Team Members: Mike Walsh, Nick Davis, Charley Kowalyshyn, Zeb Koch Guides: Kate Leipold, Dr. DeBartolo

Project Motivation:  To provide an expanded and enhanced sailing experience for sailors with varying disabilities Project Goal:  To design a mechanical solution to move a jib trimmer from side to side on a Sonar class sailboat, allowing them to function as a member of the crew.

 Concept heavily influenced by space constraint required due to Captain’s Chair ◦ 23” front to back available ◦ Cantilevered design fit best in space constraint  Rotational and translational movement required for jib trimmer

 Gary & Zak ◦ No leg mobility / core support ◦ Desires to be fully secured  Cindy ◦ Partial leg & core strength ◦ Desires freedom to exit seat when necessary ◦ Limited footprint available due to P13032’s chair  Cindy needs the option to sail with Gold Medal Chair or as a standalone device

 Two systems were to be built, requiring a comprehensive design to fit varying needs  Cantilevered seat – most viable option to fulfill needs at expense of weight, time and money

 Main components: ◦ Baseplate platform ◦ Side seat platforms ◦ Bench ◦ Lazy susan ◦ Seat ◦ Purchase system ◦ Handholds  Points of contact with the boat are: ◦ Baseplate, side seat platforms, handholds, purchase system

 Modeled on previous baseplate  Legs are bolted through metal plate underneath  Base clamps to bilge cover  Allows adjustability – forward and backward

 Protects boat from interference with jib transfer bench  Provides surface to distribute any forces from system  Parts of purchase system mounted to these platforms

 Pillow block and carriage provide linear motion on bar and track  Most expensive component in system  Heaviest component  Most complex to install

 Durable lazy susan ◦ Greased bearings ◦ Rigid against torque  Provides enough friction for braking, but allows easy rotation too

 Provide adjustability to any Sonar handhold ◦ Slides along 80/20 in X- Direction ◦ 80/20 design allows for rotation to perfect angle ◦ Slots in plates allow for extension into handhold cups ◦ Turnbuckle gives max adjustability and security

 Mounted behind occupant. Travels the width of device  Designed to give a 3-1 advantage

 Top of swivel stool used  Lap belt for support

 System moved forward on baseplate with front handhold used  Limits space for Cindy to move

 Bucket seat and 5- point harness provide support  Leg supports

Test # MetricMarginal Target Technical Target Test ResultPass/Fail? 1Device Weight100 lbs50 lbs125 lbsFail 2Transfer Time5 sec3 sec2.9 secPass 3Vertical Translation 3 in0 in Pass 4Product footprint1000 in in in 2 Fail (flaw) 5Mechanical Solution (IFDS Standards) IFDS Standards Pass, per Appendix B of IFDS Standards Pass 6Time to enter seat 4 min2 min 40 sec Pass 7Time to exit seat4 min2 min 40 sec Pass 8Force to start movement 150 N (33.7 lbs) 120 N (27 lbs) 26 lbs (2-1)Pass

Test # MetricMarginal Target Technical Target Test ResultPass/Fail? 9Weight capacity220 lbs265 lbs270 lbsPass 10Comfort3 on a 0-5 scale 5 on a 0- 5 scale ~4Pass 11Installation time10 min5 min5:49 w/o purchase system Approx 8 minutes with (speed demons) Pass Flaw in spec 12Transfer Distance 40 in50 in39 inFail Flaw in Spec 13Salt Chamber12 hrs24 hrsn/aResource unavailable 14Product width20 in18 in22.75Fail

Test # MetricMarginal Target Technical Target Test ResultPass/Fail? 15Seat accepts customer’s cushion or one is provided W 18x1820x2016” cushion provided Pass 16Weight at a 45° angle forward to test harness 220 lbs265 lbs180 lbs safely Inadequate test equipment 17Emergency release time to activate 3 seconds1 second< 1 secondPass 18Rotates in final position 10°20°> 20°Pass 19Clamping force to maintain position lbs192 lbs330 lbsPass

 System is overweight ◦ Had to be robust due to space limitation  System is expensive  System is unable to be manufactured on a large scale in its current design  Some specifications are not feasible  Adjusting for multiple configurations is time consuming

Zeb worked on the PRP to iterate this project again in the 2014 school year  Eliminate space constraint due to Captain’s Chair  Reduce weight  Reduce cost  More off-the-shelf parts  Less machining  Better corrosion resistance  Re-evaluate specs  Evaluate feedback on rotation – if it needs a brake mechanism