JYOT CHOKSI

Design & Engineering Portfolio

M.S in Mechanical Engineering

Arizona State University
jkchoksi@asu.edu
+1(917) 941-4527

TABLE OF CONTENTS
S.No

Title

Page No.

Table of Contents

Introduction

Design of Home Appliance - Lawn Mower

Design of Creature

V6 Engine Design and Assembly of Components

11

MQ1 Predator UAV design

14

FSAE ASU Chassis

15

FSAE ASU Chassis Analysis

16

FSAE ASU Brake Rotor Analysis

20

10

Structural assessment and analysis of thrust vector control (tvc) hydraulic system flight filter manifold

23

11

Computational fluid dynamics of hot water tank using Ansys fluent

29

12

Design of aerospace structures

32

13

Fused deposition modeling: an analysis of aesthetics, accuracy and isotropy

35

14

Finite element analysis of heat transfer in a thin plate

38

15

Experimental analysis of contactless power transmission system

41

16

Design Intern Otis Lift Manufacturing Ltd

45

INTRODUCTION
Hello! My name is Jyot Choksi. I am currently enrolled as a graduate student in Mechanical Engineering
at Arizona State University. This design and Engineering Portfolio is created to supplement my resume
that allows me to showcase the experience gained and the skills developed over the course of education
I have acquired. The graduate program at Arizona State University offers a wide range of courses to
specialize especially in the field of design engineering. These courses have great emphasis on dealing
with real world problems and subsequently provides efficient and appropriate techniques and theories to
address the objective by formulating optimal solutions. Exposures to theses courses have helped me
evolve as a design engineer and sharpen my skills in the area of product design and development.
Therefore, I would really appreciate your thoughts and thank you for your valuable time in looking at
what I have created.

Design of Home Appliance Lawn Mower (SolidWorks 2015)

Overview:
The aim of this project was to design a home appliance that
consists of rotating a primary rotating component using the
CAD package SolidWorks 2015.
This was a team project and we decided to design a
lawnmower as the home appliance which consists of
numerous rotating parts. Each of the 2 team members have
design different sub-assemblies which have been finally
integrated together to generate the final model for the
lawnmower.
The following images attached demonstrates the CAD model
of the Lawnmower and the components and their respective
sub-assemblies like the battery system, engine system and
the fuel system together forming the power system.
The other sub-assemblies like the cutting deck, chassis,
hydraulic system and lifting mechanism have also been
displayed.

Engine Sub system

Air Filter

Battery with Housing

Crankshaft Assembly

Carburetor with Butterfly Valve

Engine system with Mounting Plate

Sub - Assemblies

Fuel System with fuel intake system and fuel outlet system

Cutter Assembly with Lifting Mechanism

Hydraulic System

Engine with cutting mechanism and Hydraulic System

Final Assembly of the Design

DESIGN OF A CREATURE (PTC Creo Parametric 3.0)

Overview:
The objective of this project was to design a creature capable of three worldly reactions. I decided to design an Aerodactyl which is capable of flying, walking and a
mouth mechanism for talking/shouting/eating etc. The cardinal task was to generate conceptual designs of mechanisms to perform the required interactions. Lastly, a
final design was to be designed representing the skin of the creature and the assembly of the three selected mechanisms for the interactions with fasteners and
standard parts like gears, motors and linkages. The final design should be easily placed inside a box of 0.5*0.5*0.5 meters. The complete project was completed using
the PTC Creo Parametric 3.0 as the software package. The final project was to be presented in the course lecture briefly explaining the various concept level mechanisms
and the final design selected

Final Design assembly of first mechanism

Final Design assembly of second mechanism

Flying Wing Mechanism Concept 1:

Walking Mechanism Concept 1:

Mouth Mechanism Concept 1:

The working on this concept mechanism is

based on the conversion of rotational motion
provided by the motor into a reciprocating
motion about a pivot point provided on the
support structure. The gear mounted on the
motor drives a comparatively larger
dimension gear which is coupled to the
driving gear. The driven gear is meshed with
the same dimension gear and this both
driven gear are responsible for creating a
flapping mechanism . The main linkage which
is connected to the driven gear and which is
also connected to the linkage which supports
the wing gives an up and down motion which
replicates the motion of the wing.

This mechanism is based on a four bar slider

linkage mechanism. In this mechanism a main
slider linkage (in green) is coupled with the
gear about which it slides about a pivot point
provided on the structure. The second
linkage (in blue) supports the leg. There are
two similar size linkages (in oranges) which
moves along with the slider linkage to give a
perfect walking mechanism. Both the walking
linkages are connected to a shaft and this
shaft is mounted with a gear which is meshed
with a driven gear and this driven gear is
coupled with the motor.

This concept is used for generating a up and

down mechanism for both the jaws. There is
a crank wheel which is coupled with a motor.
The driving linkage in turn is connected to the
crank wheel and the lower jaw. Both the
jaws are provided with gears at the outer end
which are meshed together. Both jaws, the
gears and the linkage are supported on a
structure which forms the skeleton for
designing the final design of the creature.

Flying Wing Mechanism Concept 2:

Walking Mechanism Concept 2:

Mouth Mechanism Concept 2:

The working of this concept is based on

the planetary gear system. The ring
type gear is a stationary gear and a
smaller size driven gear rotates in the
periphery. The driven gear is coupled
with linkages which in turn supports
the wing structure. Both the linkages
are connected about a pivot point
which forms a kind of oscillatory
motion about this pivot point. This
oscillatory motion is due to the driven
gear which rotates inside the sun gear.
This movement replicates a flying type
mechanism

This concept is based on the 6 bar

linkage mechanism. The crankshaft
produces the oscillating motion which
represents the walking motion of the
leg linkages. The motor imparts the
rotational motions to the shaft which is
connected using a belt drive and this
motion is transmitted to both the
crankshaft. Each crankshaft consists of
two cranks oriented at different angles
to produce a relative walking motion.
The design of the legs is based on the
leg system proposed by Theo Jansen
(the linkage topology is the same, but
the proportions are slightly different).

