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

Best Performing Machine, 3rd Place (tie)

Pictures of this machine:
1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13.

Movie Clips: 1, 2.


Group #2:

Jacob Dyer
M
ichael Suominen
Carlos Monge
Jason Furry

 

Click here for larger picture

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2, 3, 4.

Movie Clip: 1.


Group #3:

Alex Nas
Oluwatosin Kolade
Elliot Bache
Jorge Mustelier

Click here for larger picture

Best Software Award
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

Click here for larger picture

Design Concept 1, 2

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2, 3.

Movie Clips: 1, 2.


Group #5:

Duc Pham
Louis Nucci
Stephen Lawson
Caleb Slavens

Click here for larger picture

Best Performing Machine, 3rd Place (tie)

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Movie Clips: 1, 2, 3.


Group #6:

Angela Hanes
Mark Barden
Joseph Hengy
Matthew Jeselnik

Click here for larger picture

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2, 3, 4.

Movie Clips: 1, 2.


Group #7:
Zach Niforos
Malcolm Leachman Michael Greene
Juan Montoya

Click here for larger picture

Best Performing Machine, 1st Place

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2.

Movie Clips: 1.


Group #8:

Joseph Roser
Justin Versluis
Michael Wisnom
James Giganti

Click here for larger picture

Best Performing Machine, 2nd Place

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2,

Move Clips: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7.


Group #9:

Jeffrey French
Charles Steiner
Steve Sheldon
Herman Ramos

Click here for larger picture


Group #10:

Matthew Green
Eric DeGrottole
Jill Maynard
Juan Valdez

Click here for larger picture

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Movie Clips: 1, 2.


Group #11:

Kevin Reagan Christopher Vanzo Michael Scholl
Tarek Al-Ghfaily

Click here for larger picture

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2, 3.

Movie Clips: 1, 2.


Group #12:

Burton Morse
Giovanni Gomez
Anthony Charbonneau Matthew Helm

Click here for larger picture

Best Performing Machine, 3rd Place (tie)

Pictures of this machine: 1, 2.

Movie Clips: 2, 5.