other applications such as dump trucks and

    bulldozers. Issues with this design however include the presence of additional moving parts,

    opportunities for the mechanism to get stuck or hung up on something during function, as well as

    designing the extent at which the machine and its parts will be rotating.

    Another feasible option is a hopper that will not rotate or tilt but instead have a removable bottom that

    will open or close remotely when needed. This will allow the material to fall straight down into the

    collection box. This design is based off a simple funnel or reservoir with a controlled output. Many

    design options are available in terms of how the hopper releases its bottom. These include hinges that

    allow the doors the swing open perpendicular to the floor, or screw drives that slide a single slabparallel with the floor. This hopper design is advantageous because it typically provides a more

    controlled dump because it is falling straight down. It also alleviates the concern of dealing with the

    challenges involved with rotating a large load. On the contrary, issues regarding the structural rigidity

    of the excavator arise when trying to extend the hopper over the collection box linearly as opposed to

    rotating. Another obvious concern of this design includes the very real possibility of malfunction in the

    various mechanisms used to control the release.

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    10/11

    10

    5. Controls

    For our system we will be using last year's Labveiw control board, so the only obstacle will be learning

    the interface, but it will be feasible.

    6. Mobility

    For our design we are using last years track system which has been proven to be effective in the field.

    No further analysis on this will be necessary at this time.

    7. Stability

    The stability of the excavator was examined on a static and dynamic basis in a worst case scenario. In

    this scenario, the hopper is higher than its current design. The hoppers centroid is assumed to move

    toward the edge of the hopper as it is dumping, so the upper edge is assumed to be the centroid. The

    centroid of the excavator is also assumed to be higher than the current design would suggest. Lastly,

    the hopper is loaded with 50 kilograms of regolith, more than the current design allowance.

    For static stability, a weighted average of the weight of the hopper and the excavator was taken to

    determine the overall centroid. The overall centroid must be within the excavator itself for the total

    assembly to be stable. Even in this worst case scenario, the overall centroid is 0.88

    meters, within therequired 1 meter.

    For dynamic stability, a moment was taken at point A to determine the ratio of gravity required for the

    excavator to become unstable. The ratio was determined to be 0.13, which under normal conditions

    should not be problem, since when the excavator is moving the hopper will be within the excavator.

    When the hopper is within the excavator the ratio becomes 0.35, which might become an issue if there

    is a large acceleration. Lower centroids and smaller loads in the hopper would reduce this number.

  • 8/8/2019 ME490 Feasibility Study Final Version

    11/11

    11

    Figure 9: The system used to calculate the excavator stability

    ( 80 )(0.5 ) ( 50 )(1.5 )0.88

    ( 80 ) ( 50 )

    0

    ( 80 )(0.5 ) ( 50 )(0.5 ) ( 80 )(0.5 ) ( 50 )(1.5 ) 0

    ( 30 )(0.5 ) (80 (0.5 ) 50 (1.5 ))

    0.13

    A

    A

    Static

    g kg m g kg mm

    g kg g kg

    Dynamic Hopper extended

    M

    g kg m g kg m x kg m x kg m

    g kg m x kg m kg m

    x g

    Hopper retracted

    M

    !

    !

    !

    !

    !

    0

    ( 80 )(0.5 ) ( 80 )(0.5 ) ( 50 )(1.5 ) 0

    ( 30 )(0.5 ) (80 (0.5 ) 50 (1.5 ))

    0.35

    g kg m x kg m x kg m

    g kg m x kg m kg m

    x g

    !

    !

    !

    !