1. HYDRAULIC NANOMANIPULATOR P13375

2. Table of Contents & Agenda TaskTime Project Introduction10 min Mechanical System40 min Software40 min Project Plan and Bill of Materials20 min DiscussionRemaining Time

3. Introductions Customer Dr. Schrlau Team David Anderson Ryan Dunn Bryon Elston Elizabeth Fischer Robert Menna Guides Bill Nowak Charlie Tabb

4. Team Roles

5. Project Objectives & Goals Improve 13371 design Reduce Backlash Increase Speed Add Remote Access Increase access to nanotechnology

6. Existing System (P13371)

8. Drive Subsystem

9. Drive Subsystem Continued

10. Existing System (P13371) Manipulator Subsystem

14. House of Quality Pareto Analysis Top Specifications Ease of Use Calibration Video Latency Manipulator Backlash Control Latency Limit of Travel in Each Direction Resolution Input Device Control (Remote and Local) Speed of Travel If Top 9 of 17 Specs Met 75% of customer needs satisfied

15. System Architecture

16. MECHANICAL SYSTEM

18. Options Considered Double acting cylinders $200 a piece from Parker Precision pumps Quoted at $2000 for one pump alone from Burt and other suppliers Smaller low friction cylinders Seems promising Micro-stepping Reduces speed proportionally to increase in resolution Stiffer or softer springs Tested and produced greater backlash

19. Speed Improvement Pugh Matrix

20. Manipulator Cylinder Pugh Matrix Piston SelectionConcepts ABCDE Parker Hydraulic Control Line (1110201) Control Line Midget SMC (MQP10-10S) Current System Selection Criteria Stroke Length +SSS Smaller Bore -S-+ Cost -SS- Contains Return Spring SS-- Reduces Friction +SS+ Provides Precise Control +-S+ Appropriate Pressure Range -+++ Sum + 's 3114 Sum 0's 1541 Sum -'s 3122 Totals 002 Most Important

21. System Proposition Components MQP10-10S Cylinders at Manipulator New carriage System Accomplishments Double speed of P13371 (0.04 mm/s to 0.105 mm/s) Maintain resolution of 104.67 nm Improve robustness of system with new low friction precision pistons This will improve backlash, along with better filling methods

22. SMC MQP10-10S Pistons

23. PUMP SUBSYSTEM

24. Stepper Motors

25. Gear ratio: 13.76 planetary Gear Max holding torque: 7.55 N-m Max sustainable torque: 2.94 N-m Step angle: 0.067 degrees Max Speed: 22.88 RPM # Leads: 4 – Bipolar stepper Electrical: 12V supply 1.6A/phase

26. Stepper Motors

27. Assembly

28. Resolution Feasibility Analysis Lead=0.0125 in/rev = 0.3175mm/rev Gear Ratio = 13.76 Step Angle Before Gears = 1.8° With hydraulic advantage of 1.10 104.67 nm/step This is essentially equivalent to the spec of 100 nm/step Spec Met Previous team was at 54 nm

29. Range of Motion Feasibility Analysis Change to Manipulator Cylinders only New Cylinders have a stroke of 10mm Spec. is 0.25cm<x<1cm for each axis 10mm=1cm If the equilibrium position is set to half stroke the range of motion in each direction is 0.5 cm Spec Met (FS=2) Previous team was at 1.1 cm

30. Speed Feasibility Analysis Motor Speed= 22rpm Lead of Lead Screw= 0.3175 mm/rev Speed Spec= > 0.5 mm/s 0.1056 mm/s < 0.5 mm/s Spec Not Met Previous team had a measured speed of 0.04 mm/s listed in technical report Proposed solution provides twice the speed of previous

31. Spring Selection max spring distance 16.4 mmd116.4inches0.645 minimum 6.4 mmd26.4inches0.252 ID (mm)0.093 total compression (mm)100.393 Spring 1 9657K296$6.17 length in1 compression in0.748 k value3.15 Force lb2.356210.45N Spring 2 9657K81$5.15 length in0.937 compression in0.685 k value0.29 Force lb0.198650.885N Spring 3 9657K46$6.88 length in1 compression in0.748 k value0.76 Force lb0.568482.53N

32. Friction Anlaysis

33. Pressure Feasibility The stepper motor has been tested up to 70N New Manipulator Weight447.20grams Down Force (z-axis only)4.38N Friction Coefficient0.55 Slider Friction1.20N Spring Min0.56N Spring Max2.53N Preload Force1N Max Frictional Resistance9.11N 16.82psi Torque Feasibility Hydraulic Force on Driving Cylinder9.60N Driving Cylinder Preload5N Required Force from Stepper Motor14.60N Stepper Motor tested up to70N Torque Safety Factor4.79

34. MANIPULATOR SUBSYSTEM

35. Manipulator Assembly

36. Manipulator Continued

39. Feasibility Analysis Manipulator was modeled in Solidworks Weight =447.2 g (Spec Met of 550 g) Previous team was at 689 g Size 11.86 x 11.93 x 10.01 cm (Spec Not Met of 8 X 8 X 8 cm) Previous Team was at 13 x 13 x 13

