STATIC HOCKEY BLADE TESTING JIG

GROUP 20

Blake Loiselle

Mohsin Naseer

Mostafa Momtaz

Mohammad Siddiqui

Presentation OutlineOverview▪ Hockey blade testing▪ Bauer Testing Jig

Problem Statement▪ Client requirements▪ Constraints▪ Goals and Objectives

Design Process▪ Concept Generation ▪ Concept Evaluation▪ Final concept

Design Embodiment and Analysis▪ Heel Clamp▪ Toe Clamp▪ Disk▪ Jig Assembly

Closing Thoughts▪ Current Progress▪ Challenges▪ Lessons Learned

The stick at a glance…

Blade patterns have evolved!

● professional players improve their skills over time

● demand variations of already present blades to better suit their needs.

● One problem hockey stick developers have yet to solve is standardizing the torsional rigidity of the various hockey stick blades available in the market

Courtesy Bauer Inc.

essential step during manufacturing of hockey sticks…

Hockey blade testing

What is Torsional Rigidity?The ratio of the torque applied about the centroid axis of the body to the resulting torsional angle, when the other end is held fixed. ● Mathematically expressed as

 

T is applied torque or torsion in N.m. G is the shear modulus in GPa L is the length of the object in m ∅ is the angle of twist in radians

Bauer Hockey Blade Testing Jig

Torque applying

disk

Blade toe Clamp

Blade heel clamp

Dynamometer pull (bike

chain)

Adjustable Platform

© Bauer Hockey

Shortcomings● Blade toe not flat – clamping plates deform toe’s curvature ● Deformation and friction in the bike chain

 

Problem Statement

“Conceptualize and redesign a heel and toe clamping device, better known as the testing jig in order to produce more

reliable results in repeated torsional tests on a variety of hockey blades”

Client Requirements From pairwise comparison chart (PCC) and function means tree (FMT)

Constraints● Cost cannot exceed $5000● Blade will not twist more than 15° in either direction● Curve depth does not exceed ¾” for legal hockey blades● Maximum blade length 12.5”● Blade width between 2-3”● Disk diameter 12” and force from dynamometer 113 lbf● The redesigned jig must be restricted to the table

dimensions● Torque and angle measurement using the existing

dynamometer

How?● Brainstorming● Literature review● Eliminate unfeasible ideas ● Concept Generation and Evaluation● House of Quality (HOQ)● Morphological Chart ● Pugh’s matrix ● Design Embodiment● Material consideration● CAD modeling and detailed drawings

Our goal?• Analyze the aspects of Bauer’s design that contributed to their inconsistency• Mitigate the sources of error, and• Build a final design that improves stability, consistency and standardization

JIG DESIGN

Torsional Rigidity

minimize human error

Accommodate any blade

pattern

minimize surface damage cost

effective durable for many tests

accommodate different blade

lengths

isolate the blade from

stickprecise for repeated

measurements

Angle of disk rotation <15°

supports weight of the blade

at heel and toe

Brainstorming

Concept 1

● 4 line loads for clamping at heel

● 3D printed adapters for the toe clamp

● Translation along y-axis via track to

accommodate for blades of varying

length

● Rotating heel mounting structure

Concept 2● line loads at the heel and toe (for clamping)● screw lock mechanism at the heel to fix column rotation● pegs for adjusting the x and y position of the base

Concept 3

● applied twist using 4 bar-linkage system instead of a disk

● line load clamps to secure the shaft

● toe clamped to a disk, which in turn is attached to the bar

● lacks versatility

Concept 4

● point contact spherical clamps at the toe and heel

● rotating platform for adjustability at the heel

● point contact clamping not ideal for rotation

Concept Evaluation Morphological Chart

Pugh’s Matrix

Concept 1 leads!

Concept 1 leads!

● Uses 3D printed adapters ● hold any specific blade pattern rigidly ● no deformation prior to testing● max. torque transmission to blade ● Reduced potential for surface damage

● Line loading at heel● good contact (no drastic curve)● strong forces to prevent torque

● Translational base and heel structure● offers highest versatility● simple and sturdy design

Final Concept

Jig Design

Platform

Disk Support

Disk

Toe Clamp

Blade

Heel Clamp

Y-direction shaft

X-direction shaft

Jig Design

28”

17.9”

18.48”

Heel Clamp: DesignY-Direction: 5.32” Variation

X-Direction: 7.03 “

Heel Clamp: Design

Rollers: 1.04” Variation

Heel Clamp Structure

Rotating Disk: 32.3 Variation⁰

Heel Clamp: Analysis

●  

Mz

My

Mz

● 2-plane bending

● Fixed-fixed indeterminate beam

● Safety factor = 2

● D= 0.759 ‘’

● For further safety, D=1.0 ‘’

My

Heel Clamp: MaterialStructure - Aluminum 6013

● Strong enough: Yield Tensile Strength = 160 MPa● 3 times lighter than low carbon steel● Good machinability● Market Availability (McMaster Carr), given dimensions● Not expensive - $142.95

Heel Clamp: MaterialSlider Shafts - Aluminum 6061 (Anodized)

● Strong enough: Yield Tensile Strength = 241 MPa● Corresponding locks and supports are available in desired

dimensions ● Cheap: $34.1

Shaft LockShaft Support

Toe Clamp: Design

● 3.17’’ variation horizontally

● 4 pins holding adapter

● 4 holes mounting bracket to disk

● bearing between adjustment rods and adapter holders

4.33”

10.24”

2.36”

3.15”

2.76”

Toe Clamp: Dimensions

Structure - Aluminum 6013

● Strong enough: Yield Tensile Strength = 160 MPa● 3 times lighter than low carbon steel● Good machinability● Market Availability (McMaster Carr), given dimensions● Not expensive - $131.96

Toe Clamp: Material

Toe Clamp: AdapterAdapters - Carbon Fiber

● Strongest material available at McGill 3D Printing Service - 700 MPa● Affordable - $2.6/cm3

Adapter Boundary

Disk: Design

● Material: Aluminum 6013

1”

12”

R=6”

Testing Jig Assembly

Testing Jig Assembly

Current Progress● Heel Clamp Structure Redesign More parts for

machinability/assembly

Multiple, easy access bolts to adjust angle of rotation

Overall design change to accommodate new parts

Simple rod beam supports

Current Progress● Given a “go-ahead” to machine parts by machinists, however due to

an excess of orders and our own later submission production is estimated to be end of April for completion

Current ProgressNext Steps

1. Finish modelling Disk Support Structure

2. Update all part drawings and submit work order form

3. Address the cut direction issue with the 3D printed adapters, make mirrored part and submit for fabrication (postponed due to machinist priority)

4. Order off the shelf components (all currently available on McMaster-Carr, < 1 week delivery)

Challenges● Using different methods to simplify problem - use of safety factors● Obtaining all details - lack of information negatively affects design

process● Communicating well - between team and company● Having a balance of skills - missing some key strengths that could be

applied to our design

Learning LessonsThe importance of problem clarity

● What are all the components that make up a hockey stick blade jig?● Prototype environment? Dimensioning?● Are we constrained to a torque application procedure (Dynamometer

vs. piston with 4 bar linkage force application)

“Don’t need to reinvent the wheel”● Can use inspirations in other designs for our own implementation if

those concepts do not negatively affect our design goals and functions

● Project can be classified as a continuous improvement project due to its nature

Thank you!Questions?