Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Contents:
Bella, Temi, Abdul and Parit
Intro
Final Design
Concept Design
1 Shape of Hull/ Rider Position
2 Nose Cone/ Hatch
3 Propeller why contrarotating ver variable pitch
Component Design
Fins
Steering
Propeller
Gears
Chain
Bearings
Nose cone
Hatch
Beam/frame
Pedal mechanism- Additional mechanisms
Harness
Final Design
Buoyancy
Material
Price
Etc
Intro
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................4
1. Introduction
This report gives insight into the design development process from concept to final
design of Mazu, the two person human powered submarine. Section ___ includes
initial design sketches, CAD models and information on materials and manufacturing
methods. By careful evaluation and research, alterations were made to create a fully
functional final design.
A specification was made and 8 initial designs were drawn. What else to say about
the initial designs.
An evaluation matrix was used on the 8 designs mentioned above. The following 3
concepts were chosen for various reasons.
Concept A
Talk about final design
This report examines the orchestral changes involved in developing the overall
design of a variable pitch propeller system. Identifying key aspects of the design to
develop further will enable critical and logical thinking to create a perfect system. By
prioritising certain aspects of the design and implementing techniques to develop the
best overall design based on research, a fully functional final idea will be proposed.
Certain aspects of the design include the materials desired for the final assembly. A
lightweight and affordable invention with maintaining high strength is just some of the
characteristics required for the project. The manufacturability and reparability of the
designed system will also be discussed. This would highlight the relevance and
feasibility of this project for the actual race.
explanations for each choice in the report represent the thorough comprehension
and belief in the aforementioned design.
Concept A
Originally concept A was chosen for the shape of
the hull and rider position, yet this design led to an
excess of wasted space due to the great length.
This excess space meant the submarine had a
larger surface area than necessary, therefore not
as optimised, resulting in lower speed predictions
shown in Table 1.table 1.Table 1.
Concept B
In order to minimise this wasted space,
reduce resistive forces and make the
submarine rider positions as compact as
possible Design D was carried forward, thus
resulting in faster speeds.
Concept C
The large width (shown in table 1) needed
to cater for two riders side by side led to an
increase in drag. Although the final speed
was less than that of concept A the resistive
forces meant that speeds were not optimal.
Final Design
Th
3. Nose Cone/Hatch
Initially a combined nose cone
hatch was considered shown in
figure ?. The hatch would be
manufactured using a transparent
material, with a hinge placed at
the bottom of the hatch in order for it to be opened/closed.
Although this design provided ease of access, especially ease of
access when manufacturing and maintaining components within
the submarine, ISR guidelines (ref 1) state that crews face and
head areas shall be visible to the support and safety divers at all
times.
The agreed upon separate
nose cone and hatch enables
Figure 1: Original combined nose cone/hatch (Idea A)
4. Propeller
Contra-Rotating Propeller
Advantages
Disadvantages
5. Gears
5.1 Gear arrangement
Initially, the choice for which gear system was most suitable in
terms of functionality for the submarine was between Worm and
Bevel gears.
Although both gears are able to change the direction of motion by
90 we agreed on using bevel gears. The worm screw typically
drives the worm gear and the worm screw is usually powered by a
shaft. Our design requires the reverse of this gear design, as the
shaft will need to be powered by the gear.
In comparison, the bevel gear is comprised of two gears set at
perpendicular positions to each other. The system works in rolling
motion where the teeth push against each other. The bevel gear
will work well with the calculated 4:1 ratio, and easily change the
direction needed to power the shaft.
Hpcgears
W12
Iterative process, how changing the size or changing anything
affected the speed
Pinion 1 connected to bevel gear and inner shaft Pinion 2 connected to bevel gear and outer shaft
Bevel gear powered by chain drive from pedals, turning pinions in opposite d
5.2
Gear Material
When selecting the material for the gears, yield and tensile
strength, price and durability in fresh water were all considered.
Material
Medium Carbon
Steel
Low Alloy Steel
Stainless Steel
Price
/kg
0.3260.364
0.3510.389
3.694.07
Corrosion in Fresh
Water
Acceptable
Acceptable
Excellent
UTS
Yield
4101200
5501760
4802240
305900
4001500
1701000
Aluminium Alloy
1.37Excellent
65-386
1.51
Table ?: Material selection factors (ref CESEdupack)
50-130
We decided upon using low alloy steel, due to its high tensile and
yield strength, cheap price and as the submarine is not in
constant use, we agreed that its acceptable durability in fresh
water was satisfactory for our design.
5.3
Gear Sizing
W t P/V
D n
60
36
K v 6/(6+V )
D n
60
6
6 +0.377 m/s
0.941
700W
0.377 m/ s
1856.807 N
6
6 +0.377 m/s
0.941
Symbol
P
Meaning
Power
Units
watts
Value
700
Speed
rpm
200
Source
Sub speed
prediction
spreadsheet
Sub speed
prediction
Npinion
Ngear
Y
m
Dpinion
Dgear
V
Wt
Kv
D n
V
60 F
D n
60
Sd
P
Fallow-min
Fallow-max
Pinion
Teeth
Gear Teeth
Lewis Form
Factor
Module
Pitch
diameter
pinion
Pitch
diameter
gear
Velocity
(pitch line)
Force
Velocity
Factor
Face Width
Shaft
centres
distance
apart
Pitch
Allowable
face width
minimum
Allowable
face width
maximum
18
spreadsheet
Assumed
72
0.309
m
m
0.002
0.036
Assumed
Calculated
0.144
Calculated
m/s
0.377
Calculated
1856.8
08
0.941
Calculated
m
m
0.024
0.09
Calculated
Calculated
m
m
6.283
0.019
Calculated
Calculated
0.0314
Calculated
Calculated