Northeastern University

Mechanical Engineering Undergraduate Capstone

Projects

Department of Mechanical and Industrial

Engineering

December 08, 2005

Development of a new arm for the foster-miller

talon robot
Jon T. Hastie
Northeastern University

Ben Jacobs
Northeastern University

Chris Martell
Northeastern University

Tim Parker
Northeastern University

Amir Talakoub
Northeastern University

Recommended Citation
Hastie, Jon T.; Jacobs, Ben; Martell, Chris; Parker, Tim; and Talakoub, Amir, "Development of a new arm for the foster-miller talon
robot" (2005). Mechanical Engineering Undergraduate Capstone Projects. Paper 51. http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d10011596

This work is available open access, hosted by Northeastern University.

Development of a New Arm For The

Foster-Miller TALON Robot
MIMEU701-702
Technical Design Report

The Capstone Design Course Report Format

Project #F07
Mid-Term Report
Sponsor: Foster-Miller Inc.
Design Advisor: Prof. Mavroidis
Design Team
Jon Hastie, Ben Jacobs
Chris Martell, Tim Parker
Amir Talakoub

Department of Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

College of Engineering, Northeastern University
Boston, MA 02115
December 8, 2005

Development of a New Arm for the Foster-Miller TALON Robot:

Final Analysis

Design Team
Jon Hastie, Ben Jacobs
Chris Martell, Tim Parker
Amir Talakoub
Design Advisor
Professor Dinos Mavroids

Abstract
Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) robots save the lives of soldiers and civilians every
day. The TALON robot by Foster-Miller is the choice of many military EOD teams and
civilian bomb squads. The TALON robots manipulator arm is extremely capable, but
does have its limitations. The addition of a shoulder rotational degree of freedom while
maintaining the ruggedness, ease of maintenance, and mounting points to the platform
would greatly improve the soldiers ability to disable explosives. This paper examines
similar EOD robot arms, especially the TALONs closest competitor, the Packbot EOD.
It also discusses alternative power transmission methods as well as novel manipulator
designs.
Our design leaves two motors in the base of the robot and transmits power to the shoulder
pitch and shoulder rotation using a setup similar to a differential. The elbow motor will
be mounted above this and transmit power within the upper arm. The paper also
discusses challenges that occurred during the design process and a detailed analysis of all
major components within the arm. Solid modeling of the arm, an in depth discussion of
how the arm works, and the prototype build process are also included in the report.
The arm was ultimately assembled at Northeastern University. The design was integrated
with the TALON platform and was tested for dexterity. The test demonstrated the
successful rotation and pitch of the new shoulder joint as well as the new elbow drive.

Acknowledgments
The design team would like to thank Professor Dinos Mavroidis and Brian Weinberg of Northeastern University for
their guidance during this initial phase. They would also like to thank Tony Aponick, Hoi Tong, Ray Jenoski, Joe
Dunne, Dan Cocuzzo, Jen Sarkis, and Jeff Wiley of Foster-Miller Incorporated for their guidance and cooperation.
Their financial support throughout the project has also been greatly appreciated. The team would also like to thank
East Coast Machine and Design for their devotion and hard work during the fabrication and assembly phase of this
project.

Copyright
We the team members,
Jon Hastie
member 1

Ben Jacobs
member 2

Chris Martell
member 3

Tim Parker
member 4

Amir Talakoub
member 5

Professor Dinos Mavroidis

faculty advisor

Hereby assign our copyright of this report to the Mechanical and Industrial Engineering (MIE) Department of
Northeastern University. We also hereby agree that the video of our Oral Presentations is the full property of the
MIE Department.

Publication of this report does not constitute approval by Northeastern University, the MIE Department or its
faculty members of the findings or conclusions contained herein. It is published for the exchange and stimulation of
ideas.

Table of Contents
List of Figures.................................................................................................................... 3
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... 5
Chapter 1 - Introduction .................................................................................................. 6
Chapter 2 - Background................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Foster-Miller TALON............................................................................................... 8
2.2 Commercial and Military EOD Robots .................................................................. 11
2.3 Industrial Manipulators........................................................................................... 15
2.4 Power Transmission................................................................................................ 18
2.4.1 Direct Drive ..................................................................................................... 18
2.4.2 Chain Drive...................................................................................................... 18
2.4.3 Belt Drive......................................................................................................... 19
2.4.4 Shaft Drive ....................................................................................................... 21
2.4.5 Hydraulic Power .............................................................................................. 22
2.4.6 Pneumatics ....................................................................................................... 23
2.4.7 Cable Drive ...................................................................................................... 24
2.4.8 Shape Memory Alloys ..................................................................................... 25
2.4.9 Electroactive Polymers .................................................................................... 26
2.5 Other Novel Ideas ................................................................................................... 28
2.5.1 Elephant Trunk Robot ................................................................................... 28
2.5.2 Robotic Hand Mechanism................................................................................ 28
2.5.3 A Flexible, Tendon-Controlled Device for Endoscopies................................. 30
2.5.4 Snake Robots ................................................................................................... 31
2.5.5 Barrett Technologys Cable Drive WAM........................................................ 32
Chapter 3 Concept Development................................................................................ 33
3.1 The Customer: Foster-Miller Inc. .......................................................................... 33
3.2 Communications with Foster Miller ....................................................................... 34
3.2.1 Design Criteria ................................................................................................. 35
3.2.2 Design Specifications....................................................................................... 37
3.3 Preliminary Shoulder Design Concepts .................................................................. 40
3.3.1 Fixed Shoulder Rotation Motor ....................................................................... 40
3.3.2 Floating Shoulder-Pitch Shaft.......................................................................... 41
3.3.3 Two Fixed Motor Design with Clutch ............................................................. 42
3.3.4 Three Fixed-Motor Design: Vertically Mounted............................................. 43
3.3.5 Flat, Brushless Motor as Third Fixed Motor ................................................... 45
3.4 Preliminary Elbow Design Concepts ...................................................................... 47
3.4.1 External, Vertically-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint ....................................... 47
3.4.2 External, Horizontally-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint................................... 47
3.4.3 Internal, Vertically-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint ........................................ 48
3.4.4 In-Line, Vertically-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint......................................... 48
3.4.5 In-Line, Horizontally-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint .................................... 49
3.5 Concept Selection ................................................................................................... 49
3.6 Final Concept .......................................................................................................... 51
Chapter 4 Design and Analysis................................................................................... 54

