Login

Read PageEdit PagePage AttributesPage HistoryUploadLogin Page

Summary of Individual Report

Date: November 28, 2006

Table of Contents

Summary Problem Statement Approach Results Lessons Learned

Author: CliftonChristensen	Team: SMA Array Controls

Problem Statement:

Our team focused on individual muscle displacement sensing this semester. Due to size and scalability requirements, the team chose to use optical sensing. My main focus was the mounting system for this optical sensing system. In addition to the previously stated requirements, I also had to take the current muscle array setup into account. Including, but not limited to, the ease of integrating the sensor system into the design.

Summary of Approach:

The first thing that was considered was the ease of integrating the mounting system into the current muscle array. Next, size restrictions of the design were taken into account. Currently, the distance between muscles is 1/4” on center and the muscle casing is 1/8”. Manufacturability and strength of the small pieces were also taken into account in finalizing the mount decision.

Summary of Results:

In order to accommodate the integration and size restraints, a two quality function deployment (QFD) matrix were created to compare eight of the mount designs.

I compared the Preliminary QFD with those that I sent to the other team members and our advisor in order to pick the top three designs for the Secondary QFD.

Lessons Learned:

1. In order to make the parts more durable and easier to machine, the mount needs to run past the tendons rather than the muscles.
2. The tendons need to be longer so that there is enough space to integrate the mount between the muscles and the pulley system.
3. Size restrictions are going to require more precise machining in the future.