R.I.T. 175 th Anniversary Chopper Senior Design Team (Project Number 05912)

R.I.T. 175th Anniversary Chopper Senior Design Team

(Project Number 05912)

Diverse Team Members• Advisors

– Dr. James Taylor (ISE Associate Professor)– John Bonzo (Brinkman Lab Facilities Manager)

• Mechanical Engineering– Jonathan Howard– Alexandra (Alli) Collier– Lee Gagne

• Industrial Engineering– Jeremy Rank– John Johnson– Anthony Rounding

• Electrical Engineering– Curtis Vana

• Industrial Design– Scott Janis– Devin Connolly– Tim Houck

Agenda

• Needs Assessment

• Concept Development

• Feasibility Assessment

• Specifications

• Analysis and Synthesis

175th Anniversary Chopper Project Description / Desired Outcomes

• Convert stock 883 Harley-Davidson Sportster into custom chopper prototype

• Create customization kit for aftermarket sales – Conversion components must be bolt on

– No significant modifications can be made to the frame

• Rochester Institute of Technology • Senior Design Team• Santa Cruz Harley-Davidson

– Primary stakeholder for conversion kit

• Conversion Kit Customers– Approximately 500 Sportsters are manufactured daily

Stakeholders

Needs Assessment

• Team researched chopper motorcycles

• Talk with Mike James and Bob Davis of Santa Cruz Harley-Davidson

• Team developed a list of order qualifiers:– Rear end of the bike shall change

– Front end of the bike shall change

– Sheet metal on the bike shall change

– Electronics on the bike shall change

– Ride height shall change

– Paint on the bike shall change

– Seat on the bike shall change

– Custom parts must be bolt on

– Bike must be operable

Needs Assessment

• System changes to meet order qualifiers:– Fuel Tank

– Handlebars / Controls

– Ride Height

– Wheel Design

– Tire

– Drive System

Concept Development

– Wheel Hubs

– Headlight

– Electrical

– Exhaust

– Seat

– Conversion Kit

– Methods Used• Pros & Cons• Pugh’s Method• Weighted Concept Evaluation• Expert input / discussion

Feasibility Analysis

Electronics Specifications

• Increase Lighting – Hurt Motorcycle Accident Study

• ½ of all motorcycle accidents involve a motor vehicle (automobile) violating the motorcycle right-of-way

• Failure to recognize and detect motorcycles in traffic was the predominating cause of motorcycle accident

– Freedman and Ketron Lighting Study

• Found that the adding lights to the motorcycles rear and sides improved conspicuity

Electronics Specifications

Digital Control

Unit

RPM signal

User Interface

12VDC Battery

LED Driver

Accent Lighting( LEDs)

