Fourward Consulting Group Final Technical Report

8/9/2019 Fourward Consulting Group Final Technical Report

1/49

Dr. Farid GolnaraghiDirector of the School of Mechatronic

Systems Engineering

Simon Fraser University – Surrey Campus

July 29th, 2014

Dear Dr.Golnaraghi,

On behalf of the Fourward Consulting Group, I present you with the final technical report for the capstone

project appointed to us by Kodak.

This proposal was written in accordance with the outline provided by Mrs. Maureen Hindy and projectguidelines defined by Kodak. This final report describes the problem at hand and how a solution will be

achieved and the timeline in which it will be achieved in.

All material within this proposal is in agreement with the Non-Disclosure Agreement signed by all members

of the Fourward Consulting Group and does not express any intellectual property of Kodak.

Your assessment of our proposal is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Kjell Sadowski

Group Leader


2/49

Trendsetter SA Electrical Actuation

Modification SystemFinal Report

MSE 411 – Project Documentation and Group Dynamics

David Afonso 301 146 898

Lahz Dropsy Kikabou 301 132 529

Shawn Park 301 152 044

Kjell Sadowski 301 117 094


3/49

Copyright ©2014, Fourward Design Group Page | i

Final Technical Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document is the final technical report written for the invested personnel at Kodak and the capstone projectassessors. It provides an overview and analysis of the Trendsetter series printers using electrical automation in

place of pneumatic (driven by air) automation. The main goal of this project is to provide a proof of concept

to aid in Kodak’s decision of whether to enter into the Chinese small-scale printing industry. The Chinesemarket requires reduced noise pollution and the elimination of an external air compressor, both of whichKodak’s present plate printers have.

The objectives which the engineering team at Kodak defined for us (in order of importance) are:

1. To maintain the functionality of the existing system within the new design,

2. To maintain the throughput, the component and system reliability, which existed within the currentdesign, and

3. To complete the system redesign within the set budget of $3,000.000 CAD.

The system redesign task can be separated into two categories:

1. Electrical design: Development of a design which is low power, cost effective and simple2. Mechanical design: Development of a design which required minimal physical alterations to current

design yet could still retain the functionalities of the current system design

Firmware modification was expected to be a component of this project; however, the evolution of the designdid not require any modifications to it.

The selected actuators were from Progressive Automations because of their good customer service and actuatorselection.

The table below reflects the results of two different methods of actuation within the Trendsetter plate printer. While the actuator functions and constructions are not defined here, it can be seen that there is great potential

to reduce the size of the actuators. It should also be noted that the reduction in size comes at the price of slower

action (in all but the TEC Lock/Unlock).

Actuator Time (s) Average Speed (mm/s) Average Force (N) Average Power (W)

TEC Lock/Unlock -22% +55% -2,766% -25% TEC +73% -422% -11,157% -2,509% LEC +86% -465% -36,913% -2,022% Roller +54% -206% -5,490% -371%

Discrepancy compared to Pneumatic actuator

The actual and estimated results of the budget, timeline and printer functionality are detailed later in thedocument. Short overviews are presented here below.

Budget - The completion of the project resulted in the requirement of an extra 50% of the original

budget. This was due to the extra expense attributed to component machining and to the out-of-

specification components of distributors.

Timeline - The deviations from the timeline which was created at the beginning of this project occurred

mainly in the second half of this project. Delays in system assembly and testing occurred due to the

extra time required to machine some components.


4/49

Copyright ©2014, Fourward Design Group Page | ii


Printer Functionality - The printer functionality was maintained as defined in the original projectdefinition.

Once the project with Kodak finishes, Kodak will use the results to make a decision as to whether they areinterested into further developing this design for production or to store the details of it as a feasibility study.

This section details the recommendations that the Fourward Consulting Group suggests in the case that thisproject were to be undertaken by another group of individuals or developed further by Kodak.

Several recommendations for the mechanical and electrical system components are suggested if another reviewof this project is conducted. The mechanical brackets should be assessed for durability and lifetime and theactuators should be modified to use the system voltage of 24V instead of 12V as this would eliminate the need

for a dedicated power supply. In the event that a vendor which solenoids for a reasonable price is found, it would be highly suggested to explored this possibility because solenoids pose the same advantages of theelectrical linear actuators but with faster actuation speeds.

Overall the project was a success with the management team at Kodak. We arrived at our solution over budget

by 50% but maintained the functionality of the original device. The major flaw with the implementation ofelectrical actuators is the product lifetime. This can be circumvented by the usage of solenoids, which arecurrently too expensive but may be feasible if small enough models can be used.


5/49

Copyright ©2014, Fourward Design Group Page | iii


CONTENTS

1.

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 1

2.

Project Goals .............................................................................................................................................................. 1

2.1 Project Description .......................................................................................................................................... 1

2.2 Scope of Project ................................................................................................................................................ 1

2.3

Design Framework ........................................................................................................................................... 3

2.4 Design Constraints ........................................................................................................................................... 5

2.5 Firmware ............................................................................................................................................................ 5

2.6 Electrical design: ............................................................................................................................................... 5

2.7 Mechanical design: ............................................................................................................................................ 5

2.8

Decision Matrix................................................................................................................................................. 5

3.

Description of Systems ............................................................................................................................................. 6

3.1 System Operation ............................................................................................................................................. 6

3.2 Actuators ............................................................................................................................................................ 7

3.2.1

TEC Lock/Unlock ...................................................................................................................................... 7

3.2.2 TEC ................................................................................................................................................................ 9

3.2.3 LEC .............................................................................................................................................................. 12

3.2.4

Roller ............................................................................................................................................................ 14

3.3

Electrical System ............................................................................................................................................. 17

3.3.1 Power Requirements.................................................................................................................................. 17

3.3.2

Power Supply .............................................................................................................................................. 17

3.3.3 Wiring........................................................................................................................................................... 17

3.3.4 Actuator Controller ................................................................................................................................... 17

3.4

Control System ................................................................................................................................................ 18

3.4.1 EMCE Board .............................................................................................................................................. 18

3.4.2 Relay ............................................................................................................................................................. 18

3.4.3

External Limit Switches ............................................................................................................................ 19

3.4.4 Software ....................................................................................................................................................... 20

3.5 Vendor Selection ............................................................................................................................................ 20

4.

Problems and Challenges........................................................................................................................................ 20

4.1 Mechanical System ......................................................................................................................................... 20

4.2 Electrical and Control System ...................................................................................................................... 21

5.

