Professional Documents
Culture Documents
e
> Sy / n
s
[Von Mises stress > yield
stress / factor of safety] as
satisfied by DET
material torque applied to shaft mass minimal deformation
loads applied to shaft deflection
Table 2: Design Parameters and Variables for Shaft Design
3
Results
The plot to the right is the
flywheel optimization diagram. It
provides all the information needed to
appropriately select the flywheel
geometry. The solid curve plots
thickness as a function of diameter. The
vertical lines with arrows indicate
geometrical constraints imposed by the
design configuration. The dotted lines are
constant-mass curves. The design instantiation with the most merit is the rightmost allowable
point on the solid curve (denoted by the x). This point corresponds to the lightest acceptable
flywheel that will fit in Pedal Puress design. The flywheel dimensions and corresponding mass
are:
8 10 12 14 16 18 20
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
flywheel diameter [cm]
f
l
y
w
h
e
e
l
t
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s
[
c
m
]
5 kg
4 kg
3 kg
2 kg
1 kg
Figure 3: Flywheel optimization tool
Diameter = 0.15 m
Thickness = 0.0127 m
Mass = 1.76 kg
The three-dimensional free body diagram of the shaft is shown below. Applying force
and moment equilibrium to the shaft yields the following forces (see Appendix for specific
calculations):
Fay 101.0 N
Faz 114.9 N
Fby 101.0 N
Fbz 104.5 N
Table 3: Bearing support
forces acting on the shaft
4
Figure 4: 3-D shaft geometry and forces
The shear and bending moment diagrams can then be generated for both the XZ and XY planes
(See Appendix). From the moment diagrams the maximum moment was found to be 21.80 Nm.
Using the shaft torque (T) of 1.0 Nm, the DET yields a minimum shaft diameter of:
d
shaft
> 0.108 m
Discussion
As illustrated by the results sections, all goals of this study were met; the flywheel was
dimensioned and the minimum shaft diameter was specified. Appropriate simplifications were
made to the shaft-flywheel system, as suggested in Fundamentals of Machine Elements. These
assumptions facilitated the development of the analytical tools used to determine the geometry of
both components. The tool for the flywheel, shown in Figure 3, worked exactly as planned. As
expected this plot showed an inverse relationship between diameter and thickness. The ideal
flywheel would be a ring with all its mass at its outer edge. As Pedal Pures design and
manufacturing capabilities do not allow this shape, a large diameter disk with a thin profile is the
next best solution. Increasing the allowable diameter would further reduce the flywheels mass,
but at 13 mm thick, it is already sufficiently thin.
Simplifications applied to the shaft allowed the DET to be used to identify shafts
minimum required diameter. The only issue in using this technique was selecting the factor of
safety. While Pedal Pure does not want this shaft to fail, they also wish to avoid any over-
design. As failure of this shaft does not pose any immediate health or safety risks, a safety factor
of 2.0 was chosen. A shaft with diameter greater than 0.108 m will provide Pedal Pure with a
component that will not fail or deform excessively under the given loading conditions.
5
While no experiments were performed to validate the analytical tools used and developed
in this report, the values determined were compared with existing designs in the marketplace.
Windstream power uses a 3.6 kg flywheel while a product called the PedalPusher employs a 1.5
kg flywheel; both values are in agreement with the recommended mass of 1.76 kg. (Windstream
uses a larger mass because their product is designed to output a very smoother electrical signal.)
Shaft diameters for similar products could not be found, but Pedal Pure will be constructing a
prototype to validate both recommendations made in this study. Moreover, the tools developed
in this report were verified by comparison with known solutions. These solutions were
generated by hand.
These results have an immediate and positive impact on Pedal Pures design. This
analysis not only verifies the feasibility of their design, but also provides the group with concrete
values upon which to make further design and purchasing decisions. Both the minimum required
shaft diameter and optimal flywheel have been identified for their human-powered water still.
