1. Methods FARO Technologies FARO is a leading competitor in dimensional metrology, developing many portable 3D measurement devices including the Laser Tracker Vantage Problem Definition Drop test performed on laser subsystem before installation Current test unreliable, inaccurate, prone to false positives Creates difficulties and unnecessary expense for FARO Project Scope Design a system to allow FARO to perform accurate, repeatable drop tests on the laser subsystem for quality assurance before installation. Identify cause of inaccuracies in current test Current test involved withdrawing shim from between two blocks Analyzed by one-way ANOVA with Tukey test, * p < 0.05 BackgroundConcept Generation FARO: Laser Subsystem Drop Test Device Brandon Zimmerman · Matthew Howard · Micah Uzuh · Connor O’Leary Advisor: Dr. Samuel Dyer Harris Design Requirements Requirements We would like to thank Mr. Steve Beard, Dr. Harris and FARO Technologies. Acknowledgements Path Forward Final Prototype Testing and Validation Want/NeedAssociated MetricsTarget Values Repeatable Shock Percent Error (%) ANOVA w/Tukey 15% p > 0.05 Specified ShockAcceleration (g)80g Range of ShockAcceleration Range (g)50-200g QuickTime to Run 3 Tests (s)≤ 60s DurableCycles to Failure (Cycles)10^6 Handles Multiple Configurations # of Testable Orientations # of Shock Pulse Waveforms 4343 Safe # of Sharp Edges Adheres to Regulations 4-6 Yes Ease of Use/Learning Time to Train Operator (s) Time to Setup (s) 1-2 hours 5-10 minutes Expandable# of Testable Products1 PortableWeight (lb)15 lbs Must Have Want to Have Modify Current DesignAlternate Design Problem Identification Results indicate the error arose between users and within users Key Issues of Current Setup Motion occurs in non-testing directions High variability per user and between users (±20g for 80g test) Users affect shock response externally (friction, pull speed, etc.) Rigid impact causes variable test-to-test response Two Approaches 1.Eliminate variability in current design 2.Develop alternate mechanism Current Design Motion only in testing direction No intra- or inter-user variability Operators do not affect shock response Eliminate rigid impact variability ✔✔✔✗✔✔✔✗ ✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔ (A) (B) (C) Operator Error Statistical analysis (one-way ANOVA with Tukey, * p<0.05) shows no significant difference between operators (A) – operator error eliminated Shock Pulse Optimized shock pulse (C) displays more ordered behavior than previously (B) Validation with Top Metrics Top wants/need achieved (Table); slightly off in percent error due to latch design The current prototype will be given to FARO Technologies with all necessary resources and any suggestions to bring the prototype to ideal performance. The test results will highlight the correction factors needed to properly calibrate the model as well as any other changes that need to be made in future iterations of the model. Further experimentation and iteration required to fully optimize design Design Final prototype shown (left) Laser subsystem represented by rectangular block of equal mass Operation Select desired height, adjust positioner plate via nuts on threaded rod Raise V blocks with subsystem attached, engage latch Place desired material pads on bottom blocks Turn latch to release blocks and shock payload Accelerometer can be attached to payload to measure shock value Repeat as necessary