Comparison of Estimated and Actual Project Timelines and Budgets ........................................................... 22


6/49

Copyright ©2014, Fourward Design Group Page | iv


5.1

Timelines .......................................................................................................................................................... 22

5.1.1 Estimated Timelines .................................................................................................................................. 22

5.2 Budgets ............................................................................................................................................................. 25

5.2.1

Estimated Budgets ..................................................................................................................................... 25

5.2.2

Actual Budgets ............................................................................................................................................ 26

6. Team Description .................................................................................................................................................... 27

6.1

The Members of Fourward Consulting Group ......................................................................................... 27

7. Meeting Structures and Accountability ................................................................................................................ 28

7.1 Meeting Structure ........................................................................................................................................... 28

7.1.1

Fourward Consulting Group .................................................................................................................... 28

7.1.2 Kodak ........................................................................................................................................................... 28

7.1.3 Group Accountability ................................................................................................................................ 28

8. Project Future ........................................................................................................................................................... 28

9. Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................... 28

9.1 Mechanical System ......................................................................................................................................... 29

9.2

Electrical and Control System ...................................................................................................................... 29

10. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................ 29

11. References ............................................................................................................................................................ 31

12.

Appendix A - Exploded Views ......................................................................................................................... 32

12.1 Home Side Assembly ..................................................................................................................................... 32

12.2 Away Side Assembly ...................................................................................................................................... 33

12.3

TEC Shelf Assembly ...................................................................................................................................... 34

12.4 PA-14 Actuator ............................................................................................................................................... 34

12.5 PA-15 Actuator ............................................................................................................................................... 35

13.

Appendix B - Part Lists ...................................................................................................................................... 36

13.1 Home Side Assembly ..................................................................................................................................... 36

13.2 Away Side Assembly ...................................................................................................................................... 38

13.3 TEC Shelf Assembly ...................................................................................................................................... 40

13.4

PA-14 Actuator ............................................................................................................................................... 41

13.5

PA-15 Actuator ............................................................................................................................................... 41

T ABLE OF T ABLES

Table 1: Decision Matrix ................................................................................................................................................... 6 Table 2: Electromechanical System Specifications ........................................................................................................ 7

Table 3: TEC Lock/Unlock Characteristics ................................................................................................................... 7


7/49

Copyright ©2014, Fourward Design Group Page | v


Table 4: Discrepancy compared to Pneumatic actuator ............................................................................................... 7

Table 5: TEC Actuator Characteristics............................................................................................................................ 9

Table 6: Discrepancy compared to Pneumatic actuator ............................................................................................. 10 Table 7: LEC Actuator Characteristics .......................................................................................................................... 12 Table 8: Discrepancy compared to Pneumatic actuator ............................................................................................. 12 Table 9: Roller Actuator Characteristics........................................................................................................................ 15

Table 10: Actuator Force, Current and Power Specifications ................................................................................... 17

Table 11: Relay Power Characteristics ........................................................................................................................... 18

Table 12: Limit Switches .................................................................................................................................................. 19

Table 13: Actuator Part Numbers .................................................................................................................................. 20 Table 14: Gantt Chart Breakdown ................................................................................................................................. 24 Table 15: Cost Breakdown for hardware parts ............................................................................................................ 25 Table 16: Actual Budget ................................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 17: Actuator Comparison Results ....................................................................................................................... 30

T ABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: TEC, LEC and Roller Actuators ..................................................................................................................... 2

Figure 2: TEC Lock/Unlock Actuator ............................................................................................................................ 2

Figure 3: Fourward Re-design Method ........................................................................................................................... 4

Figure 4: Pneumatic TEC Lock/Unlock Power vs Time ............................................................................................. 8

Figure 5: Pneumatic TEC Lock/Unlock Force and Distance vs Time ..................................................................... 8 Figure 6: Electro-Mechanical TEC Lock/Unlock Power vs Time ............................................................................. 9 Figure 7: Electromechanical TEC Lock/Unlock Force and Distance vs Time ....................................................... 9 Figure 8: Pneumatic TEC Power vs Time .................................................................................................................... 10

Figure 9: Pneumatic TEC Force and Distance Vs. Time ........................................................................................... 11 Figure 10: Electromechanical TEC Power vs Time .................................................................................................... 11

Figure 11: Electromechanical TEC Force and Distance vs Time ............................................................................. 12

Figure 12: Pneumatic LEC Power vs Time .................................................................................................................. 13

Figure 13: Pneumatic LEC Force and Distance vs Time ........................................................................................... 13 Figure 14: Electromechanical LEC Power vs Time .................................................................................................... 14

Figure 15: Elcetromechanical LEC Force and Distance vs Time ............................................................................. 14 Figure 16: Pneumatic Roller Power vs Time ................................................................................................................ 15 Figure 17: Pneumatic Roller Force and Distance vs Time ......................................................................................... 16

Figure 18: Electromechanical Roller Power vs Time .................................................................................................. 16

Figure 19: Electromechanical Roller Force and Distance vs Time ........................................................................... 17 Figure 20: DC Linear Moto Bidirectional Control Using a DPDT Relay ............................................................... 18 Figure 21: Electrical Schematic For Actuation............................................................................................................. 19

Figure 22: Electrical Schematic For Tec Lock/Unlock .............................................................................................. 19

Figure 23: Gantt chart ...................................................................................................................................................... 23


8/49

Copyright ©2014, Fourward Design Group Page | vi


Glossary

AWG – Standard for American Wire Gauge

Backbone - Referring to the TEC, LEC, TEC Lock/Unlock and Roller mechanical components

CEO - Chief Executive OfficerCFO - Chief Financial Officer

CMO - Chief Marketing Officer

CTO - Chief Technology Officer

Drum - The part that the printing plate is wrapped around to allow for laser etching

DPDT – Double Poles Double Throws

EMCE - Electro-Mechanical Control Empowerment

Engine - Referring to all of the actuators that perform the automation required to operate the Trendsetter

Backbone

LEC - Leading Edge Clamp

Printing Plate - The flexible sheet that is etched with the laser

Output Device - Referring the Trendsetter SA

SFU - Simon Fraser University

TEC - Trailing Edge Clamp

Trendsetter SA - The device which Kodak has hired the Fourward Consulting Group to modify


9/49

Copyright ©2014, Fourward Design Group Page | 1


1. INTRODUCTION

In the past, Kodak Graphic Communications has traditionally used pneumatic automation for its printers

because pneumatic automation is a well-accepted industry standard and is less expensive than an equivalent

electrical automation system. In addition to this, North American and European industries support the usageof pneumatic automation. Some printing facilities already have pneumatic support systems installed and others

are willing to accommodate such systems.