Sources
1. Hamrock, Schmid and Jacobson. Fundamentals of Machine Elements. Boston:
McGraw-Hill. 1999.
2. http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2005/steel.shtml
3. www.windstreampower.com
4. http://www.los-gatos.ca.us/davidbu/pedgen.html
6
Appendix
Sizing Flywheel
Governing Equations:
power
Torque =
=
max
min
) (
d T T KE
avg l
h m
avg f
m
t d I
C
KE
I
4
2
32
=
Specific Design Values:
Coefficient of Fluctuation (Cf) = 0.002 (1)
Power = 140 W
= 1750 RPM
7
MatLab Code:
clear all;
% Size the Flywheel
Power = 140; % motor power (W)
RPM = 1750; % generater RPM
Wavg = RPM * (2*pi)/60; % generater ang vel (rad/s)
Tmotor = Power / Wavg; % torque applied to motor shaft (N*m)
delta = (pi/6); % torque diagram interval (rad)
Cf = 0.002; % coefficient of fluctuation
rho = 7850; % density of flywheel (kg/m^3)
Tavg = (delta/pi)*(Tmotor); % avg torque (N*m)
KE = (Tmotor - Tavg)*delta;
dia = 0.08 : .005 : 0.2;
x = length(dia);
for i = 1:x
th(i) = (32*KE) / (Cf*pi*rho*(Wavg^2)*(dia(i)^4)); % calc thickness as a fcn of diameter
end
plot(dia*100,th*100,'r')
hold on;
%grid on;
xlabel('flywheel diameter [cm]');
ylabel('flywheel thickness [cm]');
for M = 1:5 % add constant mass lines to previous plot
for i = 1:x
thm(i,M) = (4*M) / (rho*pi*dia(i)^2);
end
plot(dia*100,thm(:,M)*100,'k:')
end
df = input('Enter flywheel diameter in cm: ')/100; % chosen flywheel diameter (m)
thf = (32*KE) / (Cf*pi*rho*(Wavg^2)*(df^4)); % corresponding flywheel thickness (m)
Mf = 0.25*pi*thf*rho*df^2; % corresponding flywheel mass (kg)
8
Shaft Diameter
Governing Equations:
3
1
2 2
4
3 32
0
0
2
* * *
+ =
=
=
= =
T M
S
n
d
F
M
d
N r F Torque
y
s
Specific Design Values:
coefficient of static friction () = 0.7 (2)
torque = 1.0 N*m
factor of safety (n
s
) = 2.0
9
10
11
Matlab Code:
mu = 0.7; % tire/shaft coeff of static friction
Tb = 1.0; % max torque transfer between shaft and tire (N*m)
dsa = 0.01; % assumed shaft diameter (m)
N = (2*Tb)/(mu*dsa); % normal force between tire and shaft (N)
theta = (pi/4); % angle between tire and shaft
% shaft geometrical constants (m)
a = 0.06;
b = 0.15;
c = 0.30;
g = 9.81; % acceleration due to gravity (m/s^2)
Fbz = (g*Mf*a + N*sin(theta)*b) / c % from summing moments about y axis
Faz = g*Mf + N*sin(theta) - Fbz % from force equilibrium in z direction
Fby = (N*cos(theta)*b) / c % from summing moments about z axis
Fay = N*cos(theta) - Fby % from force equilibrium in y direction
% The following formulae apply becuase the max moment and torque always
% occur at x = L/2
Mxz = Fbz*(c-b);
Mxy = Fby*(c-b);
Mmax = (Mxz^2 + Mxy^2)^0.5;
Tmax = Tb;
ns = 2; % shaft factor of safty
Sy = 350*10^6; % yield strength of shaft material (Pa)
ds = [[(32*ns)/(pi*Sy)] * (Mmax^2 + 0.75*Tmax^2)^0.5 ]^(1/3); % calculated shaft diameter (m)
12