The worm gear - linkage mechanism is used

for generating the mouth mechanism. The
worm gear is coupled with a motor inside the
structure housing. The gears are meshed with
the worm gear. The gear have linkages
connected to the jaws. The crankshaft moves
the crank in the forward direction which in
turn moves the jaw in up and down motion.
The motor used for this motion is a stepper
motor which rotates for a certain degrees and
it starts to rotate in the reverse direction to
bring the jaw to move in the first position.
The image shown below shows the
mechanism.

V6 ENGINE DESIGN & ASSEMBLY OF COMPONENTS (SolidWorks 2015)

Overview: This project consists of design of individual components of a V6 Engine followed by the assembly of each
components into a final engine assembly. All the components have been designed and the final assembly have ben
carried out SolidWorks 2015

Air Filter

Camshaft

Belt Wheel

Crankshaft

Belt Wheel

Cylinder Head

Air Turbo

Engine Block

Engine Valve

Piston Assembly

Intake Manifold

Side Cover

Oil Pan

Exhaust Manifold

Final Assembly of the Design

MQ1 PREDATOR UAV (SolidWorks 2015)

Overview:

The body panel of the MQ1 predator unmanned aerial vehicle have been modelled using SolidWorks - 2015. The body panel have been
developed using surface modelling tools like compound splines, projected curves, surface loft, boundary and filled surfaces, surface trim and
indent tool. This project is completed based on the personal interest of SolidWorks 2015.

FSAE ASU CHASSIS (SolidWorks 2015)

Overview:

The design was generated using SolidWorks 2015. The chassis design is generated using in plane sketch, 3D sketch, weldments toolbar for the
structural member of the chassis tube, trim/extend command. The design of the chassis was used later for the FEA structural analysis such as
torsional rigidity analysis to simulate physical torsional rigidity test.

FSAE CHASSIS ANALYSIS

Overview
During the initial stages of chassis design, four major cross sections of the chassis
namely, the front roll hoop, the main roll hoop, the front bulk head and the rear bulk
head were fixed.
Static structural testing was done using Ansys 16.1 to validate the design. Weaker links
and less effective links were improved by modifying their position and/or adding new
links.
Chassis undergoes various kinds of forces during locomotion, it has to stay intact
without yielding, and it should be stiff to absorb vibrations.
The two commonly used material for making the space frame chassis are Chromium
Molybdenum steel (Chromoly) and SAE-AISI 1018.
SAE 1018 grade steel is better in terms of Thermal properties but weaker than
Chromoly in terms of strength. But the main priority of design is safety for the driver
hence the material with better stiffness and strength was chosen.

Structural Requirements

Following structural analysis were performed using Ansys:

Main Roll Hoop
Front Roll Hoop
Side Impact
Front Bulkhead and Bulkhead support (Front crash analysis)

Material Properties
Properties

Chromoly 4130
Steel

Density (g/cc)

7.8

Youngs Modulus (GPa)

210

Yield Strength (MPa)

480

Ultimate strength (MPa)

590

Thermal Conductivity (Wm/K)

42

Specific Heat Capacity (J/kgK)

370

Thermal Expansion: 20C to

100 C (m/m-K)

12

Torsional Rigidity test

Front Impact Test

To demonstrate the structural integrity of the chassis, a torsional load is created by a positive
static load on one side and negative on opposite side.

This analysis was found to be most critical since it defines the reaction of every member
throughout the chassis in cornering which is vital in any sort.

In cases with high stresses reinforcing the area or altering the angles of members may translate
the stress better throughout entire structure

Stress Analysis of
Chassis

Displacement
Deformation Analysis of
Chassis

Following images show a front impact test on the chassis. Placing a dynamic load
outlined in 2015-2016 FSAE rules of 120 KN on the front of the chassis where an
impact will occur.
From the below images it can be seen that the chassis distorts showing driver
safety potential from controlled folding of the chassis rather crushing effect.

Disp Deformation
Analysis of Chassis
due to front impact

Stress Analysis of
Chassis due to front
impact

Side impact test

Front and Main roll hoop test

The following mages are provided as outlined in 2015-2016 FSAE rules with a static load
placed in specific magnitudes and specific directions on the side impact beams of the chassis.

These members are crucial to see how they deform under load and how they distribute stress
throughout the system for understanding the ability to provide driver safety.

Stress Analysis of
Chassis due to side
impact

Disp Deformation
Analysis of Chassis
due to side impact

These test are done in order to know that the front and main roll hoop links will
not fail in the event of roll over of the FSAE vehicle.
All the forces and locations of the fixed support are obtained from the FSAE 20152016 rulebook as per the article AF 4.1 and AF 4.2

Stress Analysis of
Chassis for the main
and front roll hoop

Disp Deformation
Analysis of Chassis for
the main and front roll
hoop

Finite Element Analysis Results

Test

Maximum
Deformation (mm)

Maximum Von Mises

Stress (MPa)

Torsional Rigidity

1.96

35.89

Front Impact Loading

0.6614

146.4

Side Impact Loading

3.496

280

Load at the top of

Main and front roll
Hoop

8.632

437.3

CONCLUSIONS
The tubular space frame chassis fabricated for the car is safe as it has been analyzed
to withstand all possible forces that it might encounter in a racing circuit. It has been
made as light as possible while not compromising on the strength of the chassis. The
manufacturing of the chassis has been carried out in a very professional manner and
the final product adheres to the design. The chassis has also been validated for its
torsional rigidity to ensure the final chassis is in tandem with the analysis.

FSAE ASU BRAKE ROTOR ANALYSIS

Overview

Design and Assumptions

A brake is a device on which an artificial frictional force is applied in order to stop

the motion of the moving machine. Brakes are subjected to lot of thermal and
structural stresses and so the brakes should have the following characteristic:

The brakes must be strong enough to stop the vehicle with in a minimum Distance
in an emergency.

The driver must have proper control over the vehicle during braking and the
vehicle must not skid.

SolidWorks was used to design the 3D structure of the rotor. Below figure shows the
solid model of the rotor which is modeled in SolidWorks 2015
But some assumptions are taken in modeling of rotor disc. In analysis we always
ignore the things that have no or little impact on analysis. Some assumptions are such
as rotor disc material is isotropic, there is no stress in rotor disc before the application
of brake, and brakes are applied on the all 4 wheels.

