Considering how far the project has come and the skills I have learnt in CAM (SolidWorks)and the motorcycle field I think the project has been a success.
and am proud of what we have achieved.
Obviously there are ways in which the project could been improved, but we would not have been aware of this without
the knowledge that we have now. I think typical of a project of this nature we tried to 'bite off more than we could chew' and in the end ran out of time to develop a more in depth analysis of our approaches.
Some changes we might have made in hindsight:
-As a team we could have planned more by doing some more initial research into the field and consulting with people having greater industry knowledge.
-Perhaps by realising the the broader context of our project earlier on (creating an external resource) we would have started the grasshopper script for the featherbed frame earlier and been able to base more of our project on this concept of adapting and customising a frame.
-Though it was great learning experience to focus on a broad amount of content and various CAD and CAM techniques throughput the project, perhaps it would have been more beneficial to focus on a particular technique of CAM or be more selective of our outputs (parts we modeled). This may have resulted in a more in depth and comprehensive end result.
Sunday 2 June 2013
Individual Contribution
Major Contributions to the Project
Completion of SolidWorks Modeling
A major component of the project was to model up the various required parts of the motorbike(s) in SolidWorks. These models needed to be accurate to a 2mm tolerance to ensure the credibility of our models and our project as a whole.
My Modeled components Included:
Rear Sprocket & Hub
Rear Rim & Tyre
Rear Drive Train
Front Hub, Rim & Tyre
Bracket Positioning
Motor Position
Motor Position Revised
A major part of our project was the engine bracket design. Before we could start on the design we had to come up with a set position for the engine within the frame. Through discussions with Russell it became apparent that for this project the engine position was going to be based on aesthetics over functionality. I first drew a scaled 2D elevation of the motor and used an existing elevation of the featherbed frame, placing them together in AutoCAD. Using these drawings, in consultation with Russell, we were able to come up with an ideal position for the motor within the frame. We were then able to use this drawing to start the bracket designs.
Bracket Design
Bracket Design
For the project I had to come up with a bracket design, the technique I looked at was tubing.
The design is based on the curves of the Norton frame, the brackets acting as an extension of the frame design.
Part of the design process was looking at standards for tubing. I found that a standard tube for this type of job would have a 2mm wall and be made of mild steel. I then used this information to send inquiries for the brackets to get manufactured. I received a quote from FJ Metal for the Brackets to be made by cold bending for $320.
Final Assembly
Final Assembly
The process involved importing everyone's various model components and connecting them by "mating" them together in a final assembly. This was an interesting process as I had to look into how all the connections work and in our case sometimes didn't work; some of the parts weren't compatible. The whole process involved a lot of tweaking and repositioning of parts to accommodate relationships/connections between parts. Having an assembly model of the bikes components made it clear to identify the clashes within the model and proved a useful visual to what the bike would finally look like.
Completion of SolidWorks Modeling
A major component of the project was to model up the various required parts of the motorbike(s) in SolidWorks. These models needed to be accurate to a 2mm tolerance to ensure the credibility of our models and our project as a whole.
My Modeled components Included:
Rear Sprocket & Hub
Rear Rim & Tyre
Rear Drive Train
Front Hub, Rim & Tyre
Bracket Positioning
Motor Position
Motor Position Revised
A major part of our project was the engine bracket design. Before we could start on the design we had to come up with a set position for the engine within the frame. Through discussions with Russell it became apparent that for this project the engine position was going to be based on aesthetics over functionality. I first drew a scaled 2D elevation of the motor and used an existing elevation of the featherbed frame, placing them together in AutoCAD. Using these drawings, in consultation with Russell, we were able to come up with an ideal position for the motor within the frame. We were then able to use this drawing to start the bracket designs.
Bracket Design
Bracket Design
For the project I had to come up with a bracket design, the technique I looked at was tubing.
The design is based on the curves of the Norton frame, the brackets acting as an extension of the frame design.
Part of the design process was looking at standards for tubing. I found that a standard tube for this type of job would have a 2mm wall and be made of mild steel. I then used this information to send inquiries for the brackets to get manufactured. I received a quote from FJ Metal for the Brackets to be made by cold bending for $320.
Final Assembly
Final Assembly
The process involved importing everyone's various model components and connecting them by "mating" them together in a final assembly. This was an interesting process as I had to look into how all the connections work and in our case sometimes didn't work; some of the parts weren't compatible. The whole process involved a lot of tweaking and repositioning of parts to accommodate relationships/connections between parts. Having an assembly model of the bikes components made it clear to identify the clashes within the model and proved a useful visual to what the bike would finally look like.
Final Assembly Model
As one of my allocated tasks I was responsible for collating the various model components into a singular assembly to represent our final modeling output.
Rendered image of final assembly
The process involved importing everyone's various model components and connecting them by "mating" them together in the assembly. This was an interesting process as I had to think and in some cases research what part joins to what and how the various parts are connected. In some cases the connections didn't work as the parts were simply not compatible, so I simply placed them roughly in position. The whole process involved a lot of tweaking and repositioning of parts to accommodate relationships/connections between parts. Having an assembly model of the bikes components made it clear to identify the clashes within the model.
the most obvious and important clashes is with the drive train and the frame. This is due to the rear width of the Norton frame being smaller than that of the Honda. In order to resolve this problem the drive chain could be offset to the right by at least 12mm, allowing the chain 5mm clearance from the frame, however this would affect the balance of the motor and in turn affect performance.