Accent Lighting System General Layout

•System Schematic

•Cost Analysis

Triple Clamp Specifications

• Design Constraints– Safety

– Machinability

– 7 Degree Rake Angle

– Forks

– Steering stem

– Mid-Glide front end

– Handlebars

– Style

Top Triple Clamp Analysis

Top Triple Clamp with 7G Horizontal Impact Loading

Top Triple Clamp with 3G Vertical Impact Loading

Max Stress 29,000 psi


Lower Triple Clamp Analysis

Lower Triple Clamp with 7G Horizontal Impact Loading

Lower Triple Clamp with 3G Vertical Impact Loading



Front Wheel Specifications

• Design Constraints– Safety

– Manufacturability

– Style

– New Front End Design

Rear Wheel

Front Wheel Concepts

• Preliminary Design Issues– Manufacturability

– Safety

Front Wheel Analysis

• Impact Load• Torsion Test

6 G Load


3,500 lb Load

Max Stress

20,071 psi

Front Hub Analysis

• Impact Load• Torsion Test

6 G Load


3,500 lb Load

Max Stress

8,100 psi

Kit ContentsCustom Parts Designed and Manufactured

• Front Wheel

• Front Hub

• Front Axle

• Rear Wheel

• Rear Hub

• Rear Axle

• Triple Clamps

– Top and Bottom

• Steering Stem Shaft

• Steering Stops

• Modified Purchased Front Sprocket

• Modified Purchased Rear Sprocket

• Tank Mounts

• Seat Mounts

• Seat Pan

• Ignition / Key Casing

• Converted To Hydraulic Clutch

• Exhaust• Paint Scheme and

Implementation– Gas Tank– Rear Fender– Oil Cover– Electronics Cover– Frame

• Engraved Designs On The Air Intake and Engine Casing

• Cutting Fender Struts and Remanufacturing Chrome Covers

• Brake Light• LED Lighting System

• 11inch Eye-To-Eye Shocks

• Inverted Forks

• Handlebars

• Front and Rear Tires

• Chain

• Air Intake Filter

• Chrome Engine Covers

• Single Rider Seat

• Chrome Swing Arm

• Headlight

• Slave Cylinder

Kit ContentsAftermarket Parts Purchased and Implemented

Lessons Learned

• Always have a predetermined contingency – In the feasibility analysis, we only decided upon the

optimal solution• Fender attachment

• Critical path – reconstructing the critical path to make difficult tasks non-sequential

Questions

Shoulder Moment Reduction

• Original designM (shoulder) = (18.62N*.170m) + (10.78N*.480m)

M (shoulder) = 8.34 Nm

• New DesignM (shoulder) = (18.62N*.120m) + (10.78N*.340m)

M (shoulder) = 5.89 Nm

• Moment Reduction – 29%

Back

Algorithm

Back

Check State of

Comparator Interrupt

Flag

Peak Check

Is Peak? Increment Counter

Have 45 peaks been counted?

Toggle Output

Begin

Reset Counter

General outline of lighting control algorithm

•Comparator state check

•Increment

•Toggle Output

Lighting Control System

Back

R 1

1 0 k

R 21 k

I N1

O U T2

CO

MM

ON

3

U 1

U A 7 8 0 5 / TE M PM o t o rc y c le B a t t e ry

1 2 V d c C 11 n

5Vdc

12Vdc

C 21 n

PIC12F675

C ra n k P o s it io n S e n s o rC 31 n

D 1D 1 N 4 0 0 4

D 2D 1 N 4 0 0 4

Pin6

Pin1

Pin8

Pin3

0

L E DLED (Accent Lighting) Load

0

PVDZ172N

R 31 k

Power Conditioning Circuit

Signal Conditioning Circuit

R 41 8 k

R 52 2 k

•Power conditioning circuit

•Signal conditioning circuit

•Processing

Cost Analysis

Pugh’s Method Comparison

Back

Final Parts UA7805C PIC12F675

PVDZ172N PCB Terminals

Project Enclosure

Manufacturer

Texas Instruments

Microchip International Rectifier

Radio Shack Radio Shack

Function Voltage Regulator

Signal Processor

Solid State Relay

Terminals Enclosure

Quantity 2 2 2 8 (2 sets of 4)

2

Price per .52 2.15 8.50 2.29 3.99

Price for 2 sets

1.04 4.3 17 4.58 7.98

Total Project Price

$34.90

Final Parts

UA7805C PIC12F675

PVDZ172N PCB Terminals

Project Enclosure

Manufacturer

Texas Instruments

Microchip International Rectifier

Radio Shack

Radio Shack

Function Voltage Regulator

Signal Processor

Solid State Relay

Terminals Enclosure

Quantity 2 2 2 8 (2 sets of 4)

2

Price per .52 2.15 8.50 2.29 3.99

Price for 2 sets

1.04 4.3 17 4.58 7.98

Total Project Price

$34.90

Digital Control Unit

DIGITAL CONTROLLER COMPARISON PIC-12F629 Z8F011AHH020EC CY8C22113-24PIManufacturer Microchip Zilog CypressMemory Size (FLASH) 1024Kx14 words FLASH 1K 2KRAM 64bytes 256bytes 256bytesEEPROM 128bytesNVDS 16bytesVDD 6.5V Operating Voltage 2V - 5.5V 2.7-3.6I/O Lines 6 17 6UART 1Serial Lines yes noA/D 4 3CLK Speed 20MHz 20MHz 24MHzPower Dissipation 800mWPrice 1.68 3.18 2.50

