1. Sand Sampling Apparatus
Gina Teofilak
Richard Klimas
Dan Mortensen
Ruben De Sousa

2. Sponsor
Eglin Air Force Base Dr. William Cooper Munitions Directorate Air Force Research Laboratory
Faculty Advisor
Dr. Ongi Englander
Faculty Collaborations Dr. Jonathan Clark Mechanical Engineering Dr. Patrick Hollis Mechanical Engineering

3. Overview Introduction Experiment background information
Design Concept- take one
Experimental Changes
Design Concept- take two
Current Design
Modeling
Cost Analysis Comparisons

4. Introduction Purpose Problem introduction x z 8’ x 2’ x 2’ target
1100lbs sand
Interest in crystalline structure of particles and grain morphology
Shot line approximately 1’ under compacted sand
Manual labor to fill and excavate
Scooping technique (shovel and Ziploc bag)
Disruptions to sand of interest
Poor accuracy for researchers 4

5. Experimental background
Projectile
Particle Analysis
Experimental background
Virgin
Fractured
v= 1200m/s = 3937 ft/s
25.4 mm (1.00 in) diameter, L/D=7
Vimpact= 577 m/s (1,890 ft/s)
Virgin sand is dark in color
Fractured sand changes color and
density
ρ = 1.58g/cc, not packed
ρ = 1.73g/cc, packed 5

6. Design Concept- take one Breakdown
Design take one
Mount Aluminum Extrusion to side of
target
Vacuum to desired depth
Use of Linear Actuators
Carbon Stick Tape 6

7. Newly added forklift straddles
Experimental Changes
Eglin Visit 10/31/2008
Newly added forklift straddles 7

8. Design Concept – Take two Breakdown
Mechanism must be attached to top
of target
Vacuum to desired depth
Linear actuators will be designed
Carbon tape in circles
Cylinder to attach carbon tape
Disadvantages
Threaded rod lead screws were found to bend X y z 8

9. Current Design Current Design
Use 2 linear motion actuators for Y and Z motion
¾ inch threaded rod
aluminum extrusion frames
¾ inch aluminum rod
stabilizers for support
motion to be attained from 2 high torque dc motors
Mounts to the side walls of the box for easy installation X y z 9

10. Motion in the X-direction
Current Design
Chain and sprocket motion
Wheels fit inside aluminum extrusion grooves
DC motor attached to sprocket
Chain is clamped to actuator
Chain mount is adjustable for chain
tension 10

11. Motion Control Current Design Motion control 3 DC motors/drivers
micro processor
encoders
Y axis motion
threaded rod
aluminum rod for support
Z axis motion
threaded rod
rigidly attached to vacuum tube
Control Sequence
z axis ½”-1”
y axis 24”
x axis 4” X y z 11

12. Tip down
Inverted tip
modeling
Surface result
Surface result 12

13. Tip Design modeling Controlled depth Blades to breakup material
Back pins
Trial and error
Side View
Bottom View
Front View 13

14. Cost Analysis Comparisons
Cost Breakdown
Total: $
Total: $
Total: $1,150 14

15. REFERENCES Cost References
Cooper, William “Bill”, MSgt Wes Schuler, AFRL/RW
Munitions Directorate
Air Force Research Laboratory
Mortensen, Charles, Owner, Dynatech Associates
Dr. Chiang Shih, FAMU-FSU College of Engineering, Mechanical
Dr. Daudi Waryoba, FAMU-FSU College of Engineering, Mechanical
Cost References
Carbon Stick tape
Aluminum Extrusion
Dynatech Associates
McMASTER-CARR 15