Material Selection

The primary base material for the rotor was selected as Maraging steel, Cast Iron and
Aluminum.
Aluminum in such dissipates more heat but it needs to be anodized with hard coat to
The brakes should have good anti wear properties.
withstand the deformations. After the use of Aluminum rotor with aluminum oxide
(ceramic) coated 2000 series once or twice there are a lot of hairline radial cracks
Objective
The objective of structural analysis of rotor disc is to study & evaluate the performance formed in them. And so aluminum rotors were avoided.
under severe conditions & to suggest best combination of parameters of rotor disc like
Aluminum
Maraging Steel
Cast Iron
Properties
Flange Width, Wall Thickness &Material composition. In this Structural analysis we
obtain total deformation and Von misses stress. Because it is a very important
Density (Kg/m^3)
2700
8100
7100
parameter for design engineers. Using this information we can say our design will fail, if
maximum value of Von Misses stress induced in the material is more than strength of
the material. According to the given specification of rotor disc of disc brake the element
Young Modulus (GPa)
70
210
125
type chosen for structural analysis is SOLID187.

The brakes must have good ant fade characteristics i.e. their effectiveness should
not decrease with constant prolonged application.

Final Design
of brake rotor

Poisson Ratio

0.33

0.3

0.25

Thermal Conductivity

16

25.5

54.5

Specific Heat (J/Kg-K)

160

813

586

Coefficient of Friction

0.61

0.8

0.2

Meshing Details

The goal of meshing in Workbench is to provide robust, easy to use

meshing tools that will simplify the mesh generation process. The
model using must be divided into a number of small pieces known as
finite elements. Since the model is divided into a number of discrete
parts, in simple terms, a mathematical net or "mesh" is required to
carry out a finite element analysis. A finite element mesh model
generated is shown in the above. The elements used for the mesh of
the model are tetrahedral three-dimensional elements with 8 nodes.

Structural Boundary Conditions

The boundary conditions are introduced into module ANSYS

Workbench, by choosing the mode of simulation and by defining the
physical properties of materials and the initial conditions of simulation.
In this work, static structural analysis is carried out.

FEA Model Mesh Model for the rotor

Static Structural Boundary Conditions for rotor disc

Aluminum

Total Deformation

Finite Element Analysis Results

Von-Mises Stress

Maraging Steel

Total Deformation

Von-Mises Stress

Displacement
(mm)

Von Mises Stress

(N/mm^2 - GPa)

Aluminum

0.709

71.682

Grey Cast Iron

0.4216

69.662

Maraging Steel

0.203

69.761

The above result comparison between three material i.e Aluminum Alloy, Grey
Cast Iron and Maraging steel shows that Maraging steel gives less deformation
and stress compared to other materials when similar Loads are applied and so
Maraging steel was preferred over the existing materials

Conclusion

Cast Iron

Total Deformation

Material

From the above analysis, we can provide a useful design tool and improve the
brake performance for disk brake system. From the above table we can say that
all the values obtained from the analysis are less than their allowable values.
Hence we can say that the rotor brake design is safe based on their strength
and rigidity criteria.

Von-Mises Stress

STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS OF THRUST VECTOR CONTROL (TVC) HYDRAULIC

SYSTEM FLIGHT FILTER MANIFOLD
This project aimed at optimization of the fillet radius located inside the filter bowl using parametric study, response surface and
design of experiments to minimize the maximum stress induced in the filter bowl. Subsequently, qualification of the complete
assembly was performed as per the customer requirements by carrying out pressure analysis for normal operating, proof and
burst pressure cases, acceleration and random vibrations analysis is X, Y, Z directions to obtain Margins of Safety (MS) and Fatigue
Damage Ratio (FDR). The completed analysis was performed using ANSYS 16.0 and Design Modeler (CAD Module of ANSYS)
Model Preparation:
The model is first set up wherein an optimized fillet of 0.475 in is considered for the qualification studies. The fittings are replaced
with filled solid with negligible density thereby, simplifying the simulation of the model. Point masses are applied at the CG of
these fittings to compensate for their masses. This is a very common technique adopted in the industry to minimize the
complexity of the geometry and the application of the point mass is an effective method of balancing the pressure loads that are
being acted on the filter assembly. The tension in the bolts that fix the bolts to the flight body is compensated by applying a fixed
support boundary condition to the imprinted circular regions on the under-surface of the valve manifold which is determined by
the base of a frustum that holds the bolts. The fluid that applies the pressure on the inner surfaces of the assembly are not
modeled, but the mass of the fluid is accounted for by adding 2/3rd of fluid mass to the mass of the filler bowl and 1/3rd to the
valve manifold respectively. Additional, model modifications like defining the appropriate contact surfaces are made before the
model is tested for the different analysis cases.

TVC Filter and Manifold Assembly Model

Convergence Study:
A convergence study is successfully carried out on the assembly to justify that the location of the maximum stress by locally
refining the faces of the valve manifold and filter bowl where the maximum stress is obtained when the assembly is meshed at
0.2 inches element size. The following data provides the convergence study wherein the maximum von-mises stress converges at
a local mesh size of 0.0125 inches with an error percent of less than 4% as per the specifications. The material is safe as the
maximum stress induced in within the yield strength of the material properties. The images on the following page show the areas
where the mesh is locally refined.

Model with mesh size of 0.22i3n

Fixed Support at Contact Regions

Fittings replaced with solid and

point mass applied at the CG

Pressure Surfaces inside the Filter Bowl

0.0125 inch Local Mesh on Filter Bow l

Convergence Study
0.0125 inch Local Mesh on Valve Manifold

Pressure Surfaces inside the Valve Manifold

Force Imbalance (Measurement & Rectification):

During the static cases, force reaction is checked for by applying a reaction probe at the
fixed support of the assembly. Force imbalance is observed in the Y-direction due to the
gaps and anomalies in the geometry of the model assembly arising due to the model
modification done initially to simplify the simulation of the TVC Hydraulic filter assembly.
Reaction probe applied at the fixed supports depicts the force imbalance in the assembly.
The total reaction force in along each component of the direction is required to be lesser
than 5 lbf. as per the specified requirements. Therefore, this imbalance in the force is
balanced by applying 96 psi of additional pressure to the inner top surface of the filter
bowl to obtain the net reaction force within the specified requirements. The maximum
von-mises stress induced in the system is then recorded for the qualification of the
assembly.
24

