| General > General Technical Chat |
| Sharing some project planning phase: A (digital) ELECTRO-MECHANICAL Network |
| << < (5/39) > >> |
| RJSV:
I wanted to take time to describe my own take, on developing prototypes. Believe it, or not, that's my BABY, there, figuritively. (See picture). I'm thinking: "Any customer, of my product, is going to notice, any dirty fingerprints, on that unfinished wood box". So that's one concern. Inventers are, sometimes, a strange breed...You aren't 'working' for a living, no cash usually coming in today. That can look a fool's pursuit. REWARDING, heh yeah...maybe tomorrow. You can't be expecting quick rewards, or you lose sight. But it can be a very unpleasant journey. The problem area, with prototypes, is you can be faced with a wide open, BLANK page, and better get busy. Many folks balk at this point (ha! Wimps). But in reality, not so bleak as there are some set patterns of action that some creative people utilize. Plus, pay attention to an opposite effect. Say, you've got a new dress design. Using existing designs, think of the burden, of review all those (thousands) of previous dress designs. In that dynamic, you are often better off ignoring everything else, and just get (your) design down, in paper, first. THEN, you enter the 'prior art' review phase. (NO LEGAL ADVICE, just opinion). For dealing with novel design, my approach often starts with a goal, first prototype model, often precedes most functional goals. It's a packaging and 'fit and use' ergonomic consideration. Of course, this describes prototyping mechanics and with 'educational' market aspects, so the package appearance takes precedence. The first (couple of) models, I let things get slightly 'wild', meaning that some bold or unusual feature might be emphasized. For example, after considering one particular model, requiring 4 foot tall cabinet, I went bold: exaggerating that cabinet, to 7 feet height. Now, that's bold, but some restraint needed too! I often don't strictly require the whole 100 % of functions to be working, until 3rd prototype model is begun. My main point here is that it doesn't add that much to sort-of 'decorate' the dang thing: In this case, I wanted that clear wooden box to get a nice varnish, or oil rub finish. Can't hurt, and makes your new 'baby' purty to look at... Meanwhile, maybe you can't visualize the whole of it, mechanically especially. You give it your best shot, and add some cosmetically pleasing appearance. It can be an attitude changing approach. |
| RJSV:
Referring to previous photo, for sealing the wood case I like a product, WATCO DANISH OIL, a rub on oil finish. I mean, why not get your prototype cabinet looking good, at a stage where things are starting to mostly fit together and work. "DON'T BE A 'WOOD BUTCHER' as my 9th grade Wood Shop teacher would say. (lol). By the third prototype box build I generally expect most of the nagging problems to be solved. For mechanical items it often comes down to a good 3-D perception, whether it's visual, or simply precedes any viable looking model. As you may purcieve, I put maybe more emphasis on 'looks' but that's an eye towards customer engagement. That's actually a HUGE vital aspect, if the effort is to create trade-worthy market products. Sometimes, a big / major error occurs. That's OK, part of this business cycle. For example: suppose a co-worker points out: "...your signal output labels are totally backwards, on the bottom half..." Now, perhaps a decision point: Remember the prototype isn't simply a 'wooden box': that's your investment, there, represents all those hours, time spent searching hardware store shelves, etc etc. You have a management question: One approach is to be consistent and plan for at least part of (that 3rd proto model) to be functional and ready for some quality worthy testing, big time. Otherwise, you have to consider 'abandoning' that 3rd prototype model, and endure another round of build. Yes, I guess it's at this point that things can get serious. Every inventor / innovator has this kind of story...well almost all of us... "I don't like inventing, but the inventing likes me.." (Borrowed from song lyrics: "I don't like THE DRUGS but the drugs like me". Inventor reading this? Even if technically off-base, the information here is meant to encourage creative exploration, in engineering, and present some methods in approaching novelty in product development. Thanks. |
| RJSV:
By way of explanation, the attached picture shows, partially, the organization of 'internal compartments. To simplify, there are two main rectangular compartments or volumes. That is, the interior division, depicted by the half-wall in the picture, is, first, to make the 'A' and the 'C' individual switch areas. Then, interior to those, further divided (not shown here) are two volumes or 'compartments' where function is split: one compartment handles inputs, to the 3PDT switch, while the other is for Output components. It's all fairly simple, but with some demanding attention, for avoiding basic interferences, 3-D wise. Because the switch module involves this 4 layer stack of compartments, the depth available for components is fairly tight, (using 4 inch depth, in present prototype.) Perhaps too much detail info here, but the 'C' portion of the assembly sits behind the other ('A'), and literally, the shafts associated with 'A' had to 'poke through' the volume assigned to the 'C' toggle portion. That's OK, as clearances are carefully kept, between the two extra shafts, and the toggle lever (of 'C' ). It's messy, but easy to assemble. |
| RJSV:
Here is photo depicting an antenna modifying 'tuning' or impedance switching, as MEMS application. (That's Micro-Electro-Mechanical device). For special switching, roof-top or other settings, including in presence of high voltages, the Mechanical Network, discussed here, could be utilized, at the four switch points, shown in the example. Of course, would be easier, to just run 4 shafts with no complicated 'network node boxes'. A better example might be, if there are several such antennas, needing switches, say, spread out over a roof-top. Then, a network accessed mechanically, by four 'encoded' shafts, could replace a system, say four antennas, each needing 4 switch boxes. So that reduces the 'control' shafts from 16 original. |
| RJSV:
Picture shows prototype enclosure, the 3PDT mechanical switch box, in comparison with what half-sized unit would look like. (That's a standard wall box, for indoor light switch). By designing / building at that scale, volume goes down, by a factor of 8. Much of the switch box could be done different: after all, it's really just a small rotary transmission. It's the LOGICAL use here, that is central to operating as a networked string of devices. Current design uses rubber wheels, for rotary contact, but a gear to gear arrangement probably has lower total friction. Friction is a critical factor, when attempting to operate a string of, say, 40 devices (3PDT Switches). |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |