Kinematic Coupling Design

Design Considerations

The second hardware challenge was to design and build a kinematic coupling (KC). A KC
provides consistent, repeatable location between two parts by restricting contact to 6 locations
such that all 6 degrees of relative motion are constrained. This is typically achieved by using
three hemispheres (or balls) and three grooves. In this work, I will be considering a Maxwell KC

Figure 1 Schematic of the kinematic coupling

Below is a FRDPARRC chart to outline the design requirements.

Figure 2 FRDPARRC Chart for the KC Design

Figure 3 shows three potential designs for the initial KC. All designs assume a constant ball
diameter (0.5 in) and assume all grooves have a 45° angle.

Lettiere 1
Figure 4 Three potential designs for the KC. (A) Cut acrylic (B) dowel pins (C) Machined Aluminum

Figure 3 KC spreadsheet to calculate stresses and stiffness. This set-up is for an Aluminum groove and steel ball
under -4 N preload and 290 N load.

(1) Acrylic base with a 45° groove cut aligned with a groove cut in the base and a stainless
steel ball attached via screws or epoxy(see Figure 3A)
(2) Acrylic base with plastic dowel pins for grooves and a stainless steel ball attached via
screws or epoxy(see Figure 3B)
(3) Aluminum base, machined grooves and a stainless steel balls attached either by press
fit, screws, or epoxy (see Figure 3C).
Then, these designs were compared using the KC spreadsheet. The preload was set to be the
pre-load of 4 N. An example of the spreadsheet is shown in Figure 4. While designs (1) and (2)
would be potentially cheaper to build, there could be a potential issue with strength of the KC
and alignment of the KC grooves. Design (3) has an order of magnitude higher stiffness (66.8
N/µm vs 7.9 N/µm) and would be simple to manufacture – simply milling the grooves and
drilling holes for the balls. Design (3) will be the design used in this work. The lowest cost
design would be to use press fits instead of epoxy or glue, which would have to be purchased.

Lettiere 2
Design and Build
The KC was machined out of 3’’ aluminum stock found in the LMP shop. Figure 5 shows the
drawings for the KC and a picture of the as-machined KC - all dimensions are in inches. The balls
were press fit into the top aluminum plate.
Figure 5(bottom) drawings for the KC – all dimensions
are in inches. (top)image of the as machined KC
Figure 7: (A) x, (B) y (C) z repeatability measurements
using a dial indicator under a 4 N preload. (D)
deflection of KC under a load of 290 N measured by a
dial indicator
Lettiere
Figure 6 Summary of repeatability and stiffness
calculations
Testing
The x,y,z repeatability of the KC under a preload of 4
N was measured using a dial indicator as shown in
Figure 6. The results for the repeatability are shown
in Figure 7. The angular repeatability was measured
laser beam to the KC and measuring the
displacement of the laser pointer after replacing the
top of the KC without a load (4N preload) and with a
load (131.45 N). The spread is shown in Figure 7. For
the unloaded KC, the spread in the z and y direction
was 4.76 mm and 6.35 mm, respectively, for a radius
of 6.62 mm. For the loaded KC, the spread in the z
and y direction was 6.35 mm and 1.58 mm,
respectively, for a radius of 5.02 mm. The angular
repeatability was calculated using the following
radius
equation θ = atan (projection distance). The angular
repeatability is 809.33 and 612.84 µradians for the
3
loaded and unloaded KC. As expected, the repeatability increases with increasing load. The
stiffness was measured by using a dial indicator to measure the displacement of the KC under a
known load (290 N), see Figure 6D. The stiffness was calculated to be 57.0 N/µm. The results
are summarized in Figure 7.

Figure 8 Laser pointer test. (left) laser pointer pointed at wall across the room (middle) example of the set-up
under load (right) unloaded and loaded laser spot size measurements.

Comparison and Improvements

The measured stiffness ( 57.0 N/µm ) is less than the calculated stiffness (66.8 N/µm). This may
be due to the press fitting of the steel balls. The balls may have deformed due to the stress
during the press fit which changes the point contact of the ball/groove interface. In the next
iteration, I will use a hemisphere (or ball) and screw the hemisphere (or ball) into place or glue
the balls into a predrilled hole.
The low angular repeatability may be due to the laser pointer moving when repeatedly testing
the KC. Attaching the laser pointer with something more secure than tape might improve the
measured angular repeatability.

Lettiere 4