4.1 Design ..................................................................................................................... 54

4.1.1 Arm Base ......................................................................................................... 54
4.1.2 Upper Arm Assembly ...................................................................................... 62
4.1.3 Connection of Assemblies ............................................................................... 64
4.1.4 Design Challenges ........................................................................................... 65
4.2 Shaft Design and Analysis ...................................................................................... 70
4.3 Gear Selection and Analysis ................................................................................... 71
4.4 Elbow Drive Design................................................................................................ 77
4.4.1 Power Transmission Method ........................................................................... 77
4.4.2 Elbow Motor Selection .................................................................................... 78
4.4.3 Elbow Motor and Gearbox Layout .................................................................. 79
4.4.4 Elbow Belt System Selection........................................................................... 80
4.4.4 Elbow Spur Gear Selection.............................................................................. 82
4.5 Bill of Materials ...................................................................................................... 83
4.6 Lifting Capacity ...................................................................................................... 85
Chapter 5: Manufacturing and Assembly .................................................................... 86
5.1 Machining and Prototype Decisions ....................................................................... 86
5.2 Creation of Key Components.................................................................................. 88
5.3 Actual Parts............................................................................................................. 90
Chapter 7: Future Steps ................................................................................................. 96
Chapter 8: Conclusions .................................................................................................. 98

List of Figures
1

Figure 1 TALON EOD Robot ........................................................................................ 6

Figure 2 - TALON EOD Robot Detail1 .............................................................................. 9
Figure 3 - PackBot Team5 ................................................................................................. 12
Figure 4 - PackBot EOD5 .................................................................................................. 12
Figure 5 - RMI-9WT7 ....................................................................................................... 13
Figure 6 - Industrial Manipulators .................................................................................... 16
Figure 7 - Chain Drive ...................................................................................................... 18
Figure 8 - Belt Drive12 ...................................................................................................... 19
Figure 9 - Toothed Belt Drive12 ........................................................................................ 20
Figure 10 - Shaft Drive ..................................................................................................... 21
Figure 11 - Flexible Shaft Drive ....................................................................................... 21
Figure 12 - Hydraulic Power............................................................................................. 22
Figure 13 - Hydraulic Power Conceptual ......................................................................... 22
Figure 14 - Pneumatics ..................................................................................................... 23
Figure 15 - Air Muscles18 ................................................................................................. 24
Figure 16 - Internal Cables9 .............................................................................................. 24
Figure 17 - SMAs.............................................................................................................. 25
Figure 18 - Elephant Trunk............................................................................................... 28
Figure 19 - Complete Hand............................................................................................... 29
Figure 20 Finger Assembly............................................................................................... 29
Figure 21 - Novel Endoscope ........................................................................................... 30
Figure 22 - Snake Robot ................................................................................................... 31
Figure 23 - BarrettHand10 ................................................................................................. 32
Figure 24 Shoulder Concept 1: One Fixed, Shoulder Rotation Motor .......................... 40
Figure 25 Shoulder Concept 2: Fixed Shoulder Pitch and Shoulder Rotation Motors.. 41
Figure 26 Shoulder Concept 2a: Variation of Concept 2 Showing Elbow Motor and
External Chain Drive ................................................................................................ 42
Figure 27 - Shoulder Concept 2b: Variation of Concept 2 Showing Elbow Motor and
Internal Chain Drive ................................................................................................. 42
Figure 28 Shoulder Concept 3: Two Fixed Motors with Clutch ................................... 43
Figure 29 - Shoulder Concept 4: a) Lateral Section View; b) Isometric View................. 44
Figure 30 Shoulder Concept 4: Elbow Rotation, Shaft.................................................. 44
Figure 31 Shoulder Concept 4: Rotating Elbow Motor with Chain .............................. 45
Figure 32 Shoulder Concept 5a: 3 Fixed Motors with Concentric Shafts ..................... 45
Figure 33 - Shoulder Concept 5b: Variation of Concept 5a ............................................. 46
Figure 34 - Elbow Concept 1: External Motor: Bevel Gears............................................ 47
Figure 35 Elbow Concept 2: External Motor: Helical Gears......................................... 47
Figure 36 Elbow Concept 3: Internal Motor: Bevel Gears ............................................ 48
Figure 37 Elbow Concept 4: In-Line Motor: Bevel Gears ............................................ 48
Figure 38 Elbow Concept 5: In-Line Motor: Spur Gears .............................................. 49
Figure 39 - Proposed Concept........................................................................................... 51
Figure 40 - Design Assembly ........................................................................................... 55
Figure 41 - Cross section of base...................................................................................... 56
Figure 42 - Internal View of Power Transmission............................................................ 57
Figure 43 - Cross Section of Shoulder Power Transmission ............................................ 58
3

Figure 44 - Illustration of Shoulder Pitch Motion ............................................................ 59

