Applied precision design llc concept design review biomedical orbital mixer
Download
1 / 29

Applied Precision Design, LLC Concept Design Review BioMedical Orbital Mixer - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 149 Views
  • Uploaded on

Applied Precision Design, LLC Concept Design Review BioMedical Orbital Mixer. Amir Torkaman Applied Precision Design, LLC 1755 East Bayshore Rd. Suite 9B Redwood City, CA 94063 Phone: (650) 387-7902 Fax: (650) 493-1195 www.AprecisionDesign.com. Typical Design Cycle: Biomedical Orbital Mixer.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Applied Precision Design, LLC Concept Design Review BioMedical Orbital Mixer' - goldy


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Applied precision design llc concept design review biomedical orbital mixer
Applied Precision Design, LLCConcept Design ReviewBioMedicalOrbital Mixer

Amir TorkamanApplied Precision Design, LLC1755 East Bayshore Rd. Suite 9BRedwood City, CA 94063Phone: (650) 387-7902Fax: (650) 493-1195www.AprecisionDesign.com



Simplified energy model energy entering system

L

T

Simplified Energy Model: Energy Entering System

CONSERVATION OF ENERGY:

Two Modes of Operation:

  • Cranking Cycle: Energy In = Energy Stored into System

  • Operating Cycle: Energy Stored = Work Done By System

Energy Into System

Work Done By System

Internal energy (stored)

Energy Into the System:

Energy Into System = Human Power

Work = Τ∆Θ

example: T = 2.25Nm

L = 75mm

∆Θ = 30 Turns X 2Π = 188.4 rad

W = 423.9 J

Independent of Crank Time or Speed (30 sec)


Simplified energy model energy stored

K

m

Simplified Energy Model: Energy Stored

CONSERVATION OF ENERGY:

L

T

Energy Into System

Work Done By System

Internal energy

W

I

Energy Stored in the System:

Total Energy = Potential + Kinetic Energy

Kinetic Energy = ½ Iw^2Potential = m.g.∆h Spring = ½ K ∆Θ^2

m = 5 grams (x4) m = 5 grams (x4) k ~ 23 N-mm / rad

d = 50mm g= 9.8 m/sec^2 ∆Θ = turns x 2Π

I = 50e-6 Kg/m^2 ∆h = 30mm Spring E = varies with time

Kinetic E = 0.88 J Potential E = 0.005 J


Simplified energy model energy leaving system

L

T

D (drag)

W

I

F (friction)

K

m

Simplified Energy Model: Energy Leaving System

Drag Force =

C ~ 0.8

A = .0012 m^2

V = 9.4 m/sec

F = .05 N (drag force)

Drag Energy = 363 Joules

Energy Out of the System:

Total Work = Frictional Losses + Drag

Frictional Losses = Σ (ζ.E + μ.N.d.∆Θ)

ζ = 3-5 % (gear efficiency)

μ = 0.2 (sliding bearing friction)

Total Energy Loss ~ 80 Joules


Critical design parameters
Critical Design Parameters

V = r.W

Power In = Work / Time = 1.90 Watts (after frictional losses)

Drag Power = = 2.02 Watts

Centripetal Acceleration = r.W^2 (120g’s)

g1

m

r

Drag Power ~ r^3

Acceleration ~ r

Minimize Distance To Center of Mass (r)

EXPERIMENTS

  • Increase Air Resistance

    (Thru addition of a thin sheet metal foil)

    Significant reduction in final velocity

  • Increase Mass 5g  10g

    (Same max speed / took longer to get to speed

  • Increase Mass 5g –> 15g

    (no change in Steady-State conditions)

     vibration and rattling, more force on bearings

  • Reduce # of Cartridges

  • Increase of Cartridge Length

Air Drag Coefficient < 0.4

Use Rolling Bearing μ< 0.01

Reduce # of Gears / Belts / & provide Good Alignment

Reduce Moving Mass / Inertia

Improve Gear Efficiency Thru Lubrication ζ < 3%

Critical Design Parameters


Mixer design
Mixer Design

  • Design Goals

    • Top loading

    • Cartridge top twist in holder

    • Low power loss

      • Ball bearings

      • Minimize CG dia.