China, a new market for Kodak, is expanding and Kodak would like to have products which will be competitive

in China`s printing market. Unlike Kodak’s prior customers who had previously installed or were willing to

support pneumatic automation systems, the Chinese markets want a simpler solution. Many of the potential

customers in China are smaller operations that are not willing to invest in pneumatic automation support

systems and would rather use equipment from other manufacturers that do not have this requirement. Kodak’s

main competition in China uses electrical actuation in their plate printing presses. This makes their products

more attractive than Kodak’s pneumatic operated printer.

Rather than fully redesign their current Trendsetter series printer, Kodak wants to modify the automationsystem of their existing product. This will allow the usage of all the other existing systems within the printer

while making changes only to the automation system.

2. PROJECT GOALS

2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Kodak required the functionality of the new electrical actuation system to remain the same as the current

pneumatic actuation system. Therefore, the new system had to be able to operate under the same functional

and operational conditions, and had to have the same performance characteristics. Throughput and reliabilityof the new implementation were required to be similar to or as good as that of the pneumatic implementation.

In addition, new components of system had to be able to work within existing system parameters such as

keeping the operating temperature between 17C - 30C to avoid defects at the output.

2.2 SCOPE OF PROJECT The scope of this project was to replace the pneumatic automation system with an electromechanical system within eight months. This project consisted of the integration of new electromechanical actuators and theaddition of an electrical support system. Firmware development was explored and was found to be unnecessaryto control the new electric actuators. The actuators to be replaced are:

● Six pneumatic cylinders responsible for actuating clamping and setting mechanisms ( Figure 1 ) ● One pneumatic cylinder controlling a magnet locking and unlocking mechanism ( Figure 2 ). The

system modifications will be restricted by a firm budget of $3,000.00.


10/49



Figure 1: TEC, LEC and Roller Actuators

Figure 2: TEC Lock/Unlock Actuator


11/49



2.3 DESIGN FRAMEWORK The Fourward Consulting Group applied the Fourward ReDesign Method ( Figure 3 ) to this project, which usesthe following eight steps approach to address the problem and find a suitable solution:

1. Analyze system - A system analysis is performed where the problem is recognized and described, andall important parameters and variables which will be used during the design process will be identified.

This includes characterizing the components, their roles and interactions in the system.

2. Propose system modification - The data will be used to create a new system model based on therequirements for the new solution from Kodak

3. Select new components - Once a new system model is proposed, the main components such aspistons and motors are selected.

4. Select auxiliary components - Motor controllers and power supplies are chosen.

5. Analyze necessary system modifications based on components - Re-analyze the system to ensurethat all components will work effectively with the other systems and that no spatial issues or other

issues of a similar nature exist.

6. Assess feasibility of solution - Feasibility covers the time to implement the solution created from thenew system model as well as lead and manufacturing times.

7. Analyze budget constraints - Once steps 1-6 are completed, a financial analysis is performed and amore accurate project cost is determined. This project cost will determine how viable this solution isto execute.

8. Identify inaccuracies, incompatibilities and unfeasible solutions and return to step 2 and modifythe existing proposal


12/49



Figure 3: Fourward Re-design Method


13/49



2.4 DESIGN CONSTRAINTS ● Budget: Although an automated electromechanical system has a lower energy cost and is more

economic for long periods of usage than a pneumatic one, the former comes with a higher design and

development cost. Since an electromechanical design was predicted to cost more than the current one,

keeping the development costs under Kodak’s $3,000 budget was one of the main technical challenges.

● Throughput: Retaining the functionalities of the printer, such as, the throughput (96 plate per day),actuation timing and speed.

● System lifespan: Maintaining a reasonable system life span, given that the lifetime of pneumatic

actuators is far longer than that of electromechanical actuators. It is important to keep the frequency

of replacement of actuators low to maximize the reliability of the device and minimize maintenance

costs.

2.5 FIRMWARE Understanding the firmware and developing a simple and effective solution with minimal change to the current

code in order to stay within the time constraint.

2.6 ELECTRICAL DESIGN:● Low noise to reduce interference

● Low power to cut down on electricity costs

● Cost effective

● Simple implementation.

2.7 MECHANICAL DESIGN:● Minimize physical alterations inside the printer to minimize cost

● Fit the new actuators within the space constraints of the current model

● Customize actuators for proper mechanical connection

2.8 DECISION M ATRIX The decision-making criterions which were major factors in the design of this project are outlined below in

Table 1. FCG developed a weighted decision matrix to gauge the identified QFD items in order of importance;

criteria with higher importance will have a higher weight in order to better reflect our design requirements.

Weights were chosen based on the Quality Function Deployment method to determine the solution for the

actuator type.


14/49



Table 1: Decision Matrix

List of QFD Weights1(low) - 100(high)

AC motoractuator

DC motoractuator

Servo-DCmotor

actuator

Steppermotor

actuator

Solen

Reliability 12 9 6 8 9 9Cost of

implementation

16 3 9 1 10 0

Speed 13 9 7 7 5 9Force 13 9 8 8 6 9IntegrationFeasibility

10 1 9 6 5 9

Noise 16 1 10 10 3 8Life time 12 9 6 6 4 9Sustainability 8 5 6 6 5 5

Total 100 564 781 647 597 708Rank - 5 1 3 4 2

Based on the decision matrix, the DC motor is the best choice with the solenoid coming in second. The solenoidexcels at most of the metrics, but the main reason the solenoid would not be considered is the cost of it. Forthe equivalent specifications, solenoids were almost 10 times the cost of DC motor actuators, which puts themout of our budget.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEMS

3.1 SYSTEM OPERATION The main components of the actuation system are the seven actuators that drive the Trendsetter engine. The

auxiliary components include the electrical system to power the actuators and the control system to control the

operation of the actuators. The seven actuators in the actuator system are as follows:

● Two Leading Edge Clamp (LEC) actuators

● Two Trailing Edge Clamp (TEC) actuators

● Two Roller actuators

● One TEC magnetic clamp Lock/Unlock actuator

The LEC actuators are used to open the clamps that hold the bottom edge of the printing plate to the drum

during loading of the plate. The Roller actuator is used to hold the printing plate to the drum while it is rotating

into position to allow the TEC actuator to lower onto the drum and place the magnetic clamps on the top edge

of the printing plate. The TEC Lock/Unlock releases or engages the magnetic clamps during placement or

removal. The electrical system is dedicated to the actuators in order to operate the actuators at a different voltage (12V) than the standard system voltage (24V). The control system is controlled by signals sent by a

controller board connected to the main control hub. Table 2 shows the specifications of the new system with

the elimination of pneumatic actuation.