Device Comparison

Algorithm Back

Rear Wheel and Hub

Back

– Clean up controls – sleeker look

– Hide control cables within handlebar

– Change handlebar shape / geometry• Biomechanics

– Use twist-grip clutch

– Suicide Shift

– Custom foot controls

Handlebar Control Concepts

Back

– Lower ride height – rear end

– Shorten shocks

– Rigid Hard-tail design

– Redesign rear suspension geometry

Ride Height Concepts

Back

– Three claw design• 3-dimensional

• 2-dimensional

– Solid Wheel Design • Spoke Appearance

– Incorporate tiger image into design

– Fabricate wheels in-house (Brinkman Lab)

– Outsource wheel fabrication

Wheel Design Concepts

Back

– Increase rear tire width• Size Range – 180mm – 220mm

– Change front tire to match new rear tire

– Find similar front & rear tire pattern

Tire Concepts

Back

– Switch from belt to chain drive

– Switch to narrower belt

– Use current belt• Drive extension / spacer to accommodate new rear tire

• Widen swing arm

– Replace existing drive covers• Chrome

• Powder coat

• Aftermarket color

Drive System Concepts

Back

– Fabricate all components of kit

– Purchase all components (aftermarket)

– Combination of purchase / fabrication

– Final Kit delivery• All components – 1 set

• Documentation

– “Bolt on” components

Conversion Kit Concepts

Back

– Design hubs to fit custom wheel

– Purchase aftermarket hubs• Requires wheel design to conform

Wheel Hub Concepts

Back

– In-house custom fabrication

– Purchase aftermarket headlight

– Remove headlight from design

– Reuse stock headlight

Headlight Concepts

Back

– Left exit exhaust

– Converging exhaust pipes (two into one)

– Shortened straight pipes

– Street sweeper pipes

– Purchase aftermarket pipes

– Fabricate exhaust in-house

Exhaust Concepts

Back

– Replace stock two-up seat

– Single seat• Fabricate in-house

• Purchase aftermarket

– Redesigned two-up seat• Fabricate in-house


– Sissy bar• Fabricate in-house


– Incorporate Logo into seat design• RIT 175th anniversary

• Sponsor Logo

Seat Concepts

Back

– Pugh’s Method

Electrical Feasibility

Back

GENERAL SYSTEM COMPARISON Digital Controller-LED Driver Digital Controller Analog CircuitDesign Complexity 3 3 2Sufficient Equipment 5 5 5Cost of Total Materials 3 4 2Availability of Components 5 5 5Versatility of Design 5 3 1Power Efficiency 5 4 3Mean Score 4.33 4 3

– Integrate rear lights into rear fender

– Develop proximity sensors

– Develop variable intensity lighting

– Accent lighting for engine

– Custom turn signals

– Ignition• Access code

• Toggle switch

Electrical Concepts

Back

– Variable intensity lighting• Pro:

– Safety (increase visibility)

– Aesthetically pleasing

• Con:– Not visible during the daytime

– Proximity sensor system• Pro:

– Safety (visibility)

• Con:– Cost

– Time required to implement

– Resources (people)

Electrical Feasibility

Back

• Custom designed tank• Cons:

• Team lacks expertise in metalworking

• Cost to outsource fabrication of in-house design ~ $2000 per tank

• Pros:

• Radical one of a kind

• Does not compromise the Industrial Designer’s design

• Commercially available tank• Cons:

• Compromises the Industrial Designer’s design

• Not a radical design

• Pros:

• Cost: ~$600 per tank

Fuel Tank Feasibility

Back

• Weighted concepts


Back

Attributes 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL Weights

1. Price X 3 0 3 0.27

2. Uniqueness X X 0.5 0 0.5 0.05

3. Design concept X X X 0 0.5 0.5 0.05

4. Ease of manufacture X X X X 0 2 2 0.18

5. Fullfills project goals X X X X X 0 5 5 0.450 0 0.5 2 5 11 1

• Pugh’s method


Back

Evaluate each additional concept against the baseline, score each attribute as: 1 = much worse than baseline concept 2 =

worse than baseline 3 = same as baseline 4 = better than baseline 5= much better

than baseline

Purchase Custom Tank

Fabricate Tank

Purchase Aftermarket

Tank

Sufficient Student Skills 3 2 3Sufficient Shop Equipment 3 2 3Economic Feasibility 3 4 5Cost of Materials 3 4 5Cost of Purchased Components 3 4 5Schedule Feasibility 3 1 3Task Time 3 1 3End user satisfaction 3 3 1Technology Feasibility 3 2 3Meets intermediate milestones 3 3 3Meets PDR requirements 3 3 3Meets CDR requirements 3 3 3