Figure 45 - Shoulder Pitch Components........................................................................... 60
Figure 46 - Transfer Gear Assembly ................................................................................ 61
Figure 47 - Bottom Plate and Bearing Support................................................................. 61
Figure 48 - Shoulder Rotation Shaft ................................................................................. 61
Figure 49 - Upper Arm (First Stage of Arm).................................................................... 62
Figure 50 - Yoke Assembly .............................................................................................. 63
Figure 51 - Yoke Assembly Gear Train............................................................................ 64
Figure 52 - Connected Assemblies ................................................................................... 65
Figure 53 - Arm assembly................................................................................................. 66
Figure 54 - Shoulder Assembly ........................................................................................ 67
Figure 55 - Elbow Assembly ............................................................................................ 68
Figure 56 - FEA of shoulder shaft. ................................................................................... 70
Figure 57 Bevel gear diagram........................................................................................ 71
Figure 58 - Torque and pitch curve for selected materials ............................................... 74
Figure 59 - Torque and face width curve.......................................................................... 74
Figure 60 FEA of miter gear.......................................................................................... 75
Figure 61 Miter gear FEA cross-section........................................................................ 76
Figure 62 - Chain drive for elbow motor power transmission.......................................... 77
Figure 63 - Shaft for elbow motor power transmission .................................................... 77
Figure 64 - GT2 belt dimensions ...................................................................................... 81
Figure 65 - Pulley Dimensions ......................................................................................... 81
Figure 66 - Isometric of pulleys to be used....................................................................... 81
Figure 67 - 360 TALON Lift Capacity due to COG ....................................................... 85

List of Tables
Table 1 PackBot Specifications ..................................................................................... 12
Table 2 - Military Robot Classification Matrix ................................................................ 14
Table 3 - Comparison of Industrial Robot Configurations8 .............................................. 17
Table 4 - EAP Pros and Cons ........................................................................................... 27
Table 5 - Full Design Criteria ........................................................................................... 35
Table 6 - Top Design Criteria ........................................................................................... 37
Table 7 - Design Specifications ........................................................................................ 37
Table 8 - Concept Selection Matrix .................................................................................. 50
Table 9 - Tooth form factor. ............................................................................................. 72
Table 10 - Analysis of 16 pitch gears ............................................................................... 73
Table 11 - Comparison of spur and planetary gearheads23 ............................................... 79
Table 12 - Pulley Dimensions and Specifications ............................................................ 81
Table 13 - Spur Gear Tooth Form Factor ......................................................................... 82
Table 14 - Spur Gear Geometry Comparison ................................................................... 83
Table 15 Truncated Bill of Materials............................................................................. 84
Table 16 - Bill of Materials with Processes ...................................................................... 91

Chapter 1 - Introduction
Explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) robots have saved the lives of many military and
civilian bomb squads. The TALON robot by Foster-Miller Inc. is the choice of many of
these bomb squads due to its ability to investigate, and recover or dispose of explosive
devices. The TALON robot uses a manipulator arm to accomplish these tasks; while
adequate there is room for improvement.
The major limitation on the current TALON robot is that it can only manipulate objects
that are directly in front of it. The TALON must turn its entire platform to reach objects
that are to its sides or rear. There are many areas, such as buses and airplanes, that
turning the robot platform is not possible. This severely limits the TALONs usefulness
in these situations. By adding a rotational degree of freedom to the shoulder, the
TALONs capabilities would be vastly improved. Figure 1 shows the TALON robot and
the shoulder joint location.

Area of Design

Figure 1 TALON EOD Robot1

This project stipulates that the group work solely on the arm of the TALON robot. The
arm must work with the current robot platform, and maintain the current arms physical
envelope. Foster-Miller has made it clear that the most desired improvement is adding
horizontal rotation to the shoulder joint. Adding a degree of freedom to the shoulder
would most improve the capabilities and functionality of the TALON robot compared to
6

all other areas of improvement. The addition of a horizontal rotation degree of freedom
to the shoulder joint presents a design challenge in the form of transmitting power to the
elbow. The elbow joint is currently driven by a motor fixed to the robot platform through
a chain. Arm rotation requires that the elbow drive mechanism be modified. The
concepts laid out in this report show different methods that could be used for the transfer
of power to the elbow.
The major challenge of the project is adding the requisite features while staying within
the size constraints. As the platform geometry cannot be changed, the design must
integrate into the space occupied by the existing arm. The weight on the arm must be
minimized as any additional weight will limit the lift capacity.
The goal of this project is to analyze the current robot arm design for the TALON and
then conduct further research on competing products and methods of power transmission,
as well as perform 3-D modeling and mechanical analyses in order to present an
innovative design to Foster-Miller Inc. This will improve upon the TALON robots
method of object manipulation, while maintaining the current design attributes of
ruggedness, ease of maintenance, and ease of use. The design should be compatible with
previous models while preserving or improving upon its capabilities.

Chapter 2 - Background
This section of the report investigates direct competitors, industrial manipulators, power
transmission techniques, and novel ideas.

2.1 Foster-Miller TALON

The TALON robot was first introduced in 1991 and has gone through several iterations.
It was implemented during the aftermath of September 11th in the rubble of the World
Trade Center as well as in the caves of Afghanistan during the War on Terrorism.
Currently it is saving the lives of soldiers in Iraq by eliminating direct human contact
with explosives when defusing improvised explosive devices (IED). The robot can be
wirelessly operated with video feeds from up to two thousand meters away. Using a
combination of multiple on board cameras, the robot can discover and defuse IEDs using
the manipulator arm.
There are many features of the 90lb EOD class of robots as well as current selling points
of the TALON that must be maintained.