Test Specifications:
Note: All qualifications require material to be characterized at
maximum flight environment temperature: 135 C [275 F]

Normal Operating Pressure Case: 3200 psi

Proof Pressure Case (1.5 x NOP): 4800 psi
Burst Pressure Case (2.5 x NOP): 8000 psi
Acceleration Cases: +1g acceleration applied in X, Y, Z
directions. (Results to be scaled appropriately when
performing Margin of Safety and Fatigue Damage Ratio
calculations).
Scaling Factor:
6.22 x Result for X - Direction analysis
2.00 x Result for Y & Z Direction analysis
Random Vibration in X, Y, Z direction.
Longitudinal: X Direction
Tangential: Y Direction
Radial: Z Direction

Results Pressure cases

Yield
Von Mises Stress,
Allowable, ksi
ksi

Component

Material

Manifold
Bowl

7050 - T73511
7075-T7351

Component

Material

Manifold
Bowl

7050 - T73511
7075-T7351

48.38
39.36

Von Mises
Stress, Mpa

MS

163.02
211.35

1.05
0.28

Von Mises
Stress, Mpa

MS

244.14
284.54

3.7E-01
-4.6E-02

Von Mises
Stress, Mpa

MS

362.44
287.37

0.33
0.12

23.64
30.65

Normal Operating Pressure

Yield
Von Mises Stress,
Allowable, ksi
ksi
48.38
39.36

35.41
41.27

Proof Pressure
Ultimate
Von Mises Stress,
Allowable, ksi
ksi

Component

Material

Manifold
Bowl

7050 - T73511
7075-T7351

Results Acceleration cases

Axial (X)
Dir

Component
Manifold
Bowl

70.00
46.80

52.57
41.68

Burst Pressure

Material
7075 - T652
7075-T7351

Allowable
Stress (Fty,
ksi)
48.38
39.36

VonMises
Stress, ksi
0.123
0.150

VonMises
Stress, Mpa
0.851
1.033

MS
391.06
261.61

VonMises
Stress, ksi
0.01
0.01

VonMises
Stress, Mpa
0.094
0.066

MS
3544.47
4121.07

VonMises
Stress, Mpa
0.318
0.328

MS
1047.05
827.04

X-Direction (+6.22g)

Lateral (Y)
Dir

Component
Manifold
Bowl

Material
7075 - T652
7075-T7351

Allowable
Stress (Fty,
ksi)
48.38
39.36

Y-Direction (+2.00g)

Lateral (Z)
Dir

Component
Manifold
Bowl

Material
7075 - T652
7075-T7351

Allowable
Stress (Fty,
ksi)
48.38
39.36

VonMises
Stress, ksi
0.05
0.05

Z-Direction (+2.00g)

25

Maximum Von-Mises Stress Normal Operating Pressure

Maximum Von-Mises Stress Axial (X) Acceleration

Maximum Von-Mises Stress Proof Pressure

Maximum Von-Mises Stress Lateral (Y) Acceleration

Maximum Von-Mises Stress Burst Pressure

Maximum Von-Mises Stress Lateral (Z) Acceleration

26

Results: Random Vibrations

Direction

Component

Manifold

Material

7075 - T652

Radial (Z) Dir

Bowl

7075-T7351

Sigma (s)
Level
1s Level
(68.3%)
2s Level
(27.1%)
3s Level
(4.33%)
1s Level
(68.3%)
2s Level
(27.1%)
3s Level
(4.33%)

VonMises VonMises
Expected
Stress (ksi) Stress (Mpa) Cycles, N
3.519

24.260

5.278

36.390

10.556

72.781

1.910

13.170

2.865

19.755

5.730

39.510

1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08

Required
Cycles, n

FDR

2.59E+06

0.026

1.03E+06

0.010

1.64E+05

0.002

5.39E+05

0.005

2.14E+05

0.002

3.41E+04

0.000

Required
Cycles, n

FDR

2.68E+06

0.027

1.06E+06

0.011

1.70E+05

0.002

5.41E+05

0.005

2.15E+05

0.002

3.43E+04

0.000

S FDR

0.038

0.008

3 Stress in Z-Direction

Radial (Z-Direction)
Direction

Component

Manifold

Material

7075 - T652

Longitudinal (X)
Dir
Bowl, F4

7075-T7351

Sigma (s)
Level
1s Level
(68.3%)
2s Level
(27.1%)
3s Level
(4.33%)
1s Level
(68.3%)
2s Level
(27.1%)
3s Level
(4.33%)

VonMises VonMises
Expected
Stress (ksi) Stress (Mpa) Cycles, N
0.264

1.821

0.396

2.732

0.792

5.463

0.323

2.229

0.485

3.343

0.970

6.687

1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08

S FDR

0.039

0.008

3 Stress in X-Direction

Longitudinal (X-Direction)
Direction

Component

Manifold

Material

7075 - T652

Tangential (Y)
Dir
Bowl, F4

7075-T7351

Sigma (s)
Level
1s Level
(68.3%)
2s Level
(27.1%)
3s Level
(4.33%)
1s Level
(68.3%)
2s Level
(27.1%)
3s Level
(4.33%)

VonMises VonMises
Stress (ksi) Stress (Mpa)
0.021

0.141

0.031

0.212

0.062

0.424

0.016

0.110

0.024

0.165

0.048

0.329

Tangential (Y-Direction)

Expected
Cycles, N

1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08
1.00E+08

Required
Cycles, n

FDR

4.12E+07

0.412

1.64E+07

0.164

2.61E+06

0.026

1.85E+07

0.185

7.36E+06

0.074

1.18E+06

0.012

S FDR

0.602

0.271

3 Stress in Y-Direction

27

Margin of Safety & Fatigue Damage Ratio Calculations

Part
Manifold
Bowl
Manifold

Load Case

Condition M.S.

