Transcript Progress Presentation 1

Team Highlander
Design Problem
 Current walker users have trouble getting out of chairs
of varying size.
 The importance of this problem is to come up with a
design that allows the user to help themselves up and
subsequently assist them in walking.
 The motivation of this project is to give people with
motor disabilities the sense of independence in their
mobility.
Challenges & Opportunities
 Maintain high level of safety.
 Ergonomic, mobile and compact design.
 Eliminate the use of motors for functionality.
 Design of the frame to accommodate user weight,
stability and lift functions.
 Opportunity to conquer these challenges and create a
unique design that satisfies the user to the fullest
extent, giving them a sense of self sufficiency.
Design Specifications
 Capacity – support up to 300 lbs
 Weight – approximately 10 lbs
 Compact – ability to be collapsed and stored
 Price – mid range/affordable; ~$200
 Material – aluminum; light weight; available; easily
machined
 Reliability – 95% reliable
 Safety – high priority
 Dimensions – approximately 17x22x33 in. (DxWxH)
Concept Selection
& Justification
Second Level Evaluation Matrix
Design Concepts
Concept 1 (Break-A-Leg)
Pros
 Functional grip and has handbrakes
 Collapses to manageable height
 Easy to use
Cons
 Structural stability
 Source of actuating force
Concept 2 (Metamorphosis)
Pros
 Button actuated
 High adaptability
 Vertical lift assistance
Cons
 Lengthy operation
 Too many mechanical
parts
Concept 3 (Show Stopper)
Pros
 Provides lift support
 Counterbalance
 Retractable
Cons
 Requires space directly
below user
 Counterbalance stability
FRDPARRC Chart
Functional Requirements
Design Parameters
Analysis
References
Risk
Counter-measures
Sliding handles
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
Handles will slide back in during use; Handles will not be
rigid enough to support weight;
Motor controlled sliding;
Retractable handles
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
Not robust; Weak joints;
Adjust frame to support more stress on joints
Retractable supports
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
Cannot be used in an area without space beneath;
Make position of supports adjustible/use internal
counterweights
Enveloping design
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
Cannot be used with a couch; Possible injury when
contracting the frame again;
Make contraction of frame a slow process
Spring supported handles
Statics; Def Bods; FEA; Machine Design
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
Injury from misuse
Use springs that won't cause bodily harm from too much
strength
Lift design (motor powered)
Statics; Def Bods; Dynamics; FEA
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
High complexity; High cost;
Implement as modular a design as possible
Collapsing design (motor powered)
Statics; Def Bods; Dynamics; FEA
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
High complexity; High cost;
Implement as modular a design as possible
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
material wearing out
Use a higher grade material
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Solidworks;
Not easily stowed;
Use a higher grade material
Lifting aid
Standard frame
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
Support during use
X-shaped frame
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
Electronics to control design partitions
Safety
Meets/exceeds industry standards
ME 3015 Textbook
Short circuit;
Reliable electronics
ME 3015 Textbook
Limited line of sight
Place in area with good line of sight
Hand brakes for wheels
Systems & Controls
Friction analysis
Injury from misuse
Easy to use handbrakes
Industry regulations
N/A
Federal Government
Injury from substandard construction
Standards Training
Removable tray
Static/Dynamics
Statics/Dynamics textbook
tray wearing out
High grade material
Hooks to hang things
Static/Dynamics
Statics/Dynamics textbook
hooks crack over time
High grade material
shifting fluid
Fluid Mechanics
Fluid Mechanic textbook
fluid descreasing over time
ability to replace fluid
Sensors
Systems & Controls
Accessories
Weight balance
Lifting technique
shifting weight by springs
Machine Design
Machine Design textbook
Spring losening over time
ability to replace springs
motorized weight distribution
Static/Deformable bodies/dynamics
COE 2001/3001/ Dynamics Textbook
complexity
Use few motors
Horizontal pull
Static/Dynamics
Statics/Dynamics textbook
Counter weight issues
Heavy frame
Vertical pull
Static/Dynamics
Statics/Dynamics textbook
Counter weight issues
Heavy frame
Vertical push
Static/Dynamics
Statics/Dynamics textbook
Counter weight issues
Heavy frame
Horizontal collapse
Static/Dynamics
Statics/Dynamics textbook
Robustness
Use a higher grade material
Vertical leg adjustment
Static/Dynamics
Statics/Dynamics textbook
Robustness
Use a higher grade material
$500
Manufacturing/testing cost/FEA
Material pricing
few customers
lower cost of material
~$100 product price
Manufacturing/testing cost/FEA
Material pricing
few customers
lower cost of material
Simple design
Few parts
CAD
break down of parts
use few parts
Use of buttons
Electronics
Circuits Textbook
over voltage
check spec on voltage use
Lightweight ~7 lbs
Material science
Material science textbook
heavy product hard to move
use light weight material
Aluminum
Manufacturing and production analysis/FEA
Manufacturing book
low safety factor
use a higher grade material
low safety factor
use a higher grade material
Portability
Within Budget
Ease of use
Ease of Manufacturing
Carbon Ceramins
Manufacturing book
Manufacturing and production analysis/FEA
Functional Requirements – Lifting Aid
Functional
Requirements
Design Parameters
Sliding handles
Analysis
References
Risk
Handles will slide back in
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; during use; Handles will
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
Solidworks;
not be rigid enough to
support weight;
Counter-measures
Actuated sliding handles;
Retractable handles
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
COE 2001/3001 Textbook;
Adjust frame to support more
Not robust; Weak joints;
Solidworks;
stress on joints
Retractable supports
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
Reliable mechanism designed
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Possible retraction during
to prevent accidental support
Solidworks;
use
retraction.
