Embarking on a Journey of Mechanical Innovation

Introduction

Here is a awesome song called “Kimse Bilmez/No one knows” written by Mehmet Güreli, sang by Cem Adrian you might enjoy while reading this blog.

Embarking on an extraordinary journey of creativity and mechanical innovation, our mission was to craft a mechanical model that utilizes both functionality and aesthetic features. Throughout the design, planning, and prototyping phases, our model underwent significant transformations, revealing the pivotal role of prototyping in product design. This journey has been deeply aligned with the course’s objectives, hence its name: Prototyping and Fabrication.

The sketches below gives a good idea how our project is evolved, and improved, overtime.
(Every version had several trials that is why there are numbers after the dot (Etc: Version 2.1))

Piston Project Prototype Version 1.2: Simple sketch for the low fidelity model (Initial testing for the piston idea)

Piston Project Prototype Version 2.4: Full scale high fidelity model (Stingray version)

 

Piston Project Prototype Version 3.2 & Production Model : Scaled down & proportioned high fidelity model

Inspiration and Ideation

In collaboration, Tinghan and I initially envisioned crafting a vertical-turning windmill that would transfer motion to a horizontal axis via cranks. Through invaluable feedback from the teaching team, we discovered the complexity of creating gears capable of transferring motion between planes using laser-cut pieces, especially concerning bevel gears (Educational Video).

Adapting to this feedback, our creative journey took a turn towards crafting a model inspired by the graceful movements of a stingray, flapping its wings through various interconnected rods moving in a synchronized motion range. Influenced heavily by “507 Mechanical Movements,” our aspiration was to construct a model that captivates imaginations while vividly demonstrating the dynamic mechanical movement of a piston.

PROTOTYPING

Sketching and Planning:

Our creative process kicked off with conceptual sketching, laying down the foundations of our idea on paper, before transitioning to Adobe Illustrator for a more detailed design outlook. However, our journey through Illustrator was challenging, hampered by our novice skills in the software, leading to approximations and ‘eyeballing’ of dimensions rather than precise measurements.

Low Fidelity Prototyping:

Progressing to the prototyping phase, we materialized our design ideas by assembling a cardboard prototype reinforced by hot glue and wooden sticks. It was during this phase that a significant design flaw surfaced. The piston was directly connected to the crank, inducing an undesired back-and-forth motion in addition to the expected up-and-down movement. Through insightful realizations, we identified the need for an interlinking rod to moderate the piston’s motion, ensuring it moves harmoniously in sync with the crank. A comprehensive diagram from Birdbrain Technologies illuminates this concept effectively, offering a deeper insight into our mechanical model’s functioning principles.

The main problems we have observed in the low fidelity model was:

• The cranks (Which consisted of two disks aligned with each other) weren’t aligned perfectly, which created problems with the rotation.
• Pistons did a back and forth motion, which is unwanted.
• The overall length of the crank shaft was too long, which hinted at the need for extra support.
• Using how glue in the frame distorted the proportions of the model.

High Fidelity Prototyping

For the high fidelity model, we have used laser cutted wood for the model. We were able to create a
working model with an intermediary rod and the piston.

The main problems we have observed in the high fidelity model was:

• The crank shaft (The stick that is holding the crank) was too thin for long term durability.
• The length of the rod was too much
• The top part of the frame wasn’t aligned well  with the pistons
• There was too much friction in the mechanism

The problems above has pushed me to utilize Illustrator’s measurement tool and redraw the pieces proportionally and compared the pieces and their placements in the software. Also we realized the difficulty of optimizing such mechanism so decided to scale down to one piston rather than 4 pistons which was the initial plan.  We made an another prototype (Version 3) using high fidelity materials and latest drawing. The last prototype was helpful for us to understand weak points in the mechanism so that we decided to increase the width of the crank shaft, add bearings and change the crank material to metal. After small adjustments in piece dimensions we proceeded with production.

 

 

Production of the final Model

Our fabrication journey was filled with further learning and fine-tuning. Special attention was paid to ensure that no fasteners were used, and the assembly remained coherent and functional. We utilized laser cutter for cutting most of the pieces and the finger jointed frame. Later assembled the frame and used Danish oil to give it a more finished look.

I cut cranks using the water jet which was quite tricky regarding the size difference between the drawn and cut product. (I calculated a 0.7 mm difference between those to and adjusted my drawings accordingly.) The surface of the metal
piece I used was corroded thus I sandblasted it and coated the surface with clean matte coat. Also, we coated the corners in red to give the crank more style.

Tinghan came up with the idea of turning this piston model into a jumping kangaroo model and wet and painted the aesthetic components for that. Also we added the vinyl part as a kangaroo warning. I believe Tinghan made an awesome job in this.

At the end we came up with an end product which was a scaled down version of our original idea. However since we were smoothen the mechanism and able to post-process it, we were satisfied with this project overall.

 

Challenges and Learning

Throughout this project, we encountered several challenges. However, each hurdle was a learning opportunity, pushing us to explore, adapt, and innovate.

Conclusion: Bringing the Mechanical Model to Life

Our final model,  stands as a testament to the incredible journey of exploration, design, and fabrication. It’s not merely a mechanical model but a confluence of art and engineering, inviting viewers to interact, explore, and be captivated by its mechanical wonders.

Acknowledgments

A heartfelt thank you to the teaching team and peers for their guidance, support, and constructive feedback that was instrumental in the successful completion of this project.

Cost Type		Price	Source	Quantity	Total
Materials	1/4″ Plywood	29 (32 sq ft)	Homedepot	900 sq in	5,66
	Spray Paint	5.98 (1 can)	Walmart	0.1 Can	0,59
	Danish Oil Stain	51.56 (1 lt)	Walmart	50 ml	2,86
	Bristle Brush	0.98 (1 pc)	Walmart	2 pc	1,96
	Sand Paper	6.98 (4 pc)	Homedepot	2 pc	3,49
	Vinly Paper	65.28 (720″)	BHP	5″	0,50
	Cardboard	16.99 (6*9, 50 pc)	Amazon	4 pc	1,36
	Epoxy Adhesive	4.50 (1 Oz)	Amazon	0.1 oz	0,45
	Hot Glue Stick	14.99 (200 pc)	Amazon	3 pc	0,22
	Mild Steel	14,93 (6*18 in)	Homedepot	5*2,9	2,00
Labor	Laser Cutting Operator	19,92 / h	Indeed	4 h	59,68
	Carpanter	21.95 / h	Ziprecuriter	4 h	87,8
	Prototyping Eng.	53.93 / h	Zippia	5 h	269,65
	Sandblast Operator	17 / h	andblast operator17/hourIndeed0,11,70	0,1	1,7
	Water Jet Operator	20 / h	ZipRecruiter	1,5	15,00
Overhead	Water Jet	19,86 / h	WardJet	1,5	29,79
	Vinly Machine	25 / h	Not found	0.5 h	12,5
	Dremel	16 / 4 h	Homedepot	2 h	7,50
	Sandblaster	265 / Daily	Aztec Rental	0,1 h	1,10
	Laser Cutter	30 for 1/4 h	Light Object	4 h	480
Design	Adobe Illustrator	20/ Month	Adobe	1 Month	20
Miscellaneous	Mistake 1*4 Lumber	9.69 (4ft)	Acehardware	29″ (2 pc)	5,85
					1009,66