Max Working
pressure

1.49E+0
NA
0
2.84E-01 NA
3.66E-01 NA
275F
-4.62E02
NA
275F
3.32E-01 NA
1.23E-01 NA
3.91E+0
2
NA
Axial (X) Dir
2.62E+0
2
NA
3.54E+0
Lateral (Y)
3
NA
Dir
4.12E+0
3
NA
1.05E+0
Lateral (Z)
3
NA
Dir
8.27E+0
2
NA
Radial (Z)
NA 3.78E-02
Dir
NA 7.86E-03
Longitudinal
NA 3.91E-02
(X) Dir
NA 7.90E-03
Tangential
NA 6.02E-01
(Y) Dir
NA 2.71E-01

Proof pressure

Bowl
Manifold
Bowl

Burst pressure

Manifold

Acceleration
6.22g

Bowl
Manifold

Acceleration 2g

Bowl
Manifold

Clockwise from Top-Left Corner: Mode Shapes 1-6 for Random Vibration Analysis

Bowl
Manifold
Bowl
Manifold
Bowl
Manifold
Bowl

Acceleration 2g
Random
Vibration
Random
Vibration
Random
Vibration

FDR

275F

Conclusion:
The TVC Filter Manifold assembly achieved all the
required Margins of Safety as positive values and all the
Fatigue Damage Ratios values were lesser than the
design limit of 1.
MS > 0; FDR < 1 (Requirements)
In a nutshell, the TVC Hydraulic Filter qualified by
meeting the Margin of Safety and Fatigue Damage Ratio
requirements for all the ten analyses with the scope of
more accurate results with further detailed analyses.
Response Surface Plots for fillet Optimization

28

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS OF HOT WATER TANK USING ANSYS FLUENT

Abstract

2. A quad mesh was generated. Appropriate names were provided to the relevantsurfaces.

To solve a simple hot water tank using Ansys Fluent and to analyze the behavior of the
temperature distribution in the tank. The first phase of this project is to change the
position of the inlet and outlet with respect to the height of the tank and to understand
the reason as to why a particular setup provides a desired output.

The second phase of the project is to know the effect of the mass flow rate on the
steady-state temperature in a particular setup.

The third phase of the project is to change the turbulent K-epsilon method to
Laminar method and compare the outlet temperature using these methods. The aim
of this phase is to compare the result and to know whether the change of method
makes any significant difference in the temperature outlet or not.

3. This mesh was transferred into FLUENT.

1.Checked the mesh quality and boundary names.
2.

3.In the materials tab add a new fluid named water with density = 1000kg/m^3,
constant pressure Cp = 4216 J/kg-K, thermal conductivity = 0.677 W/m-K and Viscosity
= 8e-04 Kg/m-s.
4.

The cell zone condition was set towater.

5.

Set the boundary condition with inlet velocity u = 0.05m/s and inlet temperature =
25C. Heat source at the bottom with temperatureinput of 70C was set.

6.

In the solution methods every spatial discretization was changed to second

order.

The outlet temperature for the following 9 cases.

Temperature in K

Z2

Highest Temperature
Median Temperature
Lowest Temperature

0.2
0.2
303.23
0.6
303.66826
1.0
303.60626
Temperature in K
303.66826
302.43
300.65664

Z1
0.6
302.90324
302.1823
302.43

Energy equation model selected. Turbulent K-epsilon model was selected.

1
301.90131
301.5587
300.65664

7.

Initialize the solutions

8.

Run the calculations for 2000iterations.

4. To find the average surface temperature at the outlet following method was used.
1.

Select Reports and choose surface integrals and select on the setup
2.

From the drop down menu under report type, select mass-weighted average.

3.
In the field variable select Temperature and Static Temperature and in the
surfaces select Outlet to
find the average temperature at theoutlet.
4.

Click on compute to get the averaged surface temperature at the outlet.

Method to find the surface integrals

All the above temperatures were found using surface integrals which is under the results tab
and find the mass weighted avg.

Contour plots for Highest, Fifth highest and lowest

temperatures in horizontal and vertical cross section.
(a) Highest outlet temperature
contour maps of
vertical
cross
section for highest
temperature
(Z1=0.2 m and
Z2=0.6 m)

(b) Median outlet temperature

contour
maps
of
vertical cross section
for
median
temperature (Z1=0.6 m
and Z2=1 m)

(c) Lowest outlet temperature.

maps
of
contour
vertical cross section
for
Lowest
temperature (Z1=1 m
and Z2=1 m)

Contour maps of velocity for vertical cross section

(a) Highest outlet velocity

Figure 1: contour
maps of vertical
cross section for
highest
velocity
(Z1=0.2 m and
Z2=0.6 m)

By looking at the contour plots of the lowest and median temperature setup it can
be seen that the temperature gradient is very less as the inlets are away from the
bottom of the tank where the heat source is there. Hence proper mixing of water
does not take place and so there is not much difference in the outlet temperature
as compared to the inlet temperature.
For the highest temperature setup of Z1=0.2 m and Z2=0.2 m, the temperature
gradient is more at the bottom surface and also the inlet is close to the heat
source, so the convection of water takes place properly and water can carry more
heat at the outlet and hence the outlet temperature of water is higher than that
of the inlet.

(b) Median outlet velocity

Steady state temp vs Inlet Velocity

0.25

Inlet Velocity

Figure 2: contour
maps of vertical
cross section for
median
velocity
and
(Z1=0.6 m
Z2=1 m )

Steady state outlet temperature for different inlet velocity

for highest outlet temperature case.

(c) Lowest outlet velocity

Figure 3: contour
maps of vertical
cross section for
lowest
velocity
(Z1=1 m and Z2=1
m)

0.2
0.15
0.1

Inlet Vel

0.05
0
300

302

304

306

Plot of steadystate outlet

temperature vs
inlet velocity

308

Steady State Temperature in K

It can be seen from the above plot that as the velocity increases,
the outlet temperature starts decreasing, as the time required for
the water to heat up decreases.

DESIGN OF AEROSPACE STRUCTURES

Overview:
The objective of this project was to design and develop two minimum weight skin-stiffener designs of a critical section
of an aircraft fuselage one using a metallic material and the other using a composite material.
Design Parameters:

The inner diameter of the

critical section to be designed is
40 in.

The spacing between frames is

20 in.

The design loads were given as

10,000 lb. shear, 200,000 in-lb.
torque, and 500,000 in-lb.
bending moment as shown in
Figure.
Design Constraints:

The skin was assumed to be

only effective in carrying shear
loads

The minimum skin thickness

was restricted at 0.032 in.

