Base

The base was determined to be made of aluminum 6061 T6. Aluminum 6061 T6 has a relatively low cost
compared to other aluminum alloys. It also has high strength. The ultimate tensile strength is 310 MPa,
the tensile yield strength is 276 MPa and the modulus of elasticity is 68.9 GPa.

Figure 1: Aluminum 6061 base

These high strength properties will provide a stable foundation for the entire robot design. Aluminum
6061 T6 is rated high for machining. This quality will be important in the manufacturing stage. The base
plate will be machined in the UNC Charlotte machine shop. Machining the base in the UNC Charlotte
machine shop will allow for a vast selection of manufacturing approaches.

The base has 36 hole for the randomly placed metal spheres. These holes will be machined using a drill
press or a mill.

The base will rest on 3 legs, two legs supporting the arm assembly and stepper motor 1 while 1 leg will
be supporting the opposite side of the base. The tripod design was chosen with the knowledge of 3
points creating a plane. This maximizes base stabilization. The 3 legs are rounded to ensure 1 point of
contact. This is important when factoring in deflection. The legs will be affected by the deflection of the
base. With rounded legs the legs can naturally follow the curve of deflection and still maintain 3 points
of contacts. This will reduce internal stresses within the base and legs. The legs will fastened to the base
with ¼-28 bolts.

Figure 2: Rounded leg

There will be a rectangular cutout towards the rear base. This cutout will to be machined using a drill
press or mill. Below is a step by step process for machining the base:

Step 1: Cut Edges to length using vertical band saw

Step 2: Place Sheet on mill and use clamps to secure the sheet

Step 3: Locate edge using edge finder to set zeros

Step 4: Drill holes using center drill and drill bits

Step 5: Drill holes (36 ball placement holes, 3 drop holes and 5 component holes)

Step 6: Locate the square cutout center

Step 7: Drill 4 holes on the corner of the cutout and mill the rectangle cutout

Step 8: Deburr edges

Figure 3: Base FBD

1. Plastic Failure
To determine if the base will fail, the bending stress at the far left side of the base will be
calculated and compared to the yield strength of Aluminum 6061 T6. The base was accurately
calculated with the minimum cross section being the location at the rectangular cutout.

𝑀 (𝑀𝑎𝑥 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡) = 0.93 𝑁 − 𝑚

𝑐 (𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑛𝑒𝑢𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑜𝑝 𝑜𝑟 𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑚) = 1.5875𝑚𝑚

𝐼 (𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝐼𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎) = 4.53 ∗ 10−10 𝑚4

 𝑀𝑐
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.1: 𝜎𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 =
𝐼

𝜎𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 3.26 𝑀𝑃𝑎

𝑁𝑜𝑡𝑒: 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑠 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑤𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑀𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝐴𝑙 6061 𝑇6 = 44961.7 𝑝𝑠𝑖

44961.7 𝑝𝑠𝑖
𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑆𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑦 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = = 95.2
472 𝑝𝑠𝑖

Figure 4: Base Shear Diagram

 Figure 5: Base Moment Diagram

2. Deflection
The deflection was calculated with all six of the balls located in the center. Having the
balls in the center would cause the largest deflection and the base should be analyzed at
the worst scenario. The arm was assumed to be fully extended creating the largest
possible moment on the base. The base was treated as a simply supported beam for the
deflection calculations. To calculate the total deflection of the base, each point force
and moment was analyzed individually for deflection and then they were added
together to determine the total. This is called the composite method.

Deflection from 6 balls located in the middle (Equation 1.2)

𝑃 = 0.494 𝑁

𝐸 = 6.89 ∗ 1010 𝑃𝑎

𝐼 = 4.32 ∗ 10−10 𝑚4

𝐿 = 0.38 𝑚

𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 6 𝑏𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑖𝑑𝑑𝑙𝑒 = 0.00728𝑚𝑚

Deflection from Moment on Assembly (Equation 1.3)

𝑀 = 0.624 𝑁 − 𝑚
 𝐸 = 6.89 ∗ 1010 𝑃𝑎

𝐼 = 4.32 ∗ 10−10 𝑚4

𝐿 = 0.38 𝑚

𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 0.194𝑚𝑚

Deflection from Base Weight (Equation 1.4)

