Prosthetic Arm Force Reducer Team 1 – Halliday's ... - Ohio University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$Introduction to Numerical Math and Matlab ... - Ohio University$

used for three main categories. These categories consist of user friendly, reliable, and affordable. The contents of these categories can be found in Table 2.0.2 below. Table 2.0.1 - Initial Customer Needs List Obtained From Interviews and Observations Reduced user input force Increased grip strength Reliable Durable Servicable Light weight Corrosion resistant Simple to use Affordable Minimal maintance Rugged Adaptable to current prosthetic Optimal size for best operation Doesn't add too much cable travel Safe Table 2.0.2 - Hierarchal Customer Needs List 1. User friendly 1.1 Reduced user input force 1.2 Increased grip strength 1.3 Simple to use 1.4 Doesn't add too much cable travel 1.5 Light weight 1.6 Safe 1.7 Adaptable to current prosthetic 1.8 Optimal size for best operation 2. Reliable 2.1 Durable 2.2 Servicable 2.3 Minimal maintance 2.4 Corrosion resistant 2.5 Rugged 3. Affordable 3.1 Low manufacturing costs 4
2.1 Weighting of Customer Needs Weighting the customer needs is a key part of engineering before the design process. By weighting the needs, one can see the most important aspects of the project which will make further design decisions easier and more consistent. The weighting should also be directly related to the customer’s needs and desires as well. This assures that the customer will be happy with the final result. After weighting our project, it was determined that the reliable and user friendly categories were the most important needs of our project and customer. The breakdown of these needs can be found in Table 2.1.1 below. Table 2.1.1 - Analytical Hierarchy Process Breakdown User Friendly Reliable Affordable User Friendly 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reliable 1.00 1.00 1.00 Affordable 3.00 3.00 1.00 Total 6.00 6.00 4.00 Weight 0.333 0.333 0.222 3.0 Revised Need Statement and Target Specifications There is a need for an assistive technology device that specifically focuses on upper-extremity loss above the elbow within the field of agriculture. Our particular focus will be farmers who have physically demanding jobs to be able to perform tasks which require reliable simulated usage of the appendage and therefore, continue to run a profitable farm operation. “Health professionals and others who have contact with farmers with disabilities need to be cognizant of the strong desire and continued ability to farm after severe injury. More attention should be given to farm-specific occupational rehabilitation programs, such as AgrAbility, and in the engineering of prostheses and other assistive technology.” (Reed & Claunch 1998) This need exists due to the prevalence of disabling injuries in agriculture due to farming being an incredibly dangerous profession. Theses persons with upper extremity loss within the field of agriculture need a specific prosthetic to continue working properly and efficiently in their daily farming tasks. In order for farmers to continue their livelihood, increasing the ease of use, grip strength, and serviceability of a standard prosthetic will be our main focus. To reduce to the physical impact on the user’s body and the amount of input force required to open the hooks, improved comfort and ease of use will be the main focal point. Also, many current available prosthetics are not robust enough nor have a sufficient gripping force to meet the demands of users who work in physically intensive occupations. Increasing the grip force of a standard split hook at the contact point(s) of the grippers will address this need for increased grip strength. Serviceability will be addressed by the maintenance being able to be performed easily by the customer. 5
Page 1 and 2: Prosthetic Arm Force Reducer Team 1
Page 3: 1.0 Introduction Limb loss generall
Page 7 and 8: which could limit the use of rubber
Page 9 and 10: design of the two load hook allows
Page 11 and 12: Fig. 4.1.6 - Utah Arm 3 MAGNUM Para
Page 13 and 14: Feature Hosmer Model 7 Work Hook Ot
Page 15 and 16: hook is closed. The harness idea is
Page 17 and 18: purchase it. Safety is another exte
Page 19 and 20: Figure 5.1.2 - Solid Edge Model of
Page 21 and 22: 5.1.4 Concept D - Upgraded Springs
Page 23 and 24: 6.0 Concept Selection 6.1 Data and
Page 25 and 26: Figure 6.1.4 - Input Force FBD The
Page 27 and 28: Since the torques of the both the r
Page 29 and 30: Once the design of the system was u
Page 31 and 32: 7.0.3 Professional/Ethical Standard
Page 33 and 34: Table 7.0.2 - Risk Priority Number
Page 35 and 36: The actual FEA testing involved uti
Page 37 and 38: Another sector that has aided in ou
Page 39 and 40: Figure 7.0.10 Cable Path for Mechan
Page 41 and 42: 7.2.1 Rings (Part #’s THH-001 [El
Page 43 and 44: 7.2.4 Collars 1) Using lathe turn o
Page 45 and 46: 7.3 Cost Analysis & Bill of Materia
Page 47 and 48: manufacturing costs are $525.00. Th
Page 49 and 50: operation necessary. This convertib
Page 51 and 52: Appendix A - Split Hook Sample Calc
Page 53 and 54: George Platounaris - Interview (12:
Page 55 and 56:
Appendix C - Tim Lang’s Forearm D
Page 57 and 58:
Health Progress, “Disables Enteri
Page 59:
Drawing Package 1. THH‐001……
show all

Prosthetic Arm Force Reducer Team 1 – Halliday's ... - Ohio University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?