40. Full Mechanical System Assembly

42. ELECTRONIC SYSTEM

43. CONTROLS SUBSYSTEM

44. Control System Overview

45. Software Concept Selection Decision made to implement software via D3 – MATLAB with Java networking

46. MATLAB Local Model Accepts command and control signals from client (i.e. to direct manipulator) Interfaces with camera hardware for live video imaging access Image processing for automated calibration (needle tip located, centered) Manipulator resolution mapped to speed setting, configurable via software P13371 provides working Java serial communication to microcontroller  Implementing USB interface

47. Remote Access Support MATLAB local model wrapping underlying Java networking support  Command and Control Channel – Accepts input from remote client to direct local model  Manipulator movement via client input devices  Speed control Command protocol implemented via Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)  Connection based, ordered, error-checked command transmission  Media Streaming Channel – Captures image/video media from manipulator microscope camera Media is streamed to connected client in real time Client-configurable image quality (resolution, color depth, compression) Media data transmitted via User Datagram Protocol (UDP) Connectionless, low overhead, reduced latency bulk data transmission

48. Remote Access Support Proof of concept MATLAB / Java software completed Feasibility and reliability of software concept selection proven Portable with simple, single executable and MATLAB runtime library Research and development paves the way to refine final solution Host (Local Model) Client (Remote Model)

49. Remote Access Support Latency Considerations The one-way trip time between host and client. Video/image media streaming from host to client (one way) Implemented via UDP for rapid, low overhead, bulk data transmission Sacrifices ordering, error checking, protocol-level guarantee for real-time streaming It is okay to lose image frames rather than delaying entire application/experience (stream may be smoothed) Command sending from client to host (round trip) Implemented via TCP with request/reply loop: 1. Client sends command “Move to coordinate” 2. Host receives command, provides error-checking 3. Host sends acknowledgement to client informing command has been accepted 4. Client receives acknowledgement Optimal command latency: <= 200 ms

50. Micro Controller to Control Board Connection

51. 3-Axis Control Board

52. Toshiba TB6560AHQ 1 – 1/16 micro stepping setting 12 – 36 VDC power Adjustable 0.5 – 2.5 A driver current / phase PWM actuation output 3-axis of motion Limit switch functionality Parallel port connection Overload, over-current, over-temp protection

53. COMPLETE SYSTEM

54. Full System Test Plan Cost Keep track of all expenses Weight Weight of Manipulator (predicted 416 grams) Static Coefficient of Friction Force required to move each axis measured with a spring scale Size Measure the assembled manipulator Range of Motion Measure the travel distance of the piston

55. Test Plans Cont. Static Coefficient of Friction Force required to move each axis measured with a spring scale Range of Motion Measure the travel distance of the piston Sampling Rate Test client and host at RIT and other system locations Ease of Assembly Give new users a system manual and survey their experience Ease of use Give new users a system manual and survey their experience

56. Test Plans Cont. Resolution Measure distance traveled after 20 revolutions of the stepper motor and compare to theoretical Speed of travel Measure the time taken to move the manipulator to its full range of motion Time system run at max speed for 10 revs and see distance traveled System backlash Number of revolutions needed to change direction Safe in full range of motion Make sure nothing is damaged while testing limits of travel

57. # Specification (metric) Unit of Measure Target Value Theoretical Value S1 Size of manipulator (h x w x l)cm8 x 8 x 8 12 X 12 X 10 S2 Weight of manipulatorGrams550447.2 S3 Development cost$< 1000718.97 S4 Cost to manufacture after development $ 1000 - 1500 1,728 S5 Limits of travel in each directioncm>0.250.5 S6 Speed of travelmm/sec0.5.106 S7 Resolutionnm< 100104.7 S8 Sampling RateHz<600 S9Level of Difficulty of UseBinaryEasy

58. # Specification (metric) Unit of Measure Target Value Theoretical Value S10 Supported Control SoftwareBinaryYes S11 Visual Feed Sampling RateHz<60Yes S12 System is Controlled by a Device (Remotely and Locally) BinaryYes S13 System Provides Additional Feedback SubjectiveYes S14 System Provides CalibrationBinaryYes S15 System BacklashRevolutions<30 S16 Video Latency Frames Per Second 30 S17Control Latencyms<200200

59. Project Cost Cost of suggested improvements (Development Cost): ~$720 New Piston Cylinders New Manipulator Carriage Springs Preious team was at $2,128 Estimated Manufacturing Cost: ~$1,728 Previous team was at $1,471

60. Risk Management

62. Project Planning MSD I Week 11 Get MSD II project green light Review BOM & Prepare Order Forms for long lead items to place over the summer MSD II Week 1 Obtain All parts Re-familiarize ourselves with the project Begin Remote access programming Week 3 Mechanical Manufacturing is complete Assembly has been begun Networking Programing first draft is complete

63. Project Planning MSD II (cont.) Week 5 System Prototype assembled, and met with guide and customer Week 8 System completely assembled and ready to begin testing Week 12 Testing is Completed Week 14 Final Presentation User manual is complete Tech. paper is complete Poster is complete

64. Acknowledgments Mr. Wellin -RIT ME Department Dr. Schrlau –RIT ME Department Nick Hensel – RIT ME Department Bridget Lally – RIT EE Department Sakif Noor – RIT ME Department Team P13371

65. Questions?