Design - AutoCAD

Design - to create and draw the layout of our design using AutoCAD so that we can understand and visualise it better ... 

This is the design of our claw in AutoCAD. Due to some manufacturing flaws, such as tolerance, we designed the arms to be a little longer to compansate the bending length.

Our group approached our lecturer for some feedback and the advice given was to increased the space within the arms as it gives a higher probability of the can being capture. And our lecturer also reminded us that the car might not be propery programmed, and the car may not stop at the point we wanted. Thus, we have double the width of the ams and also increased the length of the arms too.

The lecturer also suggested us to draw a 3 views orthographic projection of our design, which includes the front plane, the top plane and the end plane. This is for our blogges and classmates to visualise and understand our concept better.

We tried to simplifly our design by bending one end of the arm inwards. We are confident that the Acrylic is stable enough if only one side of the arm is connected to the car with the motor. We bended the other end of the end inwards so as to create a loop to capture the can.

This way it saves time while maufacturing and also reduces friction at the other end.

Conceive - Sketching

Conceive - to think of and sketch some designs and ultimately choosing the best one. Firstly, these are the few designs we came up with ...   

                               

Option 1.

A simple design of a horizontal gripper using sponges. The arms can move horizontally, moving towards each other to grab the can properly.

Pros: Supposedly stable
Simple and common (Not too complicated).
 Easy to design and produce (Less problems while manufacturing).

Cons: Sponges have to place very accurately (Low probability).
Arms have to be tight enough while grabbing the can.

Option 2.

A design of a scooper to scoop up the can which comes from the concept of the dustpan.

Pros: Creative.

Cons: Too heavy (Slow and clumsy).

Can might be pushed away by the dustpan before even sweeping the can(Unstable).

Too troublesome to produce.

Option 3.

A simple design of a vertical looping technique arm. One arm is connected to a motor, while the other is held with a loose screw to the platform, which moves with the motor. The arms are connected to each other, forming a loop, which eventually is when the can is caught.

Pros: Light weight (Fast, more efficient).

Simple and nice (Not too complicated). 

Easy to design and produce (Less problems while manufacturing).

Large space for the can to be captured (Higher probability).

Cons: Can might slide from underneath if the arms are not low enough.

Option 4.

A simple design of a vertical gripper using claws. Arm with 2 claws rotate upwards and downwards to catch cans.

Pros: Light weight(Fast and efficient). 

Simple (Not too complicated).

 Easy to design and produce (Less problems while manufacturing).

Cons: Unstable (Can might slide out from the sides).

Can have to be place lying down.

So these were a few we thought of. And ultimately, after some discussion and consideration, we have decided to pick option 3, as, simply, it has the highest pros-to-cons ratio, and it seems to be the most practical among the rest. Option 1 has a high chance that it might not work, and we were not willing to take the risk. Option 2 seems to be the least pragmatic choice. And comparing options 3 and 4, although similiar, we felt that option 3 would have more chances of being able to move the can due to its larger surface area. Hence, to conclude, we will begin to work on option 3.