 |
 |
|

|
|
MAE 1203 - Introduction to Mechanical
Engineering
Spring 2003
|
|
Project Description:
The class project involved the
design and construction of a computer-controlled
XY stage, with each axis controlled by a separate
stepper motor. The motors had a resolution of
200 steps/revolution, and were driven by a four-transistor
output stage controlled from the parallel port
of a personal computer.
Each group was given two motors,
the corresponding motor drive (output stage) and
a power supply. The students were also instructed
on the basics of how to drive stepper motors by
sending sequences of zeros and ones to the transistors
that drive the motor coils. A program in GWBasic
describing the basic sequence to turn a motor
one step in either direction (both half step and
full step) was given to them and explained in
detail.
Each group had to develop:
- A detailed mechanical design
of their machine, including assembly drawings
and detail drawings of all the required parts.
Several design reviews were dedicated to discuss
functionality, reliability, cost, manufacturability,
assembly, etc.
- Each group had to make a cost
analysis of their design, locate vendors for
parts that needed to be purchased, and have
a final budget approved by the instructor before
proceed to fabrication.
- All machine components that
were not purchased off-the-shelf had to be manufactured,
assembled and connected to the motors and drive
electronics.
- The motor drivers had to be
interfaced to the parallel port of their PCs.
Some laptops have output voltage levels lower
than what is required to control the motor drivers,
therefore some groups had to build line drivers
or a new output stage with different transistors.
- Each group had to develop
the corresponding software to drive their machines.
The students had the choice to use either GWBasic
or C++ to develop their code. The machines had
to perform the following functional tests:
- Draw straight lines
at various slopes
- Draw a circle
- Draw a letter "M"
The machines were graded
according to the following criteria:
- Functionality: how well
could the tasks be performed. Accuracy and resolution
(40%)
- Quality of manufacture
and assembly. Reliability, robustness and overall
design quality (40%)
- Time of execution (10%)
- Other (cost, ease of
assembly, manufacturability) (10%)
Instructor: Hector Gutierrez, Assistant Professor,
MAE, hgutier@fit.edu
|
|
Group #1:
Shern Peters
Danette Delia
Kenji Watabe
Adrianne White
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Click
here for larger picture
Pictures of
this machine:
1,
2,
3,
6,
8,
9,
10, 12,
13.
Movie Clips: 1,
2.
|
|
|
|
|
Group #3:
Alex
Nas
Oluwatosin Kolade
Elliot Bache
Jorge Mustelier
|
 |
|
for Software Correction
of Backlash
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2,
3,
4.
Movie Clips: 1,
2.
|
|
|
|
Group #4:
Timothy Watson
John Farley
Rashid Aldossary
Jamie Toon
|
 |
|
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2,
3.
Movie Clips:
1, 2.
|
|
|
Group #5:
Duc Pham
Louis Nucci
Stephen Lawson
Caleb Slavens
|
 |
|
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2, 3,
4,
5.
Movie Clips: 1,
2,
3.
|
|
|
Group
#6:
Angela
Hanes
Mark Barden
Joseph Hengy
Matthew Jeselnik
|
 |
|
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2, 3,
4.
Movie Clips:
1, 2.
|
|
|
Group #7:
Zach Niforos
Malcolm Leachman Michael Greene
Juan Montoya
|
 |
|
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2.
Movie Clips: 1.
|
|
|
Group #8:
Joseph Roser
Justin Versluis
Michael Wisnom
James Giganti
|
 |
|
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2,
Move Clips: 1,
2,
3,
5, 6,
7.
|
|
|
Group #9:
Jeffrey French
Charles Steiner
Steve Sheldon
Herman Ramos
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Group #10:
Matthew Green
Eric DeGrottole
Jill Maynard
Juan Valdez
|
 |
|
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2, 3,
4,
5.
Movie Clips: 1,
2.
|
|
|
Group #11:
Kevin Reagan Christopher Vanzo Michael Scholl
Tarek Al-Ghfaily
|
 |
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2, 3.
Movie Clips: 1,
2.
|
|
|
Group #12:
Burton Morse
Giovanni Gomez
Anthony Charbonneau Matthew Helm
|
 |
|
Best
Performing Machine, 3rd Place (tie)
Pictures
of this machine: 1,
2.
Movie Clips: 2,
5.
|
|
|
|
|