15/49



Table 2: Electromechanical System Specifications

Specification Quantity Deviation from Original SystemMaximum power consumption 120W -42.9%

Actuation time 7.46s +24.3% Throughput 93 plates per day -3.1%Noise


16/49



Figure 4: Pneumatic TEC Lock/Unlock Power vs Time

Figure 5: Pneumatic TEC Lock/Unlock Force and Distance vs Time


17/49



Figure 6: Electro-Mechanical TEC Lock/Unlock Power vs Time

Figure 7: Electromechanical TEC Lock/Unlock Force and Distance vs Time

3.2.2 TEC

The TEC actuators move the magnetic clamps away from or toward the drum. To move the TEC shelf, two

TEC actuators operate simultaneously on each side of the TEC shelf. These actuators require more force

than the others because of the weight of the TEC shelf. Speed is sacrificed in this implementation in order

to maintain a power that is consistent with the other models. The maximum force does not reflect the

necessity of the system, rather it is a characteristic of the most compatible actuator available on the market. Table 6 shows a comparison of the previous pneumatic actuator to the new electromechanical one.

Table 5: TEC Actuator Characteristics

Type Average Time (sec)

Average Speed(mm/s)

Average Force (N) AveragePower (W)

Pneumatic actuator 0.77 42.8 220.94 691.35Electrical actuator 2.81 8.21 6.1 8.5


18/49



Table 6: Discrepancy compared to Pneumatic actuator

Time (s) Average Speed (mm/s) Average Force (N) Average Power (W)-264% 81% 99% 96%

Figure 8: Pneumatic TEC Power vs Time


19/49



Figure 9: Pneumatic TEC Force and Distance Vs. Time

Figure 10: Electromechanical TEC Power vs Time


20/49



Figure 11: Electromechanical TEC Force and Distance vs Time

3.2.3 LEC

The LEC actuators open or close the leading edge clamp. To move the LEC clamp, two actuators operate

simultaneously on either side of the clamp. The operational parameters of this actuator are the same as that

of the TEC but with a shorter stroke. Table 7 shows a comparison of the previous pneumatic actuator to the

new electromechanical one.

Table 7: LEC Actuator Characteristics

Type Average Time (sec)

Average Speed(mm/s)

Average Force (N) Average Power (W)

Pneumatic actuator 0.77 42.8 220.94 691.35

Electrical actuator 2.81 8.21 6.1 8.5

Table 8: Discrepancy compared to Pneumatic actuator

Time (s) Average Speed (mm/s) Average Force (N) Average Power (W)-264% 81% 99% 96%


21/49



Figure 12: Pneumatic LEC Power vs Time

Figure 13: Pneumatic LEC Force and Distance vs Time


22/49



Figure 14: Electromechanical LEC Power vs Time

Figure 15: Elcetromechanical LEC Force and Distance vs Time

3.2.4 Roller

The roller actuators move the roller to press the printing plate against the drum. To move the roller, two

actuators operate on each side of the roller. Since a smaller force is required by the actuator, a higher speed

actuator can be used. Table 9 shows a comparison of the previous pneumatic actuator to the new

electromechanical one.


23/49



Table 9: Roller Actuator Characteristics

Type Average Time (sec) Average Speed (mm/s) Average Force (N) Average Power (W

Pneumaticactuator

0.45 71.9 172.79 58.85

Electrical

actuator

0.98 23.47 3.1 12.5

Figure 16: Pneumatic Roller Power vs Time


24/49



Figure 17: Pneumatic Roller Force and Distance vs Time

Figure 18: Electromechanical Roller Power vs Time


25/49



Figure 19: Electromechanical Roller Force and Distance vs Time

3.3 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

3.3.1 Power Requirements

Table 10 shows the maximum power required by each actuator.

Table 10: Actuator Force, Current and Power Specifications

Type Force (N) Current (A) Power (W) Quantity

LEC 156 5 60 2

TEC 667 5 60 2

TEC Mag 147 7.5 90 1Roller 222 5 60 2

3.3.2 Power Supply

Only two motors are active during any given period, therefore the maximum power required is 120 Watts,

this was the minimum requirement for a power supply.

3.3.3 Wiring

Given a maximum current of 10A drawn by the two LEC or TEC actuators, the minimum gauge wire is

20AWG, this is rated at 11A. 18AWG was selected to provide a sufficient safety factor. The control signals

were 24 V but very low power, therefore 22AWG was selected.

3.3.4 Actuator Controller

Relays handled the motion control of the actuators. They were rated for 30A 28VDC for the motor and the

control coil was rated at 24 VDC to be compatible with Kodak’s control signals. Two actuators will be

wired in parallel to the relay circuit then to the controller (see Figure 20).


26/49



Table 11: Relay Power Characteristics

Actuator name Number of actuators per Relay

Voltage (V) Current (A) Power rating (W)

LEC 2 12 10 120 TEC 2 12 10 120

TEC Mag 1 12 7.5 90

Roller 2 12 10 120

3.4 CONTROL SYSTEM

3.4.1 EMCE Board

The main board is the EMCE board which houses the system controller. All the control signals to manipulatethe actuators come from the EMCE board. The signal is 24V active low. The new system was designed to bea drop in replacement, therefore it did not require any extra controllers.

3.4.2 RelayBecause the linear actuators move in and out, the system must be able to control the DC motors in bothdirection. Relays, controlled by the main board, were added to the Trendsetter to control the power and the

directions of the actuators. For the LEC and TEC the relay had to be able to handle a minimum current of 10 Amperes, control power of 120 Watts and operate at a voltage of 12 Volts; this was the maximum powerspecification needed for the relays. As well, the relays had to utilize the pre-existing 24V control signals to

power the switching coil. The chosen relays were rated for 30A 28VDC for the motor and the control coil wasrated at 24 VDC to be compatible with Kodak’s control signals. The design incorporating the relays was

dependent upon the internal limit switches within each actuator. Each actuator has two limit switches, one tocut power at full extension and another to cut power at full retraction. Fly-back diodes were placed across theterminals of the diodes.