Man Portable: The current TALON weighs 80-120 lbs and must be transportable
by a single soldier, fit into a law enforcement officers trunk, or be deployed by
aircraft.
Rugged: The TALON is currently used in ways in which it was not originally
intended. Often the manipulator is used to dig into the ground, move or drag
larger objects, or even be sacrificed to detonate IEDs. It is important that the
TALON be able to either survive these scenarios or be easily fixed and put back
into service.
Water Resistance: The original design of the TALON was for a submersible
robot. Though the TALON is not being used as a submersible robot, water
resistance is still an important aspect.
Long Battery Life: Always an issue when working with mobile electronics, but
even more so when the lives of people depend on them. The current model has
the longest battery life in the industry.
Best Service History: All of the TALON parts are modular. Soldiers are trained
to repair and service the TALON in the field. Most times after an explosion only
the arm and some cameras need replacement.1

Figure 2 - TALON EOD Robot Detail1

The manipulator arm of the TALON is a relatively simple design. The arm can be
seen in Figure 2, mounted at the front of the platform. The base of the arm is pivoted
about a single axis. The arms drive assembly consists of a motor, gearbox,
electromagnetic inertia brake, encoder, and potentiometer. The encoder monitors
position while the robot is powered on, while the potentiometer monitors initial position
to account for movement when powered off. The arm is directly driven off of the output
shaft of this motor. There is another motor assembly in the base attached to a chain drive
that pivots with the first section of the arm. The output shafts rotate on the same axis
allowing the base of the arm to use the second motors output shaft as a support member.
The shaft runs through a bearing, keeping the arm from having to be cantilevered off a
single motor. The chain is a typical stainless steel, master-link chain with turnbuckles for
maintaining proper tension. The chain operates the pivot at the elbow with a 1:1 ratio
and is covered by a vacuum-formed ABS (acrylonitrile butadiene styreneplastic) guard.
The elbow pivots in the same plane as the base joint.1

At the end of the forearm is a manually operated ball joint for positioning the gripper.
Using a custom designed slip ring, it can rotate 360 degrees continuously while feeding
18 wires (26 AWG) through in a small package. The gripper uses a worm and 2 worm
gears to operate its gripping fingers slowly and powerfully and making it not
backdrivable.1
The 2 structural pieces of the arm are 1.5 aluminum tube with .065 wall. They have
many attachment points for various devices and cabling on the outside. The joints are
machined out of billet aluminum. Most connections are made with stainless steel 6-32
screws and temporary Loctite for modularity. Each of the motors is held in by four
screws to a machined aluminum frame. The entire arm assembly (with motors) can be
replaced with the removal of 2 pins and 3 hermetically sealed connectors.1
While moving, the arm can be folded within the TALON for greater mobility. Below are
the capabilities of the arms work envelope1:

Horizontal Reach: 52 in
Vertical Reach: 62 in
Below Ground Reach: 34 in
Gripper Capacity: 6 in

While initially difficult to operate, the soldiers who use the TALON in the field become
very proficient with the controls. One important design facet is that when the lower arm
rotates, the upper arm maintains pitch relative to the ground. This feature is especially
helpful when operating a weapon with the TALON.
The typical TALON arm can lift 20 lbs fully extended and up to 25 lbs maximum. The
current limitation is the position of the arm in respect to the center of gravity of the robot.
The motors that operate the arm are rated at 850 in-lbs and are used in direct drive. With
the arm, the TALON can weigh as much as 120 lbs and carry an additional payload of
100 lbs or drag 200 lbs. The gripper has 40in-lbs of strength.1

10

2.2 Commercial and Military EOD Robots

Military and commercially available EOD robots come as a complete mobile package.
These mechanisms cover terrain using wheels, tank treads, or even legs. Many, like the
TALON, are equipped with a robotic arm that allows the operator to handle, move, and
disarm explosives. EOD robots are available in a variety of sizes and are capable of
carrying out different tasks depending on strength, range, durability, and the type of end
effecter.
Manipulator arms on EOD robots must be extremely durable due to the constant threat of
unstable explosives. Many EOD manipulator arms consist of several links including a
turret, shoulder, elbow, and wrist. Grippers are a typical end effecter and serve in
applications such as retrieving items, opening doors, using tools, or positioning
equipment. End effecters and manipulator arms can also be equipped with cameras to
extend the visual range of the vehicle.
Current available systems that have an overall package weight comparable to the TALON
include the following2:

iRobot Packbot
HDE MURV-100 HDE
Pedsco RMI-9WT
Vanguard MK2-ROV
Cybernetix CASTOR
Mesa Robotics MATILDA
ROV Technology SCARABB IIA

Many of todays commercially available robots are in the same class as the TALON but
not as capable. Currently, the TALONs best competitor is iRobots PackBot EOD.
Though both are in the 90 lb class for explosive ordnance disposal robots, they have
dissimilar strengths. The iRobot has greater dexterity than the TALON with 8 degrees of
freedom verses 3; two degrees of freedom are associated with a shoulder joint. The
addition of the shoulder joint allows the PackBot EOD to search areas off of narrow isles
such as seats in an airplane or bus. Also, the PackBot EOD has an OmniReachTM
manipulator arm that can reach 80 in, compared to TALONs reach of 52 in.3
The PackBot EOD uses worm gears to transfer power to its arm. The arm has a full
shoulder, an elbow, and a wrist that can rotate 360. The gripper has a similar design to
that of the TALON, which uses a worm drive. However, the PackBot EOD has a gripper
that is comprised of two hook shaped fingers compared to the TALONs straight fingers.

