Teleoperated Robotics for the IT Classroom and Competition

1
Tele-operated Robotics for the IT Classroom and
Competition
National Association of Industrial Technology
2002 National Conference Panama City, Florida
Mr. Matt Vazquez Mr. Ben Tarnowski Dr. John R.
Wright, Jr. Millersville University of
Pennsylvania
Last Updated August 22, 2009
2
Project Overview

• History of the project NAIT proposed a new
  competition at the conference for the student
  chapters.
• How it came about We looked at the proposed
  competition and decided that it was interesting
  and that it would foster student interest.
• Who started it Matt Vazquez and Ben Tarnowski
  both took a leadership role in gaining student
  interest to form a team.
• Brainstorming The team held meetings every
  Friday morning to come up with design ideas for
  the creation of a robot that would meet the
  specifications of the competition.
• Budget We proposed a budget of 2,400 and
  received a sum of 600.
• Advisor We solicited the advisement of
  several faculty members. Our head advisor to the
  project was Dr. John Wright, Jr.

3
Contest Specifics

• Build a tele-operated robot device
• Navigate an obstacle course
• Retrieve a 12 ounce soda can
• Return the can, undamaged, to a designated area
  in the least time possible
• Supplement the tele-operated robot with a poster
  session

4
Physical Design

• Platform
• We selected an EMAXX platform that had four
  wheel drive, 2 wheel steering, and good
  suspension
• The platforms chassis was large, aggressive,
  and well suited for mounting purposes
• Dual, high power motors fed the wheels more
  than enough power

5
Physical Design Continued

• Gripper
• Brainstorming sessions produced many different
  gripper designs
• We decided to design and build the Campbells
  Soup Can gripper
• We cut a soup can in half and used each side as a
  finger of the gripper
• The encompassing design ensured that the soda can
  would not shake loose
• The curvature of the gripper acted as passive
  compliance
• The gripper was mounted on a lever system that
  allowed the can to be raised and lowered so that
  the platform could navigate the course without
  obstruction

6
Control Design

• Radio Control System
• Platform Radio Control
• The platform comes with a 3 channel
  transmitter/receiver system
• The transmitter controls the steering, throttle,
  and transmission of the platform
• We decided to disconnect the transmission servo
  and lock the platform in 2nd gear
• Used for Gripper Actuation.

7
Control Design Continued

• Auxiliary Radio Control
• We researched available radio control systems
• We decided to purchase a Futaba remote control
  with a transmitter/receiver combo and 2 servos
• One servo closes and opens the gripper
• One servo indirectly raises and lowers the
  gripper assembly
• 2nd Auxiliary Servo
• The 2nd servo toggles a double-pole-double-throw,
  single break switch
• This switch takes the output of the speed
  controller and transfers it from the two drive
  motors to the lever motor on the back of the
  platform
• This system eliminates the need for a second
  speed controller

8
Wiring Schematic
9
Performance/Testing

• Preliminary Testing
• Driving the platform revealed that 1st gear was
  too powerful
• Accelerating the platform was tricky
• Prototyping of gripper was successful
• Secondary Testing
• Suspension was insufficient to bear the load of
  the gripper assembly
• Lever motor was too weak for our application
• Lever fulcrum was improperly placed
• Gripper assembly was not balanced to be
  perpendicular to the ground (critical to our
  grippers performance)

10
Performance/Testing Continued

• Solutions to Design Flaws
• Purchased stronger lever motor and designed
  control system for maximum torque
• Rebuilt lever arm and placed the fulcrum in the
  most efficient position
• Designed and implemented an adjustable pin to
  correctly balance the gripper assembly
• Purchased stiffer suspension
• Final Testing
• The speed control of the platform is left to
  the operators skill
• The speed control of the lever is left to the
  operators skill
• The gripper operates smoothly and effectively
  incorporates the designed passive compliance
• The lever raises and lowers the gripper
  assembly to the designed maximum and minimum of
  travel

11
Educational Benefits

• Electronics Communication
• Power Conversion Applications
• Circuit Design and Application
• Physics Applications (levers, screws, pulleys
  gears)
• Robotics EOAT Design (Passive versus Active
  RCC)
• Designing for a Real World Event!
• (Trade-offs costs, reliability, speed,
  accuracy, appearance, time)
• Integration (Manufacturing, Electronics,
  Control, Project Management, Robotics, Physics)

12
Summary
Great Project for a Competition -Applied
projects (competitions) draw student interest
in our association clubs Great Project for the
Classroom -RD projects -Senior Design
Problems -Independent Studies Wrights
Hypothesis M C S
13
Demonstration
Student Contributors Frank Anamze Ben Bowman
Brandon Dodson Brad Lang Jacquie Miley Seth
Powers Ben Tarnowski Matt Vazquez