Calculations for a Strong Mechanism

Take some mechanical engineering courses.

You can't be tutored and instructed about the material properties and mathmatics required for mechanical design.

The knowledge you desire cannot be simply injected into your brains. It must be assimilated by reading, learning and comprehending the material.

In short, do your own homework, or get a fellow materials student to help you.

How to Apply Design Thinking in Class, Step By Step | MindShift ...

Problems of Product Design and Development - Christopher Hearn ...

Find some information be searching the web.

Thanks for your advice and the links you shared. My group mate and I wish getting a fellow materials or engineering student was an option. But sadly there is no chance in that happening anytime soon. We'll definitely start looking deeper into documents related to mechanical engineering and continue searching on google as you suggested. So, thanks again.

There is so very much background and task specific knowledge one needs to know to do a proper kinematic analysis and design. Then again this design does not require a full analysis like a deep space probe might require.

I would start with figuring out the magnitude and center of mass of this upper section. Next I would identify the path this part must take for removal. Only once these details are estimated or known can a kinematic analysis be attempted to find out the torques and forces that must be applied for the desired trajectory.

Thanks a lot. So we'll start by finalizing the design and the material of the upper part to be able to indicate the magnitude and the center of mass. Or can we assign a rough number for the weight? e.g. We know that the interior components weigh roughly 8.5kg. Can we say for instance, in the end, the upper part isn't gonna weigh more that 10 and then use this number in the calculations? Or even a few grams extra is gonna make the situation problematic? I understand that it would be a problem if the part is heavier than what we put into calculations as the lifting mechanism may break sooner than expected. But would it be the same if the part is a couple of hundred grams lighter than what we use in our calculations?

If you want to be an engineer I suggest you stop using "gonna", as it's not a word!

Force x distance = work. You know the force (weight) of the vacuum cleaner head you are lifting. What is the component of the force in the direction that that end moves?

So that force x the distance it moves is the same as the force on the handle x the distance it moves. It's just the principle of the lever.

These students are simply not equipped to perform this type of design work.

They have no knowledge of materials and have made no suggestions of what they may use in construction. Steel, carbon fiber, wood and even styrofoam are all choices.

"How to calculate the thickness and the dimensions of the parts"

"How can we calculate the dimensions and the curve of the sloth"

"How can we calculate the pressure that will be applied "

"we don't know how much force different users will apply"

all indicate a lack of preparation for this project.

No knowledge of materials, mechanics, applied forces and no background in math all spell doom.

This member has been at this for two months and has nothing to show but some sketches.

They are not prepared!

I suspect it's a school project or exercise and not a real product.

They are students. The entire idea, at least back in our day, was to learn. Surely they must have a text book(printed or on-line) that has the information required to complete the project, and if all else fails, ask the instructor for some help. The least the teacher can do is point them in the right direction.

there was nothing more satisfying than to take information out a reference books, data and cut sheets from venders and suppliers, apply it to your project wondering if you did it correctly.

and then receive a passing grade confirming you did. It builds confidence in college that will be required when you get out in the work force.

btw, I had an incompetent instructor, but I learn from him also, and that was, 'its up to you to figure it out'

After college, that serve me well, wasn't no different that some managers.

Few are prepared to '...calculate... the curve of the sloth"...'

You should be able to work this out with a software program....

http://www.autodesk.com/products/inventor/overview

https://www.design-simulation.com/ddm/Inventor/index.php

Thanks! And can we do the same simulation in SolidWorks? Or is Autodesk Inventor more advanced on that?

The matter of preference I think would be which you had more experience on....lacking any, then you might try both....

http://www.solidworks.com/sw/products/solidworks-conceptual-design.htm

Thank you :)

:p and =) ? Are those some new form of scientific notation?

Before you spend a lot time and effort on this, you should do a patent search. Then you'll need to start with the basic understanding of what you want to design. Then you need to apply that knowledge with your construction skills and build a proto type for your R&D research.

Now, if nobody has a patent design on your invention, then you should keep your idea a secret, this is an anonymous world wide fourm and somebody who has the knowledge and understanding of what you want to do, will file a patent on your idea and make you pay for it in $$$!

Good points! Thanks =D

I shoud have added a footnote to my comment. The definition of R&D is; Reconstruct and Destroy .... reconstruct and destroy ......

That's Really Dumb.

I know, but that's all that department does, in the name of research

As an inspector I would have sign off on their destruction success, then listen to the production manager going ballistic because they destroyed "his" new machines

As students, your first mistake is that you did not start with kinematics, but design the part first and then kinematics

Yes, Would have been a good start and it's not too late to start over with kinematics.

hey, I've found out that it's quicker the second time around.

The work isn't wasted, the OP's are in school, that's where you can trip up without a reprimand.

There are two routes no 3 in designing. There is a hard way. There is an easy way. There is the easiest way, though not all the time the cheapest.

1) Hard way - do some machine design (static and or dynamic analysis)- wherein the weakest link is critically the strongest in an assembly. This is pure math, practical consideration, and common sense.

2) Easy way- You have drawn this product pretty neat, run some simulation, FEA perhaps. Couple of opensource software is available in the web (ex. Salome, Paraview, OpenFOAM), needs common sense also.

3) Easiest way - Build by trial and error then conduct a test (reliability test perhaps)

Thanks! Will start from the 2nd way.

Put a handle on each side and just lift manually.

...or a door on the front to remove the filter....or a front door and a back door....

OK one more , what about a side mounted filter...a filter mounted on the side of the canister with an opening container that would make the filter easily accessible....the filter housing need not be protruding, it could in fact be incorporated into the cylindrical shape...but easily removable...

Put a fork in it and call it done.

I gotta' go walk Porky anyway....Heel! heel!