The stiffener design was Z

limited only to stiffeners
with equal top and bottom
flange lengths

Needhams method was to be

employed
for
stiffener
crippling analysis

Methodology:
The materials chosen to conduct trade studies for the metallic
design were Al 6061, Al 7075-T6, Al 2024-T4, Al-Li 2199-T8E79
and for the composite design, Graphite Epoxy with a 100% 45
ply orientation was the material selected. The crippling analysis
was carried out using Needhams method. The Factor of Safety
(F.S.) was determined for the stiffener using the calculated
buckling stresses and for the skin using the calculated shear
stresses. MS Excel, MATLAB and Model-Center were employed to
conduct the analyses and all of the trade studies for the stiffener
design, stiffener spacing, and skin thickness to identify the
minimum weight design configurations for both the metallic and
composite materials. CATIA V5 was used to design the CAD
Model.
Trade studies were conducted by varying the number of stringers,
skin thickness and dimensions of the stringer. The effect of these
changes on the weight of the fuselage and the Factor of Safety of
both the stiffener and skin were analyzed using Model-Center.
Given the design parameters and design constraints, the F.S.
calculated for the skin and stiffeners and was required to be
greater than 1 for a suitable design. Numerous configurations
were tested before zeroing in on the best designs. The selected
material for metallic design was Al-Li 2199-T8E79 which weighed
13.546 lbs. and the Graphite Epoxy composite design weighed
8.821 lbs. The optimized results from the trade studies
throughout this project are shown in the following table.

Loading Parameters
Total

Weight

12.8824 lb

Skin

Material
Weight

Al 6061
9.5560 lb

Thickness
Critical Shear Buckling Stress

0.039 in
6241.4 psi

Maximum Shear Stress

6110.4 psi

Material
Weight

Al 2024
3.3264 lb

Style
Number
a dim
b dim
Thickness
Area/stiff

Z
36
0.4 in
0.8 in
0.03 in
0.0462 in

Weight/Stiff

0.0924 lb

Total Area

1.6632 in2

Critical Buckling Stress

30103 psi

Maximum Normal Stress

30058 psi

Stiffeners

Total Moment of inertia

Final Optimized Results

332.6888

32

FEA Analysis:
Fuselage geometry is analyzed by using ABAQUS. Modeling is
done in CATIA from which .stp file is imported into ABAQUS.
Finite Element analysis consists for following important steps
Preprocessing:
Element formulation
Assembly
Solving the equations
Post processing:
Determining quantities of interest such as stresses and strains
and obtaining visualization of the response.
Meshing
Material and section assignment comes under preprocessing.
Boundary conditions are applied to the both ends. One end
of the fuselage is fixed by restricting all six degrees of
freedom. Bending, Shear and torsional moments are applied
to the other end of the fuselage.
Meshing is completed in student edition of Abaqus.
Following fig shows fuselage mesh with 672 elements. As
student version supports only 1000 nodes for analysis,
analysis is done with the coarse mesh. Job is then submitted
and stresses are analyzed in the visualization window.
Results of FEA analysis:
Following figure shows the deformed structure of the
fuselage with stresses induced in the structure. As mesh is
coarse, obtained stresses are slightly varying with the actual
one. For analysis 24 number of stiffeners are considered. It
can be clearly seen that structure is slightly twisted because
of torsional moment.

Dimensional drawing for Zstiffener and skin of composite

fuselage

Conclusion

Front view of composite

fuselage with 40 No.
stiffeners

Von-Mises stresses in the

metallic fuselage with 24 No. of
stiffeners

Meshing on metallic
fuselage

Displacement in the
metallic fuselage with 24
No. of stiffeners

We have discussed the results for fuselage design using Aluminum alloys and composite
material made of Graphite / Epoxy. Both these optimum designs were derived
simultaneously by their design approach and optimum weighted fuselage configuration
found out by our applied trade study.
34

FUSED DEPOSITION MODELING: AN ANALYSIS OF AESTHETICS, ACCURACY AND ISOTROPY

Overview:

This experiment explored the role and effects of various factors to determine how
each interacted in a Fused Deposition Modeling method of Rapid Prototyping

Four factors were analyzed, each with high and low levels with 2 replicates and eight
runs in each replicate. The last factor was confounded and a 24-1 Resolution III design
was analyzed to identify significant factors.

This project focused on exploring how specific programming parameters affect the
outcome of 3D printed parts. Nylon is a new material recently released for fused
deposition modeling (FDM) by Stratasys.

Choice of Factors, Levels and Range:

Layer Resolution: 0.007 and 0.010.

Contour and Raster: 2 levels

Number of Contours: 1 and 3

Raster to Raster Spacing: 0.003 and 0.001

Above figure was the CAD model chosen for the experiment. This part includes several different
types of geometry so results from this experiment should apply to most parts printed using
FDM technology

Design

Factors Held Constant:

24 1

Variability within the Machine

Number of Runs

Tip Wear and Tear

Number of Blocks

Defining Relation

I = ABCD

Factor Level
A
B
C
D

Factor
Layer Resolution
Contour/Raster Size
Number of Contours
Raster to Raster
Spacing

Units
Inches
Inches
N/A

Low
0.007
0.016
1

High
0.010
0.026
3

Inches

0.001

0.003

In the above design, the principal fraction I=ABCD has been utilized which yields
D=ABC. Minitab was used for creating the design, recording, and analyzing the
outputs.

Design Summary
Study Type:
Runs:
Design Model:

Design Matrix
Factorial
16
4FI

Initial Design:
No. of Blocks:

2-Level Factorial
2

Performing the Experiment

Only one operator was handling the equipment throughout the experiment. The runs
were performed on the same machine in a random order and in a closed room with
negligible variation in room temperature. The machine envelope temperature remains
constant and all eight runs for each replicate were performed without stopping in the
middle of anysequence.
Once the parts are completed, each one is weighed separately and the values
are documented. The output response matrix is as shown below:
Batch
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2

D=ABC

Weight (g)
43.60
40.88
43.11
41.49
42.29
38.35
42.83
39.28
43.24
40.43
42.51
41.02
42.84
38.16
42.80
39.25

The design test matrix for the 24 is as shown below. The chosen method involves a fractional
factorial experiment where the last factor is aliased into the other three factors. This method
allows fewer runs to be made without completing a full factorial experiment. In order to check
for accuracy and repeatability, two different spools of nylon will be used for verification.