Figure 20: DC Linear Moto Bidirectional Control Using a DPDT Relay


27/49



3.4.3 External Limit Switches

The external limit switches were used as timing and position devices. They are optical sensors strategically

placed to provide feedback to the controller; this feedback loop allowed the system to determine whether ornot the actuator had reached the target distance from the drum so that it knew when to start the next phase of

operation. There were two limit switches per actuator that assessed the minimum and maximum distance to

the drum. The following sensors ( Table 12 ) were recycled from the current system to keep the costs as low aspossible, facilitate the integration of the new design and attain sustainability goals.

Table 12: Limit Switches

Actuator name Sensor part number Type of sensor Number of sensors LEC GP2A22 optical 2

TEC GP2A22 optical 2Roller GP2A22 optical 2

Lock/Unlock OPB810W-51 optical 2

Figure 21: Electrical Schematic For Actuation

Figure 22: Electrical Schematic For Tec Lock/Unlock


28/49



3.4.4 Software

The software controlled the timing associated with the motion of the actuators. The pneumatic actuators are

dual-action, which means they are ideal for applying pushing and pulling forces similar to our electromechanicalactuators. Therefore only forward and reverse commands were necessary for control; the actuator stops at the

end of its travel because of the internal limit switches, therefore only simple directional commands were

necessary. We recycled the code currently used by Kodak which was used to activate the manifold solenoidsneeded to open and close the valves for the pneumatic system. This kept the cost to a minimum since an extracontroller was not used.

3.5 VENDOR SELECTION The Fourward Consulting Group selected Progressive Automations in Richmond to provide the actuators forthis project over other competitors such as Firgelli Automations for the following reasons:

Potential for actuator customization,

Efficiency of customer support, and

Selection of Actuator styles

The following Actuators were selected from Progressive Automations to fulfill the requirements of thesystem:

Table 13: Actuator Part Numbers

Actuator Model Number TEC PA-14-1-150

TEC Lock/Unlock PA-15-1-33LEC PA-14-1-35Roller PA-14-1-50

To fulfill the power requirements for the actuators a 200 Watt power supply was selected. A Meanwell NES-200-12 12 Volt 200 Watt AC/DC power supply was chosen. This power supply was able to be connecteddirectly into the Trendsetters power bus with no modifications needed.

4. PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES

This section outlines some of the problems that the Fourward Consulting Group encountered within theduration of this project.

4.1 MECHANICAL SYSTEM

Several problems arose pertaining to the mechanical development of the system due to errors in mechanicaldesign, errors in manufacturer tolerance specifications and errors in part fabrication. Some challenges whichdeveloped mainly related to the customization of the actuators from Progressive Automations because thecustomizations that we required were not typical for them.


29/49



Progressive Automation

There was an unanticipated challenge with Progressive Automations associated with the necessarymodifications of the actuators for the LEC and the TEC. These modifications added two extra weeks to the

delivery time of the actuators which stalled our design procedures. These actuators also had wide toleranceranges which required some of our designs to be modified late in the assembly process.

McMaster Carr

After parts had been ordered from McMaster Carr, it was discovered that the springs required for the newRoller bracket design were not fabricated to the specification listed on the website. Upon discovering this, new

springs with the correct dimensions needed to be ordered. This required McMaster Carr to custom make thenew springs and this caused a delay in the time that we could start assembling the roller brackets.

Part Machining

Part machining proved to be more troublesome than any of us had experienced before. Since we needed parts

machined for a large company (Kodak), most companies within the Lower Mainland of Vancouver chargedmore than we originally anticipated; therefore, the lowest price vendor was chosen which quoted us for a pricethat would use 99% of our original budget. This required us to apply for more funding from Kodak in orderto cover the other aspects of our project such as the actuators and other components.

Improperly Machined Parts

Some mechanical parts which were fabricated by the contracted machinist were manufactured incorrectly from

the stated drawings. This caused some inconvenience for us because we had to re-machine these parts to fitour specifications, thus causing a delay in our assembly progress.

4.2 ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL SYSTEM

H-Bridge vs Relay

It was initially decided to use H-bridges to achieve bidirectional control of the electromechanical actuatoractuators. The use of H-bridges would give more flexibility in the future if it was deemed necessary to use PWM(Pulse Width Modulation) speed control. However, since the H-bridge instruction manual was poorly

developed, coupled with the fact that it was in the Chinese language, it was therefore difficult to integrate in

the control system; the limitations and nominal operating conditions of the device could not be determined.Due to this, the use of 12 V DPDT relays were a better choice compared to H-bridges to control the DC linear

motors as speed control was not needed. The relays also had simpler implementation as they did not require

any modification to the control signals voltage level, the H-bridge required a 5V signal.

External Optical Limit Switch Placement & Timing

The optical limit switches are used to detect the position of the actuators. Placement of the sensors is critical

to the optimum operation of the Trendsetter. The timing of the system is dependent upon the system knowing where the actuators are, if the limit switches are not placed correctly it would adversely affect throughput of


30/49



the machine. The current firmware uses the limit switches to move to the next stage of operation, if a limit

switch is not triggered then the system will wait 5 to 6 seconds before moving to the next stage rather thanmoving immediately. The limit switches are not a safety feature.

Because the dimensions of the actuators from Progressive Automations were significantly different from theirpublished specifications, the planned placement of the optical switches were not correct and therefore we had

to modify the system to accommodate the changes.

The timing of the actuators was slower than originally calculated. This affected some of the hold times necessaryfor loading the printing plates, therefore some minor changes to the firmware would be necessary to

accommodate the slower actuators. Unfortunately there was not enough time to modify the firmware to changethe timing.

5. COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED AND ACTUAL PROJECT TIMELINES

AND BUDGETS

5.1 TIMELINES

5.1.1 Estimated Timelines A project timeline was created according to the project deliverables and deadlines set by the capstone projectprocess. The project is divided into three major milestones over a two-semester period:

1. Start of project - January 6, 2014

2. Finalization of proof of concept theory - April 11, 2014

3. Final presentation - August 1, 2014

Once the Fourward Consulting Group conducted an analysis of the Trendsetter system, the Group split intotwo teams: the mechanical design team and the electrical design team. The mechanical design team developeda prototype by the end of May and finalized the design in the middle of June. The electrical design teamconfirmed their designs by the end of June. The system testing involved both teams and started after completion

of both the mechanical and electrical designs and lasted until the end of July. Figure 23 shows a Gantt chart ofthe project timeline with a more detailed timeline structure, and Table 14 shows the timeline breakdown.


