Laser Extinction Measurement System (LEMS) Group Members: Jack Copenhaver Kara Griffin Billy Holland Tiruneh Haile Faculty Advisor: Dr. Jie Chen Sponsor: Dr. Siva S. Krishnan Capstone Design Project, SP 2006

Overview Introduction Planning the Project Customer Requirements & Project Objectives Benchmarks Concept Development & Design Final Design Design Validation Overall Product Design Evaluation Recommendations Acknowledgements Summary

Customers Dr. Siva S. Krishnan, Professor Manish K. Saini, Research Assistant

Laser Extinction Device Laser Horizontal Knob Vertical Knob Burner

Planning the Project – Gantt Chart

Customer Requirements & Project Objectives Align the Laser to the Burner Improve Safety Improve Accuracy More Ergonomic Cost Effective Decrease Experiment Time

Problems with Benchmark

Concept Development & Design 1. Design Concepts  Motorized Vertical & Horizontal Travel  Motorized Vertical Travel with Manual Horizontal Travel  Manual Extension on Vertical Travel 2. Alignment Procedure

Concept #1 

Concept #2 

Concept #3

Alignment Procedure Alignment Target  Normalize the laser to the burner surface  Put the goggles on to view laser beam  Use the LabView program to move the burner until the laser is aligned on the target  Move the burner in the positive vertical direction 76.2 millimeters.  Open COSMOS program provided by Velmex and set the zero position Zero Position

Final Design Concept Cost MANUAL TO MOTORIZED CONVERSION KIT MMC $95.00 MANUAL TO MOTORIZED CONVERSION KIT MMC $95.00 VEXTA PK266-03A STEP MOTOR $ VEXTA PK266-03B STEP MOTOR $ D6CL DAMPER FOR TYPE 23 STEPPER MOTORS $88.00 VXM-2 PROGRAMMABLE STEP MTR CNTRL,2 AXIS $ Total Cost$1,383

Design Validation BenefitsPer Experiment Fuel Savings $25 - $50 Oxygen O 2 Savings $50 - $75 Improved Time 45 min – 1hr Improved AccuracyFrom ± 0.1 mm *********************************************************** More Ergonomic Enhanced Safety Cost Effective

Overall Product Design Evaluation

Summary – Concept #1 Overall Benefits Best Overall Concept Improved Safety Improved Accuracy More Ergonomic Decreased Experiment Time Added Benefits Fuel Savings Cost Effective - Return on Investment ($$$)

Recommendations Motorize Laser Closed Loop Feedback System

Acknowledgments Dr. Jie Chen, Faculty Advisor Dr. Siva S. Krishnan, Sponsor and IUPUI Professor Mr. Rudy Earlson, Manufacturing Consultant Mr. Eric Docteur, Velmex Inc. Mr. Manish K. Saini, Graduate Research Assistant Mr. Mitch Evans, Velmex Inc.

Questions?

Design Validation Target Values Old LEMS Design New LEMS Design Laser Alignment Time (min.) Burner Alignment Time (min.) Laser Alignment Process Easability (steps) 363 Burner Alignment Process Easability (steps) 362 Time to Move Burner (min.) Number Of Steps to Move Burner (steps) 242 Knob Position (Distance from Operator) (m) 01.10

Failure Modes OperationalCharacteristics Mode of Failure No.ObjectPotential Failure Potential Causes of Failure Potential Effects of Failure 1X-axis MotorBurn OutOverworked, old Research Delay, Delays Use of Bislides 2Y-axis MotorBurn OutOverworked, old Research Delay, Delays Use of Bislides 3ControllerCircuit FailureOverworked, old Complete Shut Down of System 4 Lead Screw Vertical Worn Out Vertical Limit Switch Failure Complete Shut Down of Vertical Slide. Horizontal would Still be Operational 5 Lead Screw horizontal Worn Out Horizontal Limit Switch Failure Complete Shut Down of Horizontal Slide. Vertical Slide would Still be Operational 6 Lab View Program Burn Out Motors and Damage to Limit Switches Improper Input Data for Motor Specifications Complete Shut Down of System