    • Mixer: 2mm orbital diameter

    • Centrifuge: 1800 RPM


Comparison concept 1 concept 2
COMPARISON CONCEPT 1 - CONCEPT 2

CONCEPT 2: Combined Mixer / Centrifuge

  • + REDUCES OVERALL BOX LENGTH FROM 15.75 TO 14.5

  • - REQUIRES CLUTCH AND BRAKE TO STOP MOTION OF SPINNER WHILE MIXING

  • - INTERFERENCE IF CARTRIDGES ARE NOT REMOVED FROM NON-USED MECANISM

CONCEPT 1: Separate Mechanisms

  • + SEPARATE MECHANISMS SIMPLIFY DRIVE

  • + EASY ACCESS TO CARTRIDGES

  • - SEPARATE SHAFT AND SUPPORT

  • - TWO ENCLOSURES REQUIRED


Concept 1 concentric mixer spinner
CONCEPT 1CONCENTRIC MIXER/SPINNER


CONCEPT 1CONCENTRIC MIXER/SPINNER

PINS IN SLOTS GUIDED IN SLOTS OF POLYMER BEARING


Concept 2 separate mixer spinner assembly top view
CONCEPT 2SEPARATE MIXER/SPINNER ASSEMBLYTOP VIEW

15.75”

9”


ECCENTRIC DRIVE

Orbital Mixer Design

ECCENTRIC SHAFT

UPPER BEARINGS

LOWER BEARINGS

TIMING BELT COG


Centrifuge design
Centrifuge Design

  • Design Goals

    • Top loading

    • Low power loss

      • Ball bearings

      • Minimize CG dia.

      • Aerodynamic Holders

    • G1 > 50G

    • G2 ~ 120G

    • G-load axial to cartridge

    • Contain Blood Spill


Concept concentric mixer spinner
CONCEPTCONCENTRIC MIXER/SPINNER



Concept separate mixer spinner assembly
CONCEPT SEPARATE MIXER/SPINNER ASSEMBLY




Concept separate mixer spinner assembly front view
CONCEPTSEPARATE MIXER/SPINNER ASSEMBLYFRONT VIEW

7.75”


Centrifuge design1
Centrifuge Design

  • Calculated Cartridge G’s


CARTRAGE RETAINER

RIBS ON CARTRAGE PREVENT ROTATION SO THAT CAP CAN BE TWISTED IN PLACE


CONCEPT 1 - ARM WITH PIN IN SLOT PREVENTS ROTATION

DOES NOT YIELS TRUE ORBITAL MOTION.

  • CARTIRIDGES NEARIST PIN RESTRICTED IN Y MOVEMENT

  • CARTRIDGES AWAY FROM PIN EMPHASIXED IN Y MOVEMENT

PIN IN SLPT

Y

X


CONCEPT 2 - SPRING ROTATION PREVENTER

4X SPRING POST

SPRING NOT SHOWN


Comparison of mixer anti rotation devices
COMPARISON OF MIXER ANTI-ROTATION DEVICES

ARM IN SLOT

  • - DOES NOT YIELD TRUE ORBITAL MOTION.

    • CARTIRIDGES NEARIST PIN RESTRICTED IN Y MOVEMENT

    • CARTRIDGES AWAY FROM PIN EMPHASIXED IN Y MOVEMENT

  • + Simple Design

  • - FRICTION

    SPRING

  • - SPRINGS PRONE TO BREAKAGE

  • - UNKNOWN HARMONICS

  • + LOW FRICTION

  • - NOT GOOD WITH CAP TWIST

  • + Simple Design

    SWASH PLATE

  • + ROBUST DESIGN

  • - FRICTION



Mechanical governor with speed indicator1
MECHANICAL GOVERNOR WITH SPEED INDICATOR

WITH INDICATOR SIGHT

WITHOUT SIGHT

CORRECT SPEED

OVER SPEED



Comparison of governors
COMPARISON OF GOVERNORS

MECHANICAL GOVERNOR

  • - MULTIPLE MOVING PARTS

  • - DIFICULT TO CALIBRATE

  • - INDICATOR APPROXIMATE

  • - DRAG DEPENDENT UPON WIND RESISTANCE

    ELECTRICAL GOVERNOR

  • +/- POSSIBLY COUPLED WITH RECHARGABLE BATTERY TO INDICATE CRANK WIND

  • + ELECTRIC SPEED INDICATOR

  • + GOOD GOVERNOR SPEED CONTROL

  • - ADDITION OF MULTIPLE ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS

  • - COST OF GENERATOR & CIRCUIT BOARD

    NO GOVERNOR – CENTRIFUGE ACTS AS FLYWHEEL

  • + ELIMINATES MECHANISN

  • - DIFFICULT TO BALANCE/CALIBRATE

  • - NO INDICATOR


3 minute rotation stop
3 MINUTE ROTATION STOP

PUSH ROD TO RELEASE

SPRING LOADED CATCH LEVER

GEAR REDUCTION STACK

INPUT SPROKET


ad