Prosthetic Arm Force Reducer Team 1 – Halliday's ... - Ohio University
Prosthetic Arm Force Reducer Team 1 – Halliday's ... - Ohio University
Prosthetic Arm Force Reducer Team 1 – Halliday's ... - Ohio University
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
manufacturing costs are $525.00. This is a decrease from the alpha prototype of $1125, and puts<br />
the overall cost of the system to $575.86. This is an alpha to beta savings of $1252.31. The main<br />
reasons for this price drop are the inefficient use of alpha materials and the errors in the<br />
manufacturing. This price is in the 10- 15% range of the total prosthetic arm cost of $6000.<br />
Table 7.3.4 - Manufacturing Costs for Beta Prototype<br />
Operation Operation Operation<br />
1 2 3 Operation 4<br />
Cut Cut<br />
square grooves in<br />
tracks to pulley axle<br />
desired to allow<br />
Cut pipe length travel in<br />
tubing to and drill the tracks.<br />
1" sections bolt Insert into<br />
and turn holes. pulley and<br />
down on Mill lock into<br />
lathe. opening position Bolt<br />
Drill bolt for pulley with assembly to<br />
holes axle spacers prosthetic<br />
a. Total time to complete operation(s) in hours 5 3 2 3<br />
b. Labor rate for the operation ($/hr) 15 15 15 15<br />
c. Labor Cost ($) = a x b 75 45 30 45<br />
d. Basic overhead factor 1 1 1 1<br />
e. Equipment factor 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5<br />
f. Special operation/Tolerance factor<br />
g. Labor/Overhead/Equipment Cost ($) = c x<br />
0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25<br />
(1+d+e+f) 206.25 112.50 82.50 123.75<br />
h. Purchased materials/Components cost 12.15 7.82 22.44 8.45<br />
Total Labor/Overhead/Equipment Cost $ 525.00<br />
Total Purchased Material/Components Cost $ 50.86<br />
Total Cost for Assembly $ 575.86<br />
7.4 Design Validation<br />
Throughout our design and manufacturing phases, interaction with our end user has shaped our<br />
project, and allowed us to effectively address real-world considerations. Ultimately, three main<br />
goals were set forth from analyzing our customer input: reduction of input force (to reduce strain<br />
on the user’s body), increase in grip force (to allow the user to complete a wider variety of tasks<br />
with the prosthetic), and to make the product both reliable and serviceable (so the customer can<br />
fix it easily, if need be).<br />
For the reduction of input force, we decided on a pulley-based mechanical advantage system<br />
early on. This configuration guaranteed a 2:1 reduction in user input force, as well as twice as<br />
much cable travel to get it open. Since this feature was most important to the user, and would<br />
47