1. ISR - MOONBUGGY
Advisory Committee Review
BRHS/CS MONROE

2. MOONBUGGY ASSIGNMENTS - BRHS
NAMES?– Frame and Suspension
NAMES?–– Accessories/Seats
NAMES?–– Power Train
NAMES?–– Budget/Accessories
NAMES?–– Frame and Suspension

3. Race Day Results ? Place Design Competition Winners Most Improved Time
Time of ?
Design Competition Winners
For best solving the problem of navigating the lunar surface?
Most Improved Time
First run ?
Second Run ?

4. Sept Oct Nov Dec Aug Concept Design Concept Drawings1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Concept Design x
Concept Drawings
Final Concept Agreement
Component Research x 
Drawings  x
Stress Analysis
Component Acquisition
Component Fabrication
Testing
Clean up
Install Instrumentation
Instrumentation Testing
Buggy Testing

5. Jan Feb Mar Apr Concept Design Concept Drawings20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Concept Design
Concept Drawings
Final Concept Agreement
Component Research x   x
Drawings
Stress Analysis
Component Acquisition
Component Fabrication x
Testing
Clean up
Install Instrumentation
Instrumentation Testing
Buggy Testing

6. Budget

7. Funding TEAM Source Amount ($) SAIC 500 ORBITAL 2000 STEM
LOCKHEED MARTIN
1600
BILLY BOB’S BEARING EMPORIUM
BEARINGS
SALLY SUE’S CYCLE SHOP
GEARS
Total
6100
TEAM

8. Expense Report

9. Grand Total

10. Design Conditions
Complies with all rules set forth to compete in the NASA competition in Huntsville, Alabama on April 13-14, 2013.
Weight: ? lbs (? lbs actual)
Top Speed of ? mph
Able to handle ?” obstructions on various types of terrain
TEAM

11. Design Conditions Reliable for a minimum of ? miles
Braking from 20 mph to 0 mph in ? feet
TEAM

12. Safety Factor General 2 Critical Weight 1.5
High Dynamic loading (suspension) 4+ JM

13. Frame and Suspension

14. Frame (orthoscopic) ER

15. Frame (top view) ER

18. Operation Description
OPERATION WORK INSTRUCTION
Part Number
Part Description
101
Frame Beam, Front
Created by: ER
Checked by: AD
Date:
11/26/2006
Material:
1020 HR
SFM:
120
Operation #
Operation Description
Machine Used
Tooling/Fixture
Tolerance
Speeds, Feeds 1
Cut Material
Horizontal Bandsaw
+/- .030 2
Mill Slots
Bridgeport
V-blocks, /8" End Mill
+/-.003
1222 RPM

19. ER/JA

20. ER/JA

21. ER

22. Frame Hinge Assembly JA

23. Drive Train

24. Design Considerations
Both riders power one output
Chain tension constant during setup
Differential
Differential Placement/Drive shafts
Usable 7 speed gear range
Quality Components/adjustment
Wheels/tires
AD/JM

25. Original Chain Path
ER/JM

26. Original Chain Path
JM/ER

27. Modified Chain Path

30. Target Gear Ratios High gear ratio of 2.2:1 Low gear ratio of .8:1
Have a useable range of gears spaced in between to have a total of 7 speeds AD

31. Gearing Options Option 1 Option 2 56/22/34-11/39
Max Speed rpm
Max torque 324 ft 350 lbs input
Option 2
56/16/34-11/39
Max Speed rpm
Max torque 238 ft 350 lbs input

32. AD

33. Simulated Items Manufactured out of plastic
Vinyl - ABS/PVC Alloy (Density: 0.6 g/cm³)
Console, Battery box, TV box, Fender, some simulated items will use this material
SM/Y-CC

34. Problems Encountered

35. Failure to fit in 4x4x4 box
Best solution would be to be a total redesign.
Corrective Action: installed a hinge on the front pedal tower.

36. Rear A-arms Rear A-arms were bent after testing on obstacles.
Corrective Action: added gussets to high stress points on rear lower A-arms.

37. Driveshaft pin connection
Pins were sheared multiple times on rear inboard Universal Joints
Corrective Action: Welded it
Jammed an Allen wrench into it and broke it off

38. Chain breaking Chain was catching on sprocket mounting bolts.
Corrective Action: countersunk bolt heads

39. Back of rear seat
Rear seat back broke
Corrective Action: welded it.

40. Fenders Fender mounts failed when bent three times
Corrective Action: Redesign of fender mounts.
Problem was fixed for the race by simply removing the fenders.

41. Things we would have done different.
More emphasis on handlebars and rider ergonomics.
Try to stick closer to manufacturing timeline.
Limit weight