Another clash is the Swing Arm and frame.As the rear frame dimensions of the bikes differ, the Honda swing arm does not fit within the Norton frame. This could be solved by modifying the frame or using an alternate swing arm (from a Norton).
Rendered image of final assembly
The process involved importing everyone's various model components and connecting them by "mating" them together in the assembly. This was an interesting process as I had to think and in some cases research what part joins to what and how the various parts are connected. In some cases the connections didn't work as the parts were simply not compatible, so I simply placed them roughly in position. The whole process involved a lot of tweaking and repositioning of parts to accommodate relationships/connections between parts. Having an assembly model of the bikes components made it clear to identify the clashes within the model.
the most obvious and important clashes is with the drive train and the frame. This is due to the rear width of the Norton frame being smaller than that of the Honda. In order to resolve this problem the drive chain could be offset to the right by at least 12mm, allowing the chain 5mm clearance from the frame, however this would affect the balance of the motor and in turn affect performance.
Another clash is the Swing Arm and frame.As the rear frame dimensions of the bikes differ, the Honda swing arm does not fit within the Norton frame. This could be solved by modifying the frame or using an alternate swing arm (from a Norton).
Friday 24 May 2013
Bracket Design
For the bracket designs, we decided to look at a couple of different methods in order to come up with a variety of bracket options.
My design was looking at tubing, drawing inspiration from the Norton frame to come up with a design which matches the clean tubular curves of the frame. Using the AutoCAD drawing to define relationships between engine mounts and frame
Rear Brackets
Tubular bracket design, this gets welded to the cross bar.
The opposing bracket needs to be removable, bolting to the cross pipe, allowing the engine to be removed.
Cross bar, connecting two brackets.
Mounting points, connecting engine mount points to brackets.
Rear Bracket Assembly
Front Brackets
Based on similar principles as rear brackets. The left hand side front bracket is a singular curve which gets welded onto the cross bar.
The challenge with the front brackets is they are not symmetrical as the upper right hand side protrudes by 20mm.This meant having to separate the right hand side bracket into 2 separate brackets.
Lower Bracket
Upper Bracket
Both these brackets get bolted to the cross bar (creating the 20mm difference). These brackets are removable, like the right hand front bracket, allowing the engine be removed easily.
The cross pipe (joining the two sides of the brackets)gets welded to a cross bar on the frame.
Front Brackets in place.
Bracket Quotes
After finishing the design I sent the drawing off to a variety of manufacturers to get some quotes.
3D printing
I looked into 3D printing, uploading the models to Shapeways...
Steel Cold Bending
After receiving an expectedly high cost for 3D printing I looked into more traditional manufacturing methods. I sent quotes to various steel fabrication companies and only received a response from one, FJ Metal. FJ Metal specialize in steel cold bending.
Though the steel cold bending method is not as accurate and is more labor intensive (welding etc. required)it would be a feasible choice if going ahead with bracket fabrication.
My design was looking at tubing, drawing inspiration from the Norton frame to come up with a design which matches the clean tubular curves of the frame. Using the AutoCAD drawing to define relationships between engine mounts and frame
Rear Brackets
Tubular bracket design, this gets welded to the cross bar.
The opposing bracket needs to be removable, bolting to the cross pipe, allowing the engine to be removed.
Cross bar, connecting two brackets.
Mounting points, connecting engine mount points to brackets.
Rear Bracket Assembly
Front Brackets
Based on similar principles as rear brackets. The left hand side front bracket is a singular curve which gets welded onto the cross bar.
The challenge with the front brackets is they are not symmetrical as the upper right hand side protrudes by 20mm.This meant having to separate the right hand side bracket into 2 separate brackets.
Lower Bracket
Upper Bracket
Both these brackets get bolted to the cross bar (creating the 20mm difference). These brackets are removable, like the right hand front bracket, allowing the engine be removed easily.
The cross pipe (joining the two sides of the brackets)gets welded to a cross bar on the frame.
Front Brackets in place.
Bracket Quotes
After finishing the design I sent the drawing off to a variety of manufacturers to get some quotes.
3D printing
I looked into 3D printing, uploading the models to Shapeways...
Steel Cold Bending
After receiving an expectedly high cost for 3D printing I looked into more traditional manufacturing methods. I sent quotes to various steel fabrication companies and only received a response from one, FJ Metal. FJ Metal specialize in steel cold bending.
Though the steel cold bending method is not as accurate and is more labor intensive (welding etc. required)it would be a feasible choice if going ahead with bracket fabrication.
Tuesday 21 May 2013
Final Replication Modelling
Completion of my assigned modelling tasks accurately snapped together in one assembly.
With some added materials...
With some added materials...
Revising Engine Position in Frame
As the photo stitched engine drawing wasn't an accurate aesthetic of the engine, Dan and Ben worked on combining the the frame and Alex's engine model in SolidWorks, placing it in a more desirable position (as discussed with Russell).
I then used this model and put it into AutoCAD, scaling it accordingly. This provided a more accurate elevation of the engine and it's position within the frame. This drawing means that we can take accurate measurements and model up our bracket designs on the same drawing as the engine and frame.
I then used this model and put it into AutoCAD, scaling it accordingly. This provided a more accurate elevation of the engine and it's position within the frame. This drawing means that we can take accurate measurements and model up our bracket designs on the same drawing as the engine and frame.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)