31/49



Figure 23: Gantt chart


32/49



Table 14: Gantt Chart Breakdown

Task Sub-Task Duration Actual Start Actual FinishEstimatedStart

EstimatedFinish

Start(Difference)

Finish(Differen

TrainingBecome acquainted

with machines1 1/20/2014 1/21/2014 1/20/2014 1/21/2014 0 0

Cost Analysis - 56 2/3/2014 3/31/2014 2/3/2014 3/31/2014 0 0

System Analysis

Define systemtolerances

56 2/3/2014 2/21/2014 2/3/2014 2/21/2014 0 0

Develop system

models 18 2/10/2014 2/28/2014 2/10/2014 2/28/2014 0 0Select replacementcomponents

42 2/17/2014 3/31/2014 2/17/2014 3/31/2014 0 0

Proof of Concept - 3 4/8/2014 4/11/2014 4/8/2014 4/11/2014 0 0

OrderingComponents

H-Bridge 8 3/31/2014 4/8/2014 3/31/2014 4/8/2014 0 0Power Supply 9 5/7/2014 5/16/2014 5/9/2014 5/16/2014 2 0

Actuators 22 6/10/2014 7/2/2014 5/14/2014 5/28/2014 -27 -35MechanicalComponents

37 6/9/2014 7/16/2014 - -

Power Components &etc.

0 - - 5/16/2014 5/21/2014 - -

Electrical Design - 79 5/7/2014 7/25/2014 5/7/2014 6/6/2014 0 -49MechanicalDesign

- 6 5/31/2014 6/6/2014 5/16/2014 5/31/2014 -15 -6

TestingComponent Testing 45 5/16/2014 6/30/2014 6/1/2014 7/1/2014 16 1

System Testing 3 7/24/2014 7/27/2014 6/23/2014 7/1/2014 -31 -26Machining

Mounting Brackets 21 6/16/2014 7/7/2014 6/24/2014 7/8/2014 8 1Electrical Housing 0 - - 6/2/2014 6/23/2014 - -

Assembly - 4 7/24/2014 7/28/2014 6/24/2014 7/21/2014 -30 -7FirmwareModification

- 0 - - 7/1/2014 7/5/2014 - -

Preparation ofMaterials forPresentation

- 4 7/26/2014 7/30/2014 7/21/2014 8/3/2014 -5 4

Presentation ofFinal Project

- 1 8/1/2014 8/1/2014 8/4/2014 8/4/2014 3 3


33/49



5.2 BUDGETS

5.2.1 Estimated BudgetsBudget is one of the constraints set by Kodak for the project. The total cost of the implementation is required

to be $3,000.00 or less, and it is one of the major design constraints of the new actuation system. Table 15

describes a breakdown of the costs of the system implementation.

Table 15: Cost Breakdown for hardware parts

Component Quantity Unit Price ($) Sub-Total ($) Actuators

LEC Actuator 2 $173.99 $347.98 TEC Actuator 2 $173.99 $347.98Roller Actuator 2 $173.99 $347.98

TEC Lock/Unlock 1 $157.00 $157.00 Testing Actuator 1 $108.99 $108.99

Sum of Actuators ($) $1,309.93

Tax ($) $157.19 Total ($) $1,467.12

ElectricalPower Supply 1 $35.00 $35.00Dual H-Bridge 2 $24.00 $48.00Relay* 4 $0.00 $0.00

Cabling* ~12’ $0.00 $0.00Hardware* x $0.00 $0.00

Sum of Electrical Parts($) $83.00

Tax ($) $9.96 Total ($) $92.96

Machining $600.00

Sum (before Tax) $1,992.93 Tax $239.15

Total Sum ($) $2,232.08


34/49



5.2.2 Actual BudgetsTable 16: Actual Budget

Component Unit Price ($) Quantity Total Cost ($) Actuators $1,467.12Electrical $92.96Machining - Brackets

LEC, End $218.35 2 $436.70

Roller Actuator, Inside $89.35 2 $178.70

Roller Actuator, Outside $197.35 2 $394.70Roller, Bearing Block $78.35 2 $156.70

TEC Unlock/Lock, End $289.35 1 $289.35

TEC Unlock/Lock, Lever End $265.35 1 $265.35 TEC Unlock/Locker, Middle $213.25 1 $213.25 TEC Unlock/Lock, To Lever $223.85 1 $223.85 TEC Unlock/Lock, Lever $84.35 1 $84.35

Machining - Mount

TEC, Actuator Joint $48.35 4 $193.40Mounting Plate, Away $269.35 1 $269.35Mounting Plate, Home $269.35 1 $269.35

Total Machining ($) $2,975.05Estimated Total ($) $600.00

Overbudget ($) $2375.05

Extra Mechanical ComponentsBearings (Large) $12.60 8 $100.60Bearings (Small) $6.34 8 $50.72Springs $6.07 4 $24.28

Rod Ends $15.68 2 $31.36

Total ExtraMechanical

Components ($)$206.96

Total Sum ($) $4,649.13 Total Overbudget ($) $2,582.01 Total % of overbudgetcompared to estimated

costs108.29 %

Total % of overbudgetcompared to budgetlimits

54.97%


35/49



6. TEAM DESCRIPTION

6.1 THE MEMBERS OF FOURWARD CONSULTING GROUP David Afonso

A Co-founder and CTO of Fourward Consulting Group and team lead of the electronics group for the SF-1

Formula One race car group; as well he is active with the chassis and suspension group of the SF1 team. In thepast he worked for BlackBerry for 16 months in various engineering positions such as an Associate AudioEngineer and an Electrical Engineer. As well, he has worked for SFU helping to design the world’s next

generation power supplies: fuel cells. He worked with the eatART project group to design and build the

Titanoboa, a 50ft mechanical hydraulically-controlled snake. David is currently in his fourth year at SFU

studying Mechatronic Systems Engineering. In the future, David wants to design electric vehicles and help todevelop them into an alternative method of transportation for the future.

Lahz Dropsy Kikabou

The current CEO of the Fourward Consulting Group and a fourth year international student from the Republicof Congo at Simon Fraser University majoring in Mechatronic Systems Engineering. Prior to moving to Canada,Dropsy completed a diploma in Industrial Engineering Technology and worked as an intern in the oilfield

services for two and half years at Schlumberger Artificial Lift, with an extensive focus on electrical submersiblepump systems. He held the position of Faculty of Applied Science Representative, in the Simon Fraser StudentSociety board of directors between 2011 and 2012, and served as the first-ever Vice President of Professional

Relations of the Mechatronic Systems Engineering Student Society. In recognition to his active involvement

and outstanding contribution to the community, he was the recipient of the Eileen Purkiss Memorial Award(2011) and the Engineering Undergraduate Student Society Award (2012). Dropsy has been certified Lean SixSigma Green Belt by Canada Post Corporation since October 2013 and his future aspirations are

entrepreneurship and inspirational leadership in order to contribute to the economic development of his homecountry as well as to make the world a better place.