11

Table 1 PackBot Specifications

Figure 3 - PackBot Team5

The PackBot EODs shortcomings are inherent to its size. Weighing in at 53 lbs when
fully loaded, it can only lift 5 lbs at full extension, or 15 lbs maximum as shown in Table
1. Again, the TALON weighs 100 lbs, and is capable of lifting 20 lbs at full extension
and 25 lbs maximum. The PackBot EOD, shown with an operator in Figure 3, is the only
other robot in significant use by the military.
Originally sponsored by the Defense Advance Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the
PackBot EOD started its military career in Afghanistan in the same manner as the
TALON. After proving its usefulness, the PackBot EOD was deployed during Operation
Iraqi Freedom. There it searched tunnels under the Baghdad airport, hunted the
agricultural center building for enemy soldiers, and examined potentially booby-trapped
equipment left on an airfield. A major selling point for the PackBot EOD is its clean look
(Figure 4). Its manipulator system boasts that it is fully sealed and features all-internal
cabling. Industrial design in terms of robot aesthetics has apparently benefited the
PackBot EOD when it comes to deciding which robot will be awarded a contract.4

Figure 4 - PackBot EOD5

12

The MURV-100 is a 50 lb mobile robot that incorporates four different gripper sets in its
end effecter. The robot also has an arm that can reach over 5 feet, lift up to 50 lbs, and
drag over 130 lbs.4
Other robots that use multiple tools on the end effecter are the RMI (Remote Mobile
Investigator) robots. These are used by police, fire departments, military, nuclear, and
industrial institutions. An example is the RMI-9WT (Figure 5) with three claws and the
ability to lift up to 175 lbs. While the RMI-9WT weighs almost 3 times the TALON it
can lift 7 times as much. The RMI-9WT features an arm that is attached to the back of
the mobile platform. This allows for better stability when lifting and also the ability to
lift larger payloads.5

Figure 5 - RMI-9WT7

The Cybernetix Castor, Mesa Robotics Matilda, and Vanguard MK2 all have an arm with
4 degrees of freedom. They use a shoulder, elbow, wrist setup where the wrist onlt
rotates. While this setup does have more degrees of freedom than the TALON, they are
not as strong. The SCARAB IIa is unique in that it has a shoulder, but instead of an
elbow as a degree of freedom it has an extension. While this could be handy to reach
farther away, it is not useful to reach below grade. All current military robots are
classified and summarized in Table 2.

13

Table 2 - Military Robot Classification Matrix

Robot Name

Manufacturer

Usage

Robot
Arm
Mass (lb)
Mass
85-120
~20

Payload
Drag Capacity
Capacity (lb)
(lb)
100
200
35

Talon

Foster-Miller

EOD

Packbot EOD

iRobot

EOD

53

MURV-100

HDE

EOD

49.6

MATILDA

Mesa Robotics

61

Scarab IIa

R.O.V Technologies

125

EROS

Cybernetix

320

RM35

Cybernetix

165

CASTOR

Cybernetix

MK2 ROV

Vanguard

225

103.4

Vanguard

RMI-9WT

Pedsco

308

RMI-9WB

Pedsco

260

RMI-9BT

Pedsco

288

RMI-10

Pedsco

140

Manufacturer

125

EOD

BombTec Defender

Robot
Name

130
45

551

Wrist
Wrist
Shoulder Shoulder
DOF Shoul
Elbow
Elbow Wrist
Pitch
Rotation
Pitch
Rotation
Total der
(Degrees)
(#)
(#)
(degrees) (degrees) (degrees) (degrees)
(#)
(#)

Talon
Foster-Miller
Packbot
iRobot
EOD
MURV-100 HDE

3
5

0
1

2
1

1
1

0
360+

180
160

360
360+

0
270

180*

90+

360

180

MATILDA Mesa Robotics

Scarab Iia R.O.V
Technologies
EROS
Cybernetix
RM35
Cybernetix
CASTOR Cybernetix
MK2 ROV Vanguard
BombTec Vanguard
Defender
RMI-9WT Pedsco
RMI-9WB Pedsco
RMI-9BT Pedsco
RMI-10
Pedsco

5
6

360

Robot Name
Talon
Packbot EOD
MURV-100
MATILDA
Scarab Iia
EROS
RM35
CASTOR
MK2 ROV
BombTec
Defender
RMI-9WT
RMI-9WB
RMI-9BT
RMI-10

6
3
4
5
5

360

210
210

360+
360+

60

180
225

4
4
3
4

Foster-Miller
iRobot
HDE
Mesa Robotics
R.O.V
Technologies
Cybernetix

Pedsco
Pedsco
Pedsco
Pedsco

360+

110

Manufacturer

Cybernetix
Cybernetix
Vanguard
Vanguard

270
270

Reach (in)
52
80
60
44

Lift (Extended) Lift (Max) Gripper Strength

(lb)
(lb)
(in-lb)
20
25
40
5
15
50
25
35

2.2m Vert
1.25m Horiz
39.37007874
34.64566929

11
11

98

66

Gripper Size
Capacity (in)
6
180 degrees
9
10.25

11

87
86
87
50

33
22
35
165
175
175
175

66lb
66lb

15.75

20-60lb
20-60lb

14

9.842519685
9.842519685

10.25
10.25
10.25

2.3 Industrial Manipulators

There currently exits a number of robot arms that are used in the manufacturing industry.
These robot arms are not directly related to the type of manipulator arm that is used on
the EOD robots because they are not on a mobile platform. Industrial arms typically have
little restriction on size and weight, which is not the case with the lightweight/highstrength requirements of the EOD arm. However, there are elements of these industrial
robotic arms that could factor into possible improvements to the TALON manipulator
arm.
Industrial manipulator arms use two types of joints for motion. One is a rotary or
revolute joint in which the screw pitch is zero and the joint is constrained to pure rotation.
The other is a prismatic joint in which the screw pitch is infinite and the joint is
constrained to pure sliding motion. The use of these two joints in an industrial arm
determines which of the four configuration categories it falls under.
A Cartesian arm uses three prismatic joints (shoulder, waist, and elbow) and works
within a given rectangular workspace. It can be relatively inexpensive in conjunction
with pneumatic drives, but is very large, and the joints must be covered. A cylindrical
arm uses a revolute joint at the waist and prismatic joints at the shoulder and elbow. By
combination of rotation and translation, this arm can reach anywhere within a cylindrical
workspace. A cylindrical arm can be very powerful with hydraulic drives, but is also
large and contains hard to seal joints. A spherical arm uses a revolute joint at the
shoulder and waist and a prismatic joint at the elbow. As the name implies, this arm has
a workspace of half of a sphere. The spherical arm is more mobile than the previous
arms, but has a complex kinematic model. An articulated arm uses revolute joints at the
waist, elbow, and shoulder. This arm can most closely mimic the movement of a human
arm. It is smaller than the other configurations, has more flexibility, and works well with
electric motors. When fully extended, however, the arm is not as rigid as the others. The
workspaces of the industrial arm configurations are shown in Figure 6, and their strengths
and weaknesses are summarized in Table 3.
Another industrial manipulator arm with simpler geometry was developed for assembly
applications. This arm is called a Selective Compliance Automatic Robot Arm
(SCARAB). The SCARAB uses two revolute joints in the horizontal plane and a vertical
link to translate in the vertical direction. This allows for simple pick and place on an
assembly line.
Mainly due to size constraints, the Cartesian, cylindrical, and spherical manipulator
configurations are not applicable to the TALON design. The articulated arm is
particularly noteworthy because of its revolute shoulder joint which the TALON lacks.
Although articulated arms employ this additional degree of freedom, most are still too
large for the military robot. The shoulder design, however, could be scaled down to meet
the requirements of an EOD disposal device.