Block
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 1
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2
Nylon Spool 2

Factor 1
Layer Resolution
(inches)

Factor 2
Contour/Raster
Size (Inches)

Factor 3
Number of
Contours (#)

Factor 4
Raster to Raster
Spacing (inches)

0.010
0.007
0.010
0.010
0.007
0.010
0.007
0.007
0.010
0.007
0.010
0.007
0.010
0.007
0.010
0.007

0.026
0.026
0.016
0.026
0.016
0.016
0.026
0.016
0.026
0.016
0.026
0.026
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.026

1
1
3
3
1
1
3
3
1
1
3
3
1
3
3
1

0.001
0.003
0.001
0.003
0.001
0.003
0.001
0.003
0.001
0.001
0.003
0.001
0.003
0.003
0.001
0.003

The target weight for each part was a minimum of 42.0147 grams while the
theoretical weight for each part was 46.683 grams.

Results and Statistical Analysis

The initial ANOVA results are indicated in the table below and it appears that none of
the factors of interactions are significant at the 5% level; however, Factors A and D
have lower P values than the others, implying more significance. The sparse effects
show that it is very unlikely that the 3 factor high order interaction terms aliased with
B and C are significant, which is typically from the main effects or low order
interactions.
Source
Model
Blocks
Linear
A
B
C
D
2-Way
Interactions

DF
8
1
4
1
1
1
1
3

ADJ SS
33.6687
1.311
31.5406
13.6900
2.6896
0.0289
15.1321
0.8171

ADJ MS
4.2086
1.3110
7.8852
13.6900
2.6896
0.0289
15.1321
0.2724

F-Value
3.34
1.04
6.26
10.87
2.14
0.02
12.02
0.22

P-Value
0.065
0.342
0.018
0.013
0.187
0.884
0.010
0.882

A*B
A*C
A*D
Error
Total

1
1
1
7
15

0.0729
0.3721
0.3721
8.8156
42.4846

0.0729
0.3721
0.3721
1.2594

0.06
0.3
0.3

0.817
0.604
0.604

Conclusion
After conducting meticulously planned experimental runs for recording of the
response variable (weight) over different levels of chosen factors, a thorough
analysis was carried out using the Minitab. Due to this precise and meticulous
additive manufacturing process, major variations did not occur. The factors and their
interactions did not pose any significant effects at the 95% confidence interval. This
experiment illustrates that the 3D FDM printing application can be used to produce
very accurate models of the finished part from a CAD model. Future
experimentation can utilize other factors like temperature of the base plate/print
head, speed of material addition, strength of finished model, etc., to test for the
effectiveness of FDM as a highly viable and accurate Rapid Prototyping Method.

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF HEAT TRANSFER IN A THIN PLATE

Overview:
In this project heat transfer analysis of a thin plate was conducted using Matlab and Abaqus.
Analytical solution was compared with Abaqus and Matlab and parallel results were
obtained.

Parameter
Plate edge length L
Hole radius
r
Heat capacity
K

Value
2m
20 cm
54 W/(mK)

Comparison between Matlab and Abaqus Solution

As seen from the both the solutions
obtained from Matlab and Abaqus. We can
see that the temperature field in both the
solutions have reached very identical limit
depending upon the non-uniform heat flux
which is applied on the surface of the hole.

Comparison between matlab and

analytical solution

Matlab Solution

Abaqus Solution

Also further study suggests that when the number of elements

are increased or the mesh size is reduced at different levels of
mesh than the temperature reaches a stable value. It is an
implication which shows us that after a certain point, there is no
added advantage of receiving better results when the mesh size
is kept on decreasing. Below plot suggest us that after a
particular mesh sizes, the temperature remains constant

Comparison between Linear and Quadratic elements

263 Linear Elements

Maximum temperature under several mesh sizes show that it reaches a

stable value.

263 Quadratic Elements

The above plot shows us that the use of Quadratic elements

instead of linear elements gives us a more better and
refined results.

EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF CONTACTLESS POWER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

Abstract

The conventional transmission system having various gears like spur, worm etc
have much application in industrial machines and automobiles. Although their use
is important they have some inherent problems such as contact friction, noise,
vibrations, power losses and heat.

The report deals with the possibility of replacing a mechanical gear system by a
magnetic gear system. The magnetic gear system has many advantages such as
contact-free, no gear lubrication, high speed reduction ratio and high durability. It
is mainly used in application that requires torque coupling between separated. It
also shows the application of rare-earth magnets. The magnets are magnetically
coupled to one another. When one magnet rotates it imparts torque to second
magnet causing it to rotate

This experiment shows how the use of magnetic gears can reduce the loss due to
friction, power losses, reduction in wear and reduction in maintenance cost. The
result of this study can be used to conclude that the magnetic gears can be the
optimum replacement of mechanical gears.

What is Magnetic drive system?

A drive system where the system uses magnets (preferable
permanent magnets) for mechanical power transmission is
known as magnetic drive system.
The attraction and repulsive forces with are generated by the
magnets are used for power transmission with minimum amount
of air gap between the 2 magnetic disc. When the drive shaft
rotates due to discs magnetic field interacting with other disc
the driven shaft starts rotating.

Material Used

For this experiment a very strong Neodymium magnets were used for this
experiment. They have the highest magnetic field strength and have a
higher coercivity (which makes them magnetically stable), but they have a
lower Curie temperature and are more vulnerable to oxidation than
samarium-cobalt magnets.

Experimental Setup
Various system components and measuring device used in the experimental setup.
1) Shaft , Gear Inserts/Flange Coupling , Plumber Block, Motor, Magnetic Discs,
Bush Coupling, Tachometer
These components have been chosen on the basis of design of shaft calculation.
The shaft calculation gives us the various parameters such as shear stress, tensile
stress, load bearing capacity, possible power transmission capabilities etc.
In this section the calculation of the shaft diameter and its related stresses that is
being induced, calculation for the couplings, 2D and 3D modeling of all the
components and then the final assembly design is shown.

