Baltimore Tool Chisel Test Stand

Baltimore Tool President: Harry McCarty

Baltimore Tool Representative: Dennis Shewbridge

Consultant: Peter Popper

Team 3: Matt Mitch

Marc Orgovan

Joe Stephens

Faculty Advisor: James Glancey

Nate Cloud

Mission Statement:

Baltimore Tool would like to test the effectiveness of newly created chisels.

The impact transferred by these chisels is unknown.

The test stand will examine the impact transferred and any reduction in noise.

---The team will provide Baltimore Tool with an automated test stand to evaluate their chisels.

Critical functions of the test stand The test stand needs to measure the impacts to

failure of the sample The device needs to measure the sound of the

impact The test stand must help in the promotion and sales

of the newly designed chisels The device must be marketable

Needs to be safe Machine needs to stop (possibly by an operator) when the test piece is fractured Needs to run on 110 volt power source The test stand must be able to last at least 20,000 impacts

Constraints for the stand

Current Testing:

Analysis of Hammer Swing Variables

Critical Components of the Device

Hammer Swinging System

Securing of the Chisel Securing of the Sample Anvil Base/Frame Sound Meter Impact Counter Safety Shield

(Not Pictured)

Projected Prototype:

Customer and their Wants

Harry McCarty Realistic Impact, Realistic Motion, Good Appearance, Low Cost, Variable Velocity

Peter Popper Realistic Impact, Realistic Motion, Simulate Follow Through/Wrist Break, Variable Impact Velocity, Pizzazz

Trade Show Participants

Realistic Impact, Realistic Motion, Simulate Follow Through/Wrist Break, Variable Velocity, Pizzazz

Tester Manufacturer

Low Cost, Ease of Assembly, Minimize Material Parts

Tester Vendor Low Cost, Good Appearance, Realistic Motion, Realistic Impact, Pizzazz

Tests:

Impact Force Test(to determine the required impact force)

Clamp Testing

Force Input Test (to find the required input force)

Selection of Critical Component This system is the most critical because it delivers

the realistic motion and impact. Two choices for hammer swinging devices remained

after the first phase. They were a pinned cylinder system and a cylinder

slider system. The pinned cylinder system was chosen.

Wants and Associated MetricsWith Target Values Realistic Impact (41%) Angle of Impact (zero degrees), Bounce

Back Height (0 in), Velocity of Impact (35fps)

Realistic Motion (24%) Length of Arm (2ft), Stroke Angle of Displacement (60 degrees), Frequency of Impacts(1 per second)

Low Cost (12%) Manufacturing Time (1 day), Total Cost (<3500$)

Good Appearance (11%) Number of Colors (3)

Variable Impact Velocity (5%) Range of Impact Velocity (20-50 fps), Number of Impact Velocities (5)

Simulate Follow-thru/Wrist break (4%) Bounce Back Height (0 in)

Ease of Assembly (2%) Number of Major Parts (<10), Assembly Time (<2hrs) , Number of Assembly Tools (<30 tools)

Pizzazz (1%) Number of Colors (3),

Minimize Material Requirement (1%) Height (5 ft), Width (<3 ft), Weight (<300 pounds), Number of Major Parts (<10)