Shawn Park

A fourth year Mechatronic Systems Engineering student at SFU and currently CMO in the FourwardConsulting Group. He has experience in a variety of engineering positions in Ericsson and BlackBerry. He

worked verifying hardware and software aspects of telecommunication network equipment such as servers androuters. Also, he worked with BlackBerry to support the 3GPP network protocol certification and developedautomation testing tools. Shawn served as a squad leader in the Republic of Korea Army for 2 years and

developed his leadership and responsibility attributes during this time army. He wants to expand his experience

in the field of manufacturing systems control and has interest in optimizing and developing automation systemsfor the future.

Kjell Sadowski

A fifth year student of Mechatronic Systems Engineering (MSE) at Simon Fraser University, Co-founder andCFO of the Fourward Consulting Group. Alongside this, he is the former President of the Mechatronic Systems

Engineering Student Society (MSESS). He has worked in a variety of industries including security devices,


36/49



renewable energy and medical devices. Kjell has been recognized by the School of Mechatronic Systems

Engineering for his leadership efforts among his personal initiatives such as hosting SolidWorks workshops for

the students of MSE along with his involvement in the MSESS. Kjell graduated from Kwantlen PolytechnicUniversity in summer 2010 with a certificate in Computer Aided Design for Manufacturing and is currentlyfinishing his degree in Mechatronic Systems Engineering. In the future, Kjell looks to expand his work in thefield of industrial automation as a project manager.

7. MEETING STRUCTURES AND ACCOUNTABILITY

This section details the meeting structure and the terms of accountability that governed our formal interactions with one another over the course of the capstone project.

7.1 MEETING STRUCTURE

7.1.1 Fourward Consulting Group The Fourward Consulting Group met informally on a regular basis (on average 6 times a week) to discuss

project developments, problems and future strategies. This was due to the fact that all members had someclasses together. Formal meetings were conducted more often in the spring semester and occurred once a week(because they were mandated by the curriculum of MSE 401W).

7.1.2 Kodak

In the first semester of this project, the Fourward Consulting Group met with the engineering team at Kodakon a bi-weekly basis to discuss project updates and to resolve questions. This was replaced with update e-mailsin the second semester because the members of the Fourward Consulting Group and the engineering team at

Kodak became busier and it was harder to find consistent times to meet.

7.1.3 Group Accountability

In January 2014, all members of the Fourward Consulting Group signed an agreement to maintainaccountability to the project and the other members. The agreement is effective until the end of the project

with Kodak.

8. PROJECT FUTURE

Once the project with Kodak finishes, Kodak will use the results to make a decision as to whether they areinterested into further developing this design for production or to store the details of it as a feasibility study.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS

This section details the recommendations that the Fourward Consulting Group suggests in the case that thisproject were to be undertaken by another group of individuals or developed further by Kodak.


37/49



9.1 MECHANICAL SYSTEM The mechanical system was sufficiently designed for proof of concept purposes, however, further developmentis needed to develop a design which is satisfactory for production. The following points should be considered:

1. Roller Actuator Bracket - the current design of the roller actuator bracket is sufficient for a proof ofconcept, but the actual bracket itself is very expensive to machine and challenging to assemble. It would

be more practical to design a simpler solution which is less expensive and easier to assemble.

2. Roller Bracket Bearings - the bearings used to restrict the degrees of freedom of the roller bracket arecurrently running on the aluminum guide plate. For proof of concept purposes, this is fine. However,after several thousand cycles, this interface will wear away at the metal and create grooves which can

no longer stabilize the bracket.

3. TEC Lock/Unlock Lever Mechanism - Since this mechanism has moving parts it has a shorter lifetime

than if the mechanism were composed of a fixed linkage. It is also constructed of Aluminum whichmeans that there is a definite fatigue limit. A mechanism with a fixed linkage made of steel would bemuch more sustainable for this mechanism.

9.2 ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL SYSTEM The electrical and control system were designed as a proof of concept. As such the electrical and controlsystem both need refinement before they are ready for production.

The electrical system was developed around the chosen actuators (linear DC motors), made by Progressive Automation. Although most of Kodak’s Trendsetter components run at 24 V, the actuators selected run at 12 V because the 24 V option was not a standard choice from the supplier. Those linear DC motor would have

had to be custom-made and their cost would have been substantially higher than the 12 V ones. For futuredevelopment, it will be ideal to use 24 V linear actuators to easily integrate them into the electrical system ofthe Kodak Trendsetter.

A professionally made PCB for the fly-back diodes will be needed for production.

The control system works as expected but the timing needs a bit of adjustment to work with the sloweractuators.

10. CONCLUSION

The project given to Fourward Consulting Group was a success and the management at Kodak was very

satisfied with the results because the feasibility of the electrical actuators was demonstrated. The modifiedsystem worked as expected: the electrical system operated at a lower power consumption rate compared to the

pneumatic system, the speed was slower but was within the expected time range, and the noise level wassignificantly reduced. (See Table 17 below)

The analysis of the power required to drive the actuators showed that the pneumatic pistons were morepowerful than what was required and that smaller pistons could be used (See Table 17 below). This is important


38/49



for the integrations of electrical actuators because lower power actuators or solenoids are less expensive than

similar high power actuators or solenoids. According to the FCG decision matrix ( Table 17 ), if the cost of thesolenoid is reduced (due to reduced power requirement) it would become the first choice for an actuator.

Table 17: Actuator Comparison Results

Actuator Time (s) Average Speed (mm/s) Average Force (N) Average Power (W)

TEC Lock/Unlock -22% +55% -2,766% -25% TEC +73% -422% -11,157% -2,509% LEC +86% -465% -36,913% -2,022% Roller +54% -206% -5,490% -371%

The project finished over the set budget but this is not representative of what the production cost would be. The economy of scale would take effect and drive the costs down and this would be especially evident with theactuators. The new machined parts would be machined in place of the original parts and would not add to the

overall cost.

The design with the current actuators has significantly reduced the lifetime compared to the pneumatic

actuators. The design can be easily modified to accommodate other electrical actuators, including solenoids.Due to the fact that we used non-industrial quality actuators, it would be expected that the lifetime could beimproved; solenoids have lifetimes similar to pneumatic actuators.

