Composite Filament Winding Machine P09226 System Design Review Christofer Brayton Shijo George Alex Sandy Tiago Santos Daniel Weimann

Background Why composite tubing? High Strength Light Weight High creep and fatigue performance Chemical and corrosion resistance

Filament Winding The process by which a continuous strand of impregnated fibers is wound onto a mandrel with specific fibers’ orientation which is controlled by computer. Once resin has cured, mandrel is removed

RIT First Generation Filament Winding Machine Capabilities Produce tubes of limited dimensions Simple to operate Maintain tension every time Limited range of orientation angles Able to be expanded upon Primary Goals Learning Experience – New technology to RIT and students involved – Create simple but bulletproof machine

Tension Mechanical Spring – Up to 5 lb f – Adjustable – $30.36 (York Industries) Approx 1 week lead time Pros – Cheap – Adjustable – Small Cons – Not dynamically controllable Electrical Servo – Roller mounted on servo controlled arm Pros – Dynamically controllable – Continuous feedback loop Cons – Control Maintain tension in fiber for good wrap and better final product, between 1 and 6 lb f

Tension Tortuous Path Friction from rollers throughout system Pros – Cheap – No extra mounting considerations Cons – No control – No adjustment Measurement Strain Gage – Pulley mounted to beam w/ strain gage (Tension Meter Inc.) Control Feedback loop Maintain tension in fiber for good wrap and better final product, between 1 and 6 lb f Known Issues “Good” Tension? Electronic Control Ability Continuous Feedback loop Position up/down stream Contamination by resin

Impregnation System Specifications Residence Time Reduce Waste Bend fibers for higher saturation Fiber Drum Bath Drum “picks up” resin from bath and rolls onto fiber Resin level is controlled by doctor blade Better for carbon fibers Pros – Fiber drives drum (no motor drive) Cons – Expensive – Proprietary Information (Drum Material, Doctor Blade dimensions & material) This system impregnates/saturates the fiber with resin material that acts as both an adhesive and curing agent for final product

Impregnation System Fiber Dip Bath Free spinning rollers bend fibers throughout bath Better for glass fibers Pros –High Residence Time –Bending Fibers –Simple Design Cons –Expensive –Many Parts This system impregnates/saturates the fiber with resin material that acts as both an adhesive and curing agent for final product

Impregnation System Tubing Flexible plastic tube Straight to insert fiber then bent around rollers for better impreg Pros –Residence time dependent on length –Bending fibers –Simple design –Cheap, simple Cons – Resin insertion – Resin removal/cleaning This system impregnates/saturates the fiber with resin material that acts as both an adhesive and curing agent for final product Issues Too much vs. too little resin?

Feedeye Eye Bolt Metal Threaded into translating “block” mounted on lead screw Pros – Cheap – Easy to find – Replaceable Cons – Possible fraying at high angles, >20 degrees – Difficulty with many fibers Connection to Lead Screw Teeth mate with threads Bath, feedeye move as single unit Rollers The feedeye runs transverse on lead screw creating relative motion between it and mandrel resulting in a wrap angle 2 Vertically Oriented with minimal gap Pros –Better with higher angles Cons –Difficulty with many fibers

Mandrel Dimensions Length = in. – Within Lathe Dimensions – “Viable” length to machine ends Diameter = 0.5 – 1 in – Testing Capability Material Stainless Steel 316 – Corrosive Resistance – Good Machinability – Costly, Heavy Polypropylene Polyethylene – Resistant to Epoxy Resin – Lightweight, Cheap Aquacore – Dissolves with water – Costly – Machinable, Lightweight Torque Required T ≈ 142 in-lb ≈ 12 ft-lb (see Appendix) The mandrel is the structure through which the drawn fibers take shape and on which the composite tube cures