Mean Score 3 2.67 3.33

Normalized Score 0.9 0.8 1

• Custom built handlebars

• Cons:

• No member of the team has experience designing handlebars

• Pros:

• Conceal controls

• Change look of bike from dirt bike to a chopper

• Purchase handlebars

• Cons:

• Cost: ~ $3000 per set

• Pros:

• Built by manufacturers with experience

• Conceal controls

• Changes look of bike from dirt bike to chopper

Handlebars Feasibility

Back

• Remove shocks• Cons:

• Turns bike into rigid, decreasing the ride ability of the bike

• Pros:

• Gives bike a sleeker look by removing the shocks

• Shorten shocks• Cons:

• May result in possible problems with concerning clearance, ground clearance and handling

• Cost of new shocks $281 per set

• Pros:

• Gives the bike a squatter stance

• As compared to the rigid, the bike is easier to ride (comfort)

Ride Height Feasibility

Back

– 3D design• Cons:

– Requires adding material to the wheel blank

– Safety concerns (excess weight)

– Machinability

• Pros:– Radical custom look

– 2D design• Cons:

– Not as custom

• Pros:– Machinable

– Safer

Wheel Design Feasibility

Back

Tire Feasibility

– Width over 190mm• Cons:

– Rear wheel in excess of 190mm will result in a redesign of the XL swing arm

• Pros:– Will give bike the massive back wheel look of a chopper

– Width equal to or less then 190mm• Cons:

– Rear wheel may appear to be stock

• Pros:– 190mm is a proven good look on an XL– No swing arm of drive redesign is needed

Back

Drive System Design Feasibility

– Pugh’s methodEvaluate each additional concept against the baseline, score each attribute as: 1 = much worse than baseline concept 2 =

worse than baseline 3 = same as baseline 4 = better than baseline 5= much better than

baselineExisting belt drive Smaller belt drive Chain drive

Sufficient Student Skills 3 3 3Sufficient Shop Equipment 3 3 3Economic Feasibility 3 2 4Cost of Materials 3 2 2Cost of Purchased Components 3 2 5Schedule Feasibility 3 2 4Task Time 3 2 4End user satisfaction 3 3 2Technology Feasibility 3 3 5Meets intermediate milestones 3 3 4Meets PDR requirements 3 3 4Meets CDR requirements 3 3 4

Mean Score 3 2.58 3.67

Normalized Score 0.82 0.70 1

Back

Exhaust Design Feasibility

– Right hand exhaust• Cons:

– Looks like the majority of bikes on the market

• Pros:– XL 883C is built with and for right hand exhaust– Proper flow of exhaust

– Left hand exhaust• Cons:

– Proper flow of exhaust may be difficult to obtain on XL– XL 883C is not built for left hand exhaust

• Pros:– Left hand exhaust is not norm, creating custom and radical look

Back

Fuel Tank Concepts• Custom designed tank

– Incorporate RIT Tiger into tank

• Custom fabricate

• Custom paint

• Commercially available tank

Back

– Feasibility Methods Used• Pros and Cons

• Pugh’s Method

• Weighted Concept Evaluation

– Specifications• Purchase aftermarket tank

Fuel Tank


– Specifications• Have custom handlebars with integrated controls

manufactured

Handlebars / Controls


– Specifications• Lower ride height by 1”

Ride Height


– Specifications• 2-dimensional design

• In-house fabrication

Wheel Design


– Specifications• 190mm rear tire

• Purchase front tire with matching

tread pattern

Tires

– Feasibility Methods Used• Pugh’s Method

– Specifications• Chain drive

Drive System Design

– Feasibility Methods Used• Pro & Con

• Pugh’s Method

– Specifications• Accent lighting - safety

• Blinking frequency dependant

on RPM

Electrical Design


– Specifications• Right Exit Exhaust

Exhaust Design

Documents

R.I.T. 175 th Anniversary Chopper Senior Design Team (Project Number 05912)