In summation of the document summation, the project was a success with the management team at Kodak. We arrived at our solution over budget by 50% but maintained the functionality of the original device. Themajor flaw with the implementation of electrical actuators is the product lifetime. This can be circumvented bythe usage of solenoids, which are currently too expensive but may be feasible if small enough models can beused.


39/49



11. REFERENCES

FWD Technical and Maintenance Manual

FWD Proposal

FWD Revised Proposal

FWD Design Specification

FWD Functional Specification

FWD Patent

Progressive Automation PA-14 Data Sheet

Progressive Automation PA-15 Data Sheet


40/49



12. APPENDIX A - EXPLODED VIEWS

12.1 HOME SIDE ASSEMBLY


41/49



12.2 AWAY SIDE ASSEMBLY


42/49



12.3 TEC SHELF ASSEMBLY

12.4 PA-14 ACTUATOR


43/49



12.5 PA-15 ACTUATOR


44/49



13. APPENDIX B - P ART LISTS

13.1 HOME SIDE ASSEMBLY


45/49



ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QTY.1 FAB, ENGINE SIDE PLATE 12 CABLE TIE MOUNT BARBED BLACK 83 SCREW M5X25 BHCS SB 34 DOWEL 5X20 H6 FIT S 25 LAMP,INCAN,28V,T1-3/4,MIDGET GROOVE BASE 6

6 SCREW M3X18 SHCS SP 67 WASH, M3, FLT, S-PLATED 68 CAB,TIE,MID-MOUNT CLAMP, WHITE 69 MOUNTING PLATE (HOME) 110 ACTUATOR MOUNT 211 PA-14 ACTUATOR 112 PA-14 ACTUATOR 213 ROLLER BRACKET - OUTSIDE 114 ROLLER BLOCK 115 ROLLER BRACKET - INSIDE 116 M4x0.7 X 60MM THREADED ROD 217 16MM ABEC-1 DBL SHIELD ROLLER BEARING 418 M8x1.25 X 120 THREADED ROD 119 M8x1.25 X 60 S-STEEL ROD END 120 1/2" X 2.5" SQUARE WIRE COMP. SPRING 121 HX-SHCS 0.25-20x1.875x1.375-N 122 HX-SHCS 0.25-20x1.75x1.25-N 123 PREFERRED NARROW FW 0.25 424 HNUT 0.2500-20-D-N 225 B18.3.1M - 5x0.8 X 35 HEX SHCS 426 B18.22M - PLAIN WASHER, 5 MM, NARROW 1427 B18.22M - PLAIN WASHER, 6 MM, NARROW 228 B18.2.4.1M - HEX NUT, STYLE 1, M5 X 0.8 --D-N 429 B18.2.4.1M - HEX NUT, STYLE 1, M8 X 1.25 --D-N 130 B18.2.4.1M - HEX NUT, STYLE 1, M6 X 1 --D-N 231 B18.3.1M - 5 X 0.8 X 20 HEX SHCS -- 20NHX 232 B18.3.1M - 6 X 1.0 X 60 HEX SHCS -- 24NHX 233 ROD END,MALE,8MM BORE,25MM THREAD,M8 2


46/49



13.2 AWAY SIDE ASSEMBLY


47/49



ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY.1 FAB, ENGINE SIDE PLATE 12 CABLE TIE MOUNT BARBED BLACK 33 SCREW M5x25 BHCS SB 34 SCREW PAN HEAD 10-32 7,8" 15 LAMP, INCAN, 28V, T1-3/4, MIDGET GROOVE BASE 7

6 SCREW M3x18 SHCS SP 77 WASH, M3, FLT, S-PLATED 68 ASSY, MECH, 19 CAB,TIE,MID-MOUNT CLAMP, WHITE 610 DOWEL 5X20 H6 FIT S 211 MOUNTING PLATE (AWAY) 112 PA-14 ACTUATOR 213 PA-14 ACTUATOR 114 ROD END,MALE,8MM BORE,25MM THREAD,M8 215 ROLLER BRACKET - OUTSIDE 116 ROLLER BLOCK 117 ROLLER BRACKET - INSIDE 118 M8x1.25 X 60 S-STEEL ROD END 119 M8x1.25 X 120 THREADED ROD 120 M4x0.7 X 60MM THREADED ROD 221 16MM ABEC-1 DBL SHIELD ROLLER BEARING 422 ACTUATOR MOUNT 223 1/2" X 2.5" SQUARE WIRE COMP. SPRING 124 B18.22M - PLAIN WASHER, 5 MM, NARROW 1425 B18.22M - PLAIN WASHER, 6 MM, NARROW 426 B18.2.4.1M - HEX NUT, STYLE 1, M5 X 0.8 --D-N 427 B18.2.4.1M - HEX NUT, STYLE 1, M6 X 1 --D-N 328 B18.2.4.1M - HEX NUT, STYLE 1, M8 X 1.25 --D-N 129 B18.3.1M - 5x0.8 X 35 HEX SHCS 430 B18.3.1M - 6 X 1.0 X 60 HEX SHCS -- 24NHX 231 B18.3.1M - 5 X 0.8 X 20 HEX SHCS -- 20NHX 232 B18.3.1M - 6 X 1.0 X 50 HEX SHCS -- 24NHX 133 HX-SHCS 0.25-20X1.75X1.25-N 134 PREFERRED NARROW FW 0.25 235 HNUT 0.2500-20-D-N 1


48/49



13.3 TEC SHELF ASSEMBLY

Item Description Quantity1 PA-15-1-33 12 TEC UL END BRACKET 13 TEC UL MID BRACKET 1

4 TEC UL TO LEVER BRACKET 15 TEC UL LEVER 16 TEC UL LEVER MOUNT 17 5MM WASHER, NARROW 28 M5x0.8 HEX NUT 49 M4x0.7 HEX NUT 710 M8x1.25 HEX NUT 211 M5x0.8-20 SCHS SCREW 312 4MM WASHER, NARROW 1013 M4x0.7-20 SHCS SCREW 114 8MM WASHER, NARROW 415 M4x0.7-12 SCHS SCREW 4

16 M4x0.7-16 SCHS SCREW 417 M8x1.25-50 SCHS SCREW 2


49/49


13.4 PA-14 ACTUATOR The numbered items in the table below correspond to the numbers on the exploded view of the PA-14actuator model in A.4.

13.5 PA-15 ACTUATOR The numbered items in the table below correspond to the numbers on the exploded view of the PA-15actuator model in A.5.

Fourward Consulting Group Final Technical Report

Documents

Transcript of Fourward Consulting Group Final Technical Report