Presentation on theme: "Adaptive Adjustable Wakeboarding System Lorielle Alter 1, Cory Gerken 2, Lauren Mitchell 3, Nick Pilkington 2, Katy Serowka 1 Advisors: Dr. Paul King 1,"— Presentation transcript:
Adaptive Adjustable Wakeboarding System Lorielle Alter 1, Cory Gerken 2, Lauren Mitchell 3, Nick Pilkington 2, Katy Serowka 1 Advisors: Dr. Paul King 1, Dr. Mark Richter Together with MAX mobility, Nashville, TN Department of Biomedical Engineering 1, Department of Mechanical Engineering 2, Department of Computer Engineering 3 Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN Problem Statement Currently adaptive water sport enthusiasts only have one option, the Quickie Kanski, to participate in wakeboarding. With a growing interest in the sport there is a need for new equipment because the process of mounting the Kanski cage on wakeboards is creating a myriad of problems. Our goal is to design a adaptive wakeboarding system that can easily attach to any standard wakeboard and provide the user with a more comfortable ride and softer landings when performing jumps. Background Existing Products and Cost Design Description Material Selection Cost to Manufacture Conclusion Acknowledgements Future Considerations In setting out to design our adaptive adjustable wakeboarding system it was important that it was easily compatible with all standard wakeboards. To meet this criteria we began by modeling the base of the system on the current binding system for wakeboards. These two circular aluminum plates allow for the board to flex and maintain its natural concavity. With the revision and completion of our first prototype we have successfully met our goal of designing and creating an adaptive adjustable wakeboarding system. The testing has produced good results and the feedback from the users has been positive. With each testing session we were able to learn more about our design and how to refine it to a more advanced stage. Through the design process it became clear that the seat design required the most refining so that all of the components could work together to provide the best ride for the user. Overview of Current Problems 1.The cage must be taken from the Kanski and adapted to the wakeboard. The rigid design of the cage causes the natural concavity of the board to change and stress concentrations to form leading ultimately to board failure. 2.The cage is completely rigid causing a substantial amount of impact on the back and body of the user 3.The cage is uncomfortable for users. 4.The foot-hold system does not effectively and safely transfer from the Kanski to the wakeboard. Design Process Evaluate the current Kanski Interview current users and get feedback Preliminary design sketches First design mock-up Redesign sketches First fuctioning prototype Testing and evaluation on the water Redesign of welding supports and seating system 2 nd testing and evaluation on the water 2 nd redesign of the seating system 3 rd testing and evaluation on the water Finalize the prototype with user feedback Russell Rodriguez Rocky LeBlanc Phil Davis Materials and Production Costs Aluminum Tubing and Plating Shock Absorber and Shock Pump Seat Supplies (foam padding, nylon covers, straps)44.00 Hardware (bolts, nuts, pins, etc.)18.00 Wakeboard Welding Assembly90.00 Total Cost Profit (45%) Consumer Price Participation in physically active recreational activities is a key factor in the health and quality of life of people with disabilities. Regular physical activity provides substantial health, psychological and social benefits for those disabled. Quickie Kanski - $1800 U.S. Patent Number 4,865,572 Standard Wakeboard - $160 Next it was important to provide adjustability for the users in terms of body size and experience level. We accomplished this by adding telescoping legs in the front of the frame along with a pinned mounting of the shock in the back of the frame that allowed for vertical adjustment. The seat was an important factor in the design. It needed to be comfortable and hold the user in the cage. After testing we found that a form-fitting seat made from Ethafoam with a ratcheting hip strap was the best solution to keep the user secure and comfortable. Lastly and most importantly we added a suspension system to the design. This air shock located in the rear of the frame is used to absorb the impacts on the user’s body, that come from jumping, which normally would have been felt on the spine. First Design Mock-up Final Design Sketch Frame: 6063 Aluminum — Highly corrosion resistant, good machining and welding properties Shock: Cane Creek AD-12 Air Shock — Excellent adjustability for individual styles of use, completely sealed and low maintenance Padding: Ethafoam 220 — Firm enough to keep rider in place while soft enough to provide a high level of comfort Siding: High-Density Polyethylene — Stiffness provides “quick release” with enough flexibility to snugly mold to the riders thighs With the success of the design and positive feedback throughout testing, we are developing a marketing strategy. Two paths of action are being explored: manufacturing and selling the design through MAX mobility, or presenting the design, test results, and market plan to manufacturers of adaptive sports equipment such as the monoski. To protect our work we will apply for a patent through the United States Patent and Trademark Office.