Lifting aid
Enveloping design
Spring supported handles
Lift design
Collapsing design (Break-A-Leg)
Make contraction of frame a
slow process; Design with
smooth edges to avoid bodily
harm;
Use springs that won't cause
Statics; Def Bods; FEA; COE 2001/3001 Textbook;
Injury from misuse
bodily harm from too much
Machine Design
Solidworks;
strength
Reliable mechanism designed
Statics; Def Bods;
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Unwanted actuation; Inury
to prevent unwanted
Dynamics; FEA
Solidworks;
during lifting operation;
actuation; Slow actuation
process;
COE 2001/3001 Textbook;
Statics; Def Bods; FEA
Solidworks;
Statics; Def Bods;
Dynamics; FEA
Possible injury when
contracting the frame
again;
COE 2001/3001 Textbook; Collapse during use; Joint
Solidworks;
failure; Injury from hinge;
Good statics analysis;
Testing;
Existing Products
Product 1-The Original Lift Walker
Similarities
 Lifts user from a sitting
position to a standing
position
 Can be used as a walker
Description
A walker primarily used for therapy designed
to improve a user’s “strength, balance and
coordination.” It utilizes a hydraulic lifting
operation that adjusts for a user’s weight and
can lift a user from a sitting position. Straps
and harnesses may also be used for extra
support during lifting operation.
Differences
 Very expensive
 Primary use is for hospitals
and patients with disabilities
as opposed to the average
daily user
 Straps and harnesses are
used
 Shape
Product 2- Hugo 4.0 Elite Rolling Walker
Similarities
 Wheels
 Hand brakes
Differences
 It lacks ability to aid user
in rising from chair
 Does not adjust width
for adaptability
Description
It’s a walker with large wheels on it for ease of movement. It
comes with a storage pouch and a seat. Another storage
compartment is located underneath the seat. Features hand
brakes and can be collapsed for easy transport.
Applicable Patents
Patent 1-Motorized Walker
Pat No. 5168947
Date: 12/08/1992
 A motorized walker includes a base
upon which a person can stand, with
wheels on the base for rollably
supporting the base.
 Variable speed reversible electric
motors are provided for driving the
wheels.
 Difference: Does not assist in standup process.
 Similarity: Utilizes motors to help
drive walker
Patent 2- Walker release button
Patent No. 5255696
Date: 10/26/1993
 Manufacturer: Diamond Medical Equipment
Corp. (Mount Vernon, NY)
 A collapsible walker for elderly and disabled
persons including first and second U-shape
side frames which are pivotal relative to a
front frame, enabling the walker to be
collapsed substantially flat.
 A pushbutton on the sleeve permits
disengaging the detent from the catch slot.
 Difference: Does not assist stand-up process
 Similarity: Push Button
Patent Claims
 The device assists user in
walking and rising from a
seated position by transferring
the center of gravity to a
location over the user’s feet.
 Mechanical advantage from
the device provides lift
assistance to the user – no
external energy is used in the
lifting process.
 The device accomplishes the
center of gravity transfer by
altering its geometry to more
effectively capitalize on the
strength of its user.
Schedule
Market Research Plan
 Continued product research
 Talk to companies that manufacture and design
walkers
 Nova, Medline, Hugo, Carex, Invacare and Mabis
 Talk to assisted living employees and residents
 Brighton Gardens of Buckhead, Atria Buckead, Delmar
Gardens of Gwinnett, The Arbor Company
Conclusion
 Schedule has been established for task management.
 Three concepts have been selected to make up the





final design proposed.
Evaluation criteria have been used to assess the
strengths and weaknesses of each design.
Patent/Product research has been conducted.
Market research needs to be completed.
CAD and manufacturing analysis is scheduled.
Final design and prototyping will commence.
Thank you
Any Questions?