𝑃 = 7.79 𝑁

𝐸 = 6.89 ∗ 1010 𝑃𝑎

𝐼 = 4.32 ∗ 10−10 𝑚4

𝐿 = 0.38 𝑚

𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 = 0.113𝑚𝑚

Deflection from Assembly Weight (Equation 1.5)

𝑃 = 3.63 𝑁

𝑏 = 0.0785 𝑚

𝐸 = 6.89 ∗ 1010 𝑃𝑎

𝐼 = 4.32 ∗ 10−10 𝑚4

𝐿 = 0.38 𝑚

𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑦 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 = 0.0834𝑚𝑚

𝑃𝐿4
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.2: 𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑖𝑑𝑑𝑙𝑒 =
48𝐸𝐼

𝑚𝐿2
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.3: 𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 =
9√3𝐸𝐼

𝑃𝐿4
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.4: 𝐵𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 =
48𝐸𝐼
 3
(𝑃𝑏)(𝐿2 − 𝑏 2 )2
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.5: 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑦 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 =
9√3𝐸𝐿𝐼

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 0.398 𝑚𝑚

The deflection for the base was calculated to be very small. A small base deflection is desired to
maintain precision while the robot is functioning.

3. Tipping

Figure 6: Tip Side (Bottom View)

The design for the base includes 3 legs, which results in an increase of stability. However, with 3
legs, tipping calculations had to be done to prove the base would not tip over. Two different
calculations had to be made for tipping around two different axes. The first axis analyzed can be
seen indicated by the yellow line in Figure 6. For the worst case scenario, the arm was fully
extended and perpendicular to the axis being analyzed. This creates the maximum moment
created by the arm assembly Using equation the sum of moments on the sip side were
compared with the sum of moments on the non-tip side. The calculation reveals the moment on
the non-tip side is greater than the tip side with a safety factor of approximately 8.24 thus
proving the base will not tip on its side. For the analysis, side two is to the left of the yellow line
and side 1 is to the right.

𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.6: ∑ 𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑖𝑑𝑒1 𝑣𝑠 ∑ 𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑖𝑑𝑒 2

𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑖𝑑𝑒 1 = (𝑉1 )(𝜌)(𝑔)(𝐷1) + 𝑀𝑠 + (𝐹𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟1 )(𝑋1)

𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑖𝑑𝑒 2 = (𝐹𝑠 )(𝑋2) + (𝑉2 )(𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦)(𝑋3)

𝐹𝑠 = 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 = 4.8158N

𝐹𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟1 = 6.02 𝑁
 𝜌 = 𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐴𝑙 6061 𝑇6 = 2.7 𝑔/𝑐𝑚3

𝑉1 = 36.0 𝑐𝑚3

𝑉2 = 238 𝑐𝑚3

𝑋1 = 0.10𝑚

𝑋2 = 0.09𝑚

𝑋3 = 0.097𝑚

𝐷1 = 0.083𝑚

0.388 𝑁 ∗ 𝑚 < 5.78 𝑁 ∗ 𝑚

𝑆𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑦 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 8.24

Tipping rear

Figure 7: Tip rear

The other axis that had to be analyzed for tipping was the rear axis indicated by the yellow line
in Figure 7. Using equation 1.6, the moment on the potential tipping side was compared with
the moment on the non-tipping side. The calculation reveals the moment on the non-tip side is
greater than the tip side with a safety factor of approximately 1.95 thus proving the base will
not tip along the rear axis. The safety factor is much larger in reality because the worst case
scenario had the arm extended fully and perpendicular to the axis being analyzed. This scenario
is technically impossibly for the robot design because the components that sit behind the arm
prohibit the arm from rotating 180 degrees. For the analysis, side one is above the yellow line
and side 2 is below it.
 𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.6: ∑ 𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑖𝑑𝑒1 𝑣𝑠 ∑ 𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑖𝑑𝑒 2
𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑖𝑑𝑒 1 = (𝑉1 )(𝜌)(𝑔)(𝐷1) + 𝑀𝑠

𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑖𝑑𝑒 2 = (𝐹𝑠 )(𝑋1) + (𝑉2 )(𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦)(𝑋2)

𝑀𝑠 = 0.624 𝑁 ∗ 𝑚

𝐹𝑠 = 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 = 4.8158 N

𝜌 = 𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐴𝑙 6061 𝑇6 = 2.7 𝑔/𝑐𝑚3

𝑉1 = 40.0 𝑐𝑚3

𝑉2 = 234 𝑐𝑚3

𝑋1 = 0.04𝑚

𝑋2 = 0.19𝑚

𝐷1 = 0.04𝑚

0.73𝑁 ∗ 𝑚 < 1.42 𝑁 ∗ 𝑚

𝑆𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑦 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 1.95

4. Stepper Motor 1 Housing Mounted on Base

The design features a “mount” for the NEMA 23 stepper motor that controls the first rotary axis.
Stepper motor 1 will hang from a 3D (ABS) printed motor mount. This Mount has 4 holes
for the Stepper 1 motor. This part will be 3D printed because it needs to be lightweight
and withstand the weight of the motor. Failure calculations had to be done to ensure
this part would not fail. The bending stress (Equation 1.1) and shear stress max were
calculated to be 510,495 Pa and 528,812 Pa respectively. The shear stress was used to
find a safety factor of 4.15. This reveals the 3D printed motor bracing will not fail.
 Figure 8: Housing Dimensions

Figure 9: Housing Dimensions Continued

𝑐 = 0.002𝑚

𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.912 𝑁 ∗ 𝑚

−𝑀𝑐
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.1: 𝜎𝑥 =
𝐼

𝜎𝑥 = 0.0510𝑀𝑝𝑎

𝑉𝑄
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.7: 𝜏 =
𝑡𝐼

𝜏 = 5.29𝑀𝑃𝑎

22 𝑀𝑃𝑎
𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑆𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑦 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = = 4.15
5.30𝑀𝑃𝑎

Shear Force and Bending Moment Diagrams for Base Housing

Figure 10: Stepper Motor Housing Shear Force Diagram

Figure 11: Stepper Motor Housing Moment Diagram

 Figure 12: Stepper Motor Housing

5. Base Mohr’s Circle

For the base, bending stress, axial stress, and shear stress were calculated. The bending stress
was determined from Equation 1.1 while the axial stress is zero because there is no force
applied at the location. From these two stresses, the principle stresses were determined and
shown below. Using these values, the Mohr’s Circle was constructed where the max shear
stress was found as well as the three principle stresses.

Figure 13: Base Stress Element

𝑀𝑐
𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1.1: 𝜎𝑥 =
𝐼

𝜎𝑥 = 6.49𝑀𝑃𝑎

𝑁
𝜎𝑦 = 0.00
𝑚2

𝜏𝑥𝑦 = 4.58𝑀𝑃𝑎
 𝜎𝑝1 = 6.49𝑀𝑃𝑎

𝜎𝑝2 = 0.00𝑀𝑃𝑎

𝜎𝑝3 = −3.24𝑀𝑃𝑎

𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1.63𝑀𝑃𝑎

Base Mohr's Circle

2

1.5

0.5
𝜏 (MPa)

0
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
-0.5

-1

-1.5

-2
σ (MPa)

Figure 14: Base Mohr’s Circle

6. Micro switches

The micro switches will be placed on a 3D printed micro switch mount seen in Figure 15. The
axes will home to the respective switch and make contact to set the zero.

Figure 15: Micro switches Configuration

7. Mass
The base mass breakdown is shown in Figure 16. It takes into consideration every component of
the base and how each attaches to it. Along with the masses, there is a column showing the
supplier of the material. The base was the heaviest component of the whole project at roughly
800 grams. This is due to the fact that is machined out of aluminum and not 3-D printed ABS
plastic. To calculated components like such, the volume was calculated and multiplied by the
density to get the mass.

Figure 16: Base Mass Breakdown Sheet (g)