15

Along with shoulder, waist, and elbow joints, many industrial manipulators also
incorporate a wrist joint. This allows for proper orientation of the end effecter. Spherical
wrist joints provide the degrees of freedom of a human wrist which are roll, pitch, and
yaw. The TALON currently does have a wrist joint for the end effecter, but it is not
automated.

Figure 6 - Industrial Manipulators6

16

Table 3 - Comparison of Industrial Robot Configurations8

Robot

Joints

Cartesian

prismatic waist
prismatic shoulder
prismatic elbow

Cylindrical

revolute waist
prismatic shoulder
prismatic elbow

Spherical

revolute waist
revolute shoulder
prismatic elbow

Articulated

revolute waist
revolute shoulder
revolute elbow

Coordinates
Advantages
-linear motion in three dimensions
-simple kinematic model
-rigid structure
-easy to visualize
-can use inexpensive pneumatic
drives for pick and place
operation
Disadvantages
-requires a large volume to operate in
-work space is smaller than robot volume
-unable to reach areas under objects
-guilding surfaces of prismatic joints
-must be covered to prevent ingress of dust
Advantages
-simple kinematic model
-easy to visualize
-good access into cavities and machine openings
-very powerful when hydraulic drives used
Disadvantages
-restricted work space
-prismatic guides difficult to seal from dust
and liquids
-back of robot can overlap work volume

Advantages
-covers a large volume from a central support
-can bend down to pick objects up off the floor
Disadvantages
-complex kinematic model
-difficult to visualize
Advantages
-maximum flexibility
-covers a large workspace relative to volume of robots
-revolute joints are easy to seal
-suits electric motors
-can reach over and under objects
Disadvantages
-complex kinematics
-difficult to visualize
-control of the linear motion is difficult
-structure not very rigid

17

2.4 Power Transmission

One of the major aspects of the arms redesign is power transmission. The TALON
currently uses a combination of direct drive and chain drive. The primary elbow, wrist
rotation and gripper are all controlled by direct drive while the secondary elbow uses a
chain drive. The following is a study of alternative means of power transmission. Not
only is the drive method a point of improvement, but it may also be a required change
with the incorporation of additional degrees of freedom.
2.4.1 Direct Drive
The Direct Drive method of power transfer has no intermediary device between
drive motor or actuator and the driven mechanism. This method is used to power the
gripper, primary elbow and the wrist rotation in the current version of the TALONs arm.

Advantages
o Strong connection between driving device and driven mechanism.
o Simplicity of fewer parts allows for fewer chances of failure.

Disadvantages
o Motor on arm adds to weight and therefore requires larger motors to
move arm.
o Adds to overall volume of arm, making it harder to reach into confined
spaces.
o Backlash in system

2.4.2 Chain Drive

The Chain Drive, shown in Figure 7, uses a chain and sprockets to transfer power.
Speed and torque can be changed by varying the size of the sprockets much like one
would with a gear drive.

Figure 7 - Chain Drive7

Advantages
o Metal chains are very strong and resistant to wear.
o Chains work extremely well in high torque and low speed applications.

18

o Chains work well in harsh conditions and over a wide temperature

range.
o There is no slip in chain drive systems.

Disadvantages
o Chains require lubrication which in turn attracts dirt and other
contaminants.
o Chains are usually made of metal and are therefore heavy
o Chains are relatively loud in their operation
o Chains require the sprockets to be aligned or accelerated wear and
derailment problems will occur.
o The master link often comes undone, which renders the chain useless.

2.4.3 Belt Drive

There are a wide range of belts that can be used to transmit power. These include
Flat, Vee, Poly-Vee, and Toothed belts. A Vee belt is shown in Figure 8. Like chains,
the speed and torque can be varied by adjusting the diameter of the pulleys. Flat, Vee,
and Poly-Vee belts all rely on friction for the transfer of power. The belts ability to
transfer power is highest in Poly-Vee belts, with Vee belts and Flat belts following.
These types of belts have similar advantages and disadvantages due to the transfer
method using friction8

Figure 8 - Belt Drive12

Advantages
o Flexibility in the design is allowed by the loose tolerances required by
belts.
o Rubber belts and the inherent slip in belt drive systems acts as a method
of vibration and shock isolation.
o Belts require little maintenance and no lubrication.
o Very quiet operation when compared with other methods.
o Slip can be engineered in the power transmission for power limitation,
back drive, and to smooth power transitions.

19

Disadvantages
o Since the power transmission relies upon friction unwanted slip is highly
detrimental to power transmission.
o Belts are temperature and condition sensitive. If the belts get hot or wet
they will begin to slip.
o Being made of rubber or other soft materials, belts are susceptible to
wear.
o Belts work best at constant speeds greater than 500 RPM.
o Accelerated wear will occur if misalignment is great than .
o Belts rely on angular contact with pulley.
o Belts require tension to maintain power transfer.

