Hey, guys. For this project, Carter and I decided to make a new version of this model, where no screws are needed so that this can be fabricated in a low-resourced area more easily.
As you can see in pic 1 is how the original design looks like, where we have a base plate in green to house all other components and the blue ones are plates to hold the cervical models and fabrics. All these components on top are secured in place with a key structure in grey. However, normally, these structures so far would not bae able to create a locked-in mechanism, since there aren’t enough counteracting forces. Therefore, another red key comes in place perpendicular to the grey key so that they can together be locked (pic 2). At the same time, the red key is also used as the foot to adjust angle of the labia. To adjust the angle as desired, a yellow key is inserted into one of the three slots on red key.
This concept was later converted into a more realistic design that can actually be fabricated with mostly laser cutter. Since Carter has confirmed with Dr. Wettergreen, we can also use CNC for certain components.
As shown in pic 3, this is the final design, which carries the same idea of mortise and tenon design. However, the main difference is that this one has the grey and red key structures separated into two, one on each side so that the foot (red key) won’t block the view of labia when raised up. Furthermore, the yellow key is merged into the red key structure so that the operation of changing the angle won’t be as complicated (pic 4).
Another addition to this design is that a holder for the cervical model is implemented so that the models can be kept in place with a simple snap-on structure (pic 5). Essentially, there are teeth that are slightly smaller than the diameter of the model’s base so that once the user presses the model onto the base, those teeth would grab on all sides. Just for clarification, the cylindrical red piece in the picture is to represent the vaginal canal to demonstrate the final design.
Now let’s talk about the fabrication process. Firstly, since we do want to make sure the base is strong enough and we were allowed to use CNC, we decided to use a much thicker wood to mill this base out. As shown in pic 6 is how the milling process looked like. Essentially all the slots are milled out so that one or two layers of thinner plywood can be fit in there. Two layers are used for holding the fabric together.
As shown in pic 7 is the kerf testing that was done to check the thickness of laser, which was calculated to be close to 400 um and thus 200 um was added to each side of the original dxf file (pic 8 and 9). As shown in pic 10, the end result is very close to the ideal number (250 um). All the components were cut out and sanded down for assembling onto the base (pic 11).
We’ve also applied much paint onto the outer surface to better protect the wood surface from any contamination. A white primer was chosen as the coating (pic 12)
After the paint is dried, all components are processed again to ensure a snug fit and then assembled.
Cost analysis table is shown here:
| Cost Type | Cost | Price | Source | Quantity | Total |
| Materials | PLA Filament (all iterations) | $16.99 / kg | Amazon | 224.37 mL | $4.7 |
| Wood piece (X3) | $3.75/board foot | Country concepts | 10”X3”X2” | ~$4 | |
| White Filler Primer Spray Paint | $8.99/can | RUST-OLEUM | ¼ of a can | $2.25 | |
| Labor | Prototyping Engineer | $25.91 / hour | indeed | 6 hr | $155.46 |
| Overhead | Utility Cost (considering both the cost of facility and electricity) | ~$5.13/ hour | TexAgs | 4 hr | $20.52 |
| Depreciation of Assets (CNC machines, laser cutter and tools versus their typical life spans) | ~$3/hour | MDCplus | 4 hr | $12 | |
| Design | Engineering and Development | $44.34 / hour | ZipRecruiter | 1 hr | $44.34 |
| Iterations (a continuation of the previous category) | $44.34 / hour | ZipRecruiter | 1 hr | $44.34 | |
| Misc. | Waste and Scrap | ~$49.5/L | UltiMaker | 0.2L | $9,9 |
Total=$297.51
Here is the cleaned-up tabletop.
