1. Senior Design Team 05: Gleason Works – Chamfering and Deburring Project Critical Design Review

2. Team Introduction  Project Manager:Vincenzo Mansueto-ME  Lead Engineer:Matthew Liddick-ME  Team Member:Brian Banazwski-ME  Team Member:Mark Trotta-ME  Team Member:Julie Wilcox-ME  Team Member:Phil Raduns-EE  Team Member:Greg Baesl-ISE  Faculty Advisor: Bill Scarbrough  Gleasons Representative: Eric Mundt

3. Company Background  Leading world-wide supplier of gear cutting technology  Subdivision of Gleason Corporation  Primary Market  Automobile and truck industries  Secondary Market  Aerospace, Farm, Construction, Marine

4. Defining the Need  Cutting process for creating gears leaves behind sharp edges and burrs  Danger to workers  Gear strength  Contamination  Aesthetic  Two current processes need improvement or modification

5. On Machine Apparatus  Not capable of tilt in both directions  Has no scrapper  Burrs still exist after chamfer

6. GTR 250  Too slow  30 rpm max on work spindle  Too expensive  Accuracy of machine is excessive for process  Large footprint

7. Design Requirements and Deliverables  Requirements  Chamfer and deburr in same cycle  Capable of machining various sizes of gear sets  Price below $130k  Cycle time under 1 minute  As many commercial parts as possible  Decrease footprint  Deliverables  Top level ProE drawings  Market assessment

8. Design Proposal  ~70% smaller foot- print than GTR  More tilt capabilities than both existing  Lower cost

9. Process Demonstration

10. How we arrived at our design  Work Break-down Structure  Cutting Tool Apparatus  Work Piece Apparatus  Stock Divider  Electronics  Enclosure  Customer Interactions  Current process investigations

11. Tilt Structure

12. Stock Divider

13. Time Study

14. Max Torque Curve

15. Electrical Components  Servo/Spindle Motors  Drives  CNC Controller

16. Cost Analysis Phoenix Stand AlonePhoenix with Chamfering unitNew Chamfering Machine Cost of Machine $675,000$680,000$130,000 Hours Operated 20800 Cost per Hour $32.45$32.69$6.25 Man Power per Hour $40.00 $0.00 Total Cost per Hour $72.45$72.69$6.25 Cycle Time SecondsHoursCycles per HourCycles per YearCost per Year Phoenix with Chamfering 1130.0313931.86132531$302,400.00 Phoenix without Chamfering 930.0258338.71161032$301,400.00 New Machine 200.00556180.00161032$5,591.40 Total Operating Cost of Phoenix and New Machine $253,646.27

17. Cost Analysis Continued Cycles / hrCycles / weekCycles / yearCycles / 5 years Extra Cycles without Chamfering 6.85548.1028501.28142506.42 Cost of Cycles without Chamfering $15.63$1,250.62$65,032.26$325,161.29 Cost of Cycles with Chamfering $12.82$1,025.87$53,345.13$266,725.66 Cost of New Machine $130,000.00 Annual Benefit of New Machine $48,753.73 Pay-Back Period 2.67<<5 Cost per Cycle Phoenix Chamfers $2.28 Phoenix without Chamfer $1.87 New Machine Chamfers $0.03 Percent Difference 17.97%

18. Future Topics  Chip removal  Automation  Enclosure  More in depth stress analysis  Further VNC analysis to ensure adequate part range and cycle time

19.  Questions? Contact Info: vrm0298@rit.edu

20. Time Study Breakdown  Test Conditions - Trial #2  1,500 RPM – Chamfer Motor  41 Teeth – Bevel Ring Gear  4 Revolution & 4-Start Cutter  0.75mm  Total Cycle Time = 129 sec  Total Chamfering Time = 13.4 sec  Actual Chamfering Time = ~3 sec  Tooth Cutting Time = 109 sec

21. Max Torque Breakdown  Test Conditions  1,500 RPM – Chamfer Motor  41 Teeth – Bevel Ring Gear  4 Revolution & 4-Start Cutter  0.75mm and 1.25mm Chamfer Depth  Trial #1 = 41.0 in-lbf  0.75mm  Trial #4 = 92.5 in-lbf  1.25mm  Trial #5 = 95.6 in-lbf  1.25mm  Trial #3 = Off Chart  1.25mm