Toothed belts, like the one in Figure 9, act very differently than normal belts. Often
called timing belts or synchronous belts, toothed belts rely upon a mechanical interaction
to transmit power. Teeth on the inside surface of the belt interact with corresponding
teeth on the sprocket. Much like chains, the torque and speed can be varied by changing
the size of the sprockets.

Figure 9 - Toothed Belt Drive12

Advantages
o Can be very strong. Belts are often reinforced with high strength fibers
such as steel or Kevlar.
o Toothed belts are a very light method of power transfer.
o Toothed belts limit slip but some types will allow slip past a certain force.
o Toothed Belts work extremely well in wet and dirty environments and are
relatively unaffected by temperature changes.
o Toothed belts have 98% efficiency.

Disadvantage
o Toothed belts have a maximum horsepower rating of 30-500Hp depending
on belt width and tooth geometry
o Toothed belts have a maximum misalignment of

20

2.4.4 Shaft Drive

Shaft drive systems used a rigid or flexible shaft to transfer rotational power.
Rigid shafts can be made of solid stock or tube. A rigid shaft drive system can be seen in
Figure 10.

Figure 10 - Shaft Drive9

Advantages
o When set up properly, design is strong and simple and has low failure
and low repair frequencies.

Disadvantages
o Rigid Shafts require a precise alignment or it will wear or damage other
components of the system.
o A gearbox is required to change the direction of power transfer.
o Shafts are relatively heavy.
o Shafts require bearings to minimize losses and support the shaft.

Flexible Shafts, shown in Figure 11, are fairly unique as they allow power transfer to
change directions without supplemental gear boxes. They are usually made of a specially
wound cable.

Figure 11 - Flexible Shaft Drive10

21

Advantages
o No alignment is required between the driving and driven components
o 90-95% efficient when running at a 180 offset.
o Flexible shafts are often self guarded and bearing material is integral to
the design.

Disadvantages
o Tight angles still require gear boxes.
o Flexible shafts work best when rotating in one direction. Bidirectional
shafts are harder to obtain and more expensive

2.4.5 Hydraulic Power

Unlike the aforementioned methods of transferring power, hydraulics, Figure 12
and Figure 13, do not use a mechanical connection to transfer power but instead use the
flow of an incompressible fluid. The power source runs a hydraulic pump. The fluid
from the pump goes through a control valve, and then to the hydraulic cylinder or motor.
By restricting the flow, the control valve can regulate the speed of the motor or cylinder
actuation.

Figure 12 - Hydraulic Power

Figure 13 - Hydraulic Power Conceptual

22

Advantages
o Hydraulics output an extremely high force, and can transfer a large
amount of power compared to the size required.
o Hydraulics have a low space requirement.
o Very simple system to understand and run.
o Hydraulics are very rugged and durable.
o Power can be transmitted in both linear and rotational motion.

Disadvantages
o Components can be very expensive.
o Since all power is transferred through fluid flow it is imperative that the
fluid be contained and conditioned properly.

2.4.6 Pneumatics
Pneumatics are much like hydraulics in that they use a fluid to transfer the power.
Instead of an incompressible fluid, pneumatics use air as the transporting medium.
While this lowers the weight of the system it does have some inherent problems.
Although pneumatic motors exist, they stall quite easily and should not even be
considered in this type of application. First we will discuss the pneumatic cylinders like
the one in Figure 14.

Figure 14 - Pneumatics11

Advantages
o Low cost of components and installation
o Very easy to design and implement pneumatic systems
o Components are easily available.
o Power can be transmitted in both linear and rotational motion.

Disadvantages
o Air is a compressible fluid which makes force applied to an object
depend upon the object itself, which is a limiting factor.
o There is no position or speed control with pneumatic systems.
o Pneumatic rotational actuators stall easily.

23

Air muscles work very similar to human muscles in that they create a pulling force due to
expansion. As the rubber tube fills with air, the plastic net contracts up to 75% of its
relaxed length. Since air muscles have nearly the same power curve and ability as
human muscles, they have a great ability to mimic human motion.12 A depiction of a
typical air muscle can be seen in Figure 15.

Figure 15 - Air Muscles18

Advantages
o Force to weight ratio of up to 400:1. A typical motor has a force to
weight ratio of 16:1.
o Work when bent or twisted, which allows for misalignment.
o Easily made, low cost item.
o Air muscles have an inherent self damping effect.

Disadvantages
o Have a nonlinear power curve.
o Relatively new, so long term reliability and maintenance issues are
relatively unknown.

2.4.7 Cable Drive

Cable is a simple way to transfer mechanical motion. One side of the cable is
pulled by a motor or an actuator, the cable comes under tension, and in turn, moves the
adjacent connection point. Figure 16 shows an arm driven by internal cables.

Figure 16 - Internal Cables9

24

Advantages
o Able to directly transfer motion.
o Can transfer motion through a twist.
o Allows for motors to mount at one location.
o Relatively small, strong, and reliable.

Disadvantages
o Possibility of slippage over joints.
o Able to stretch or break.

2.4.8 Shape Memory Alloys

Shape memory alloys (SMA) are a type of metal that can return to a defined shape
after being plastically deformed. An example of SMAs is shown in Figure 17. They
return to their shape when subjected to a temperature change. Nickel-titanium and
copper based alloys can be subjected to the most strain and return to their original shape.
Recently, SMAs have been used in some robots as actuators by running a current through
the metal which provides the heat necessary for change.13

Figure 17 - SMAs14

Advantages
o SMAs are easily machined.
o Easily manufactured to desired properties.
o Can easily be heated via resistive heating.
o Provide a constant force.
o Allow precise control of position, speed, and force.
o Very high efficiency.