Plumber block

4 Plumber block were used. 2 on the driving side and 2 on the driven side. The plumber block
is used to support the shaft. The inner diameter of the plumber block is 28.6mm. The diameter
of the plumber block is chosen on the basis of the shaft diameter. The material of the plumber
blocks which holds the shaft is of stainless steel and the rest of the plumber block is of mild
steel. The screws which is used to fix the plumber block is of 12mm diameter with 1.25mm

Motor

Gear inserts

The gear inserts are designed taking the reference as 28.6mm diameter of the shaft. Based on
the shaft diameter the size of the inner diameter and outer diameter of the hub, outside
diameter of bolt, number of bolt, thickness of bolt has beencalculated

The motor used is of 1H.P and 1440 R.P.M single phase

motor. The diameter of the shaft of the motor is 20mm
while the power transmitting shaft is of 28.6mm diameter.
So as to transfer the power from motor to the shaft bush
coupling was used. A special machining had to be done on
both the sides of the bush coupling. On one side the hole
was drilled was of 20mm and on the other side it was of
28.6mm dia.

Magnetic disc

This is the most important part of the experimental

setup. These magnetic discs are not actually fully
magnetic. They are PVC materials which have slots the
same size of the magnets. The magnets used are
Neodymium magnets with boron coating is used
(NdFeB). The size of the magnets are
50mm*25mm*10mm. The size of the disc has outer
diameter as 200mm and the inner diameter as 30mm.
There are 4 holes drilled at 90mm diameter of the
magnetic disc so as to mount it on the gear inserts.
The magnets have been fitted using araldite

Coupling
A coupling is a device used to connect two shafts together at their
ends for the purpose of transmitting power. Couplings do not
normally allow disconnection of shafts during operation. A special
machining had to be done on both the sides of the bush coupling.
On one side the hole was drilled was of 20mm and on the other side
it was of 28.6mm dia.

Testing and Analysis

Experimental setup
1)

Motor

2)

Magnetic disc

3)

A ) input shaft
B) Output shaft

4) Plumber block

Testing parameter
Test is done in rejection and in different configuration. Two coupling part
on both driven and driving side was the limit. Air gap of 1, 3 and 5mm
were used. Since the couplings are not perfectly flat the air gap cannot
be determined securely. This should be taken into account while
determining the results. Every measurement was done three times. The
couplings were built up out of 2, 3 and 4 disc. More than 4 disc does not
seem economical as it increases the over cost.
Efficiency
The efficiency of the coupling is between 99 and 100%. The exact
number for each coupling is difficult to measure, since the efficiency is
very high and the measurement before and after the coupling the
coupling is almost the same and in the same range as the tolerance of
the measuring instruments. Therefore efficiency cannot be determined
more accurately.

Test results
Configuration 1-1
AIR-GAP

INPUT
(RPM)

1-1 config
OUTPUT
(RPM)

1360
1340

1mm

1360

1350

3mm

1360

1330

1320
1300
1280

5mm

1360

1290
1260

1mm

3mm

5mm

Air gap VS Output rpm

Configuration 1-2
AIR GAP

1-2 config

INPUT
(RPM)

OUTPUT
(RPM)

1mm

1360

1353

3mm

1360

1339

5mm

1360

1295

Configuration 2-2

1360
1340
1320
1300
1280
1260

AIR GAP

INPUT

2-2 config
OUTPUT

1360
1340

1mm

1mm

2mm

3mm

1360

1354

3mm

1360

1342

5mm

1360

1302

1320
1300
1280
1260
1mm

Air gap VS Output rpm

1360
1340
1320
1300
1280
1260
1240
1-1 config

1-2 config

3mm

5mm

Air gap VS Output rpm

Conclusion

1mm
3mm

Based on the results we can say that these magnetic coupling are highly efficient in power
transfer, with efficiency ranging between 99-100%

While working of the system it is proved that the friction is reduced to zero, reduction in
losses due to wear and negligible maintenance.

5mm

The magnetic gear can have comparable or better performances than the mechanical one
with the obvious benefits in avoiding many mechanical drawbacks.

The reduction in air gap can significantly increase slip torque, another important point to
consider when constructing the prototype Rare-Earth magnets are very useful in different
electromechanical devices.

It is proved that the magnetic gear has a significantly improved efficiency with a
comparable or smaller volume than the classical gears. In the future, more care must be
given to the mechanical construction.

2-2 config

The above comparison clearly shows that there hardly any change in the output rpm with
the change in configuration with a constant air gap, but it clearly indicates that with
increasing air gap between the discs the transferred rpm changes decreases.
The reduction is rpm happens due to the increased gap between the discs which leads to
less interaction of the magnetic field. These are the reason which causes considerable
amount of slippage leading to less amount of power transfer

Design Intern: Otis Lift Manufacturing Ltd

Vertical lift Extension Drafting:

In this project, AutoCAD 2010 design software

was used for drafting of the elevator
assembly providing detailed specification of
the hoist way dimensions, size of the
platform, actual car size used to carry
passengers.
Also providing with detailed technical
specifications of the elevators which include:
Details

Scale Dimensions

Type of Lift

Passenger

Load/Capacity

26 passenger

Speed

0.5 mps

No. of Stops/Openings

12/12

Floor marking

-1, 0, 1, 2, .10

Rise (mm)

38270 mm

Door Operation

Automatic

Door Direction

R.T.L

Landing Door

S.S Telescopic auto door

Rope No Dia

5 ropes 13 mm

2D drafting for vertical extension of elevators using AutoCAD 2010

Machinery Used for Fabrication

Fabrication and Analysis process

Once the designing of the elevators is done, than it

is feed into the fiber optic laser cutting machine.
Sometimes for the shearing and bending of the
sheet metal is carried out using CNC press brake
machine and CNC Back Gauge system.
In another project, structural analysis of the floor
bed of the elevators was performed by reducing
the size of the C-section cross bearer used for the
elevator floors from 100*50*6 mm and it was
optimized to 75*40*6 mm suggesting that lesser
C-cross section dimension beam can be used
reducing and saving an overall cost of material by
17%. The design was considered safe when the
result after the analysis are within the range of
acceptance. The results indicated that the both the
existing as well as the optimized cross-bearers are
SAFE designs as the induced Von-Mises Stresses in
both are designs are within the Ultimate Tensile
Strength limit. For the design SolidWorks 2010 was
used and for static structural analysis Ansys 12.0
was utilized.

CNC press brake machine

CNC back gauge system

Fiber optic laser cutting machine

Final sheet metal fabrication of

elevators