Disadvantages
o Different force applications between rising and falling temperatures.
o Slow reaction times.
o Does not work well in applications that may see a large temperature
change.
o SMAs are not weldable.
o Work best on small scale, mainly used in micro applications15

25

2.4.9 Electroactive Polymers

Electroactive polymers (EAPs) are ones that change size or shape significantly
when an electric charge is applied. EAPs can be broken down into two groups: ionic
and electronic. An ionic EAPs activation mechanism involves the mobility or diffusion
of ions. An electronic EAPs activation mechanism is driven by the electric field. Table
4 shows some of the pros and cons of EAPs and a list of possible EAPs is given below.
Electronic Electroactive Polymers
Dielectric EAP
Electrostrictive Graft Elastomers
Electrostrictive Paper
Electro-Viscoelastic Elastomers
Ferroelectric Polymers
Ionic Electroactive Polymers
Carbon Nanotubes
Conductive Polymers
ElectroRheological Fluids
Ionic Polymer Gels
Ionic Polymer Metallic Composite16

26

Table 4 - EAP Pros and Cons17

EAP Type
Electronic

EAP

Ionic EAP

Advantage
Can operate in room
conditions for long periods
of time

Disadvantage
Requires high voltages
(~150 MV/m)

Requires compromise
between strain and stress

Glass transition
temperature is inadequate
for low temperature
actuation tasks

Rapid response time

(mSec levels)

Can hold strains under DC

activation

Induces relatively large

actuation forces
Requires low voltage

Provides predominately
bending actuation
(longitudinal mechanisms
can be constructed)

Except for CP (Conductive

Polymers), ionic EAPs
dont hold strain under DC
voltage

Slow response (fraction of

a second)

Exhibits large bending

displacements

Bending EAPs induce a

relatively low actuation
force

Except for CP and CNT

(Carbon Nanotubes), it is
difficult to produce a
consistent material
(particularly IPMC
Ionomeric Polymer-Metal
Composites)

In aqueous systems the

material sustains hydrolysis
at > 1.23 V

27

2.5 Other Novel Ideas

2.5.1 Elephant Trunk Robot
Clemson University Engineering formulated an idea for a novel elephant trunk-like
manipulator as shown in Figure 18. This manipulator is described as hyper-redundant,
having 32 degrees of freedom, and a segmented backbone. In other words, the structure
has an overabundance of joints, and therefore can assume a wide range of shapes. This
structure created by Clemson University is 33 in long and is separated into four sections.
Each section ranges in diameter from 4 in at the top to 2.5 in at the bottom. The sections
are separated by a hybrid cable and spring servo motor. The structures total mass is 8.8
lbs. Each section can move in any direction via a system of routed cables in a motion
resembling an articulated wrist. When the four sections are coupled together a wide range
of motions can be achieved. A possible downfall for this design could be the maximum
payload size; the information for payload was not given in the Clemson report.

Figure 18 - Elephant Trunk18

2.5.2 Robotic Hand Mechanism

A Robotic Hand Mechanism with Rotating Fingertips and Motor-Tendon Actuation
The University of Kentucky implemented a novel idea for a multi-fingered, dexterous,
robotic-hand. The complete hand and the finger assembly can be seen in Figure 19 and
Figure 20 respectively. The hand is a three-fingered, 9 degree of freedom system. The
finger mechanism has three joints actuated by three motors and four tension cables. Each
joint uses two-way tendon-operated actuation by a single motor.

28

Figure 19 - Complete Hand

Figure 20 Finger Assembly19

29

2.5.3 A Flexible, Tendon-Controlled Device for Endoscopies

Carnegie Mellon University has developed a new type of flexible endoscope, shown in
Figure 21, based off a typical bead chain with internal cable controls. For insertion and
retraction the stem is actively controllable. It consists of a number of serial rotational
joints with a prismatic joint at its base. As the endoscope moves forward, tip trajectories
are transferred to the following joint and consecutively to the rest of the joints. While
advancing the stem, the succeeding joint then moves toward the position and orientation
of the preceding joint. This motion is called snake motion. This motion is achieved by
mapping as the stem proceeds and then translating the map through to small actuators
installed at each joint. The complexity of the mechanical arrangements and computation
of the mapping increase as the length of the stem increases.

Figure 21 - Novel Endoscope

30

2.5.4 Snake Robots

A snake robot in Figure 22 is a self-supporting, slender flexible arm. Depending on the
number of links, it can make many bends and can be moved through complex paths.
These robots have been used in search and rescue missions because they can put a camera
where people cannot. Most of the robots that fit into this category are used for
inspection, as opposed to situations where there is and extensive force on the arm.

Figure 22 - Snake Robot20

Advantages
Many degrees of freedom.
Many different joint design possibilities.
Can be powered by electricity, pneumatics or hydraulics.
Disadvantages
Bulky compared to strength.
Not modular
Difficult to control.

31

2.5.5 Barrett Technologys Cable Drive WAM

Barrett Technology, Inc. offers a unique robotic arms and hands that very closely mimic
the motions of a human. The EVA-Retriever WAM (Whole Arm Manipulation) arm was
developed for NASAs use outside of the Space Station. This arm consists of a shoulder
that operates on a gearless differential mechanism, an upper arm, a gear-free elbow,
forearm, and wrist. This arrangement of joints coincides with the human shoulder and
elbow but with much greater range of motion.21
All axes of the arm are driven by high performance brushless motors with sinusoidal
electronic communication. The joints are also highly back-drivable so that dynamic
controls may be applied. This offers a higher performance than is achievable by
conventional manipulators.
Barrett also manufactures a number of robotic hands. The BH8-series BarrettHand
(Figure 23) is a multi-fingered programmable grasper with the dexterity to secure target
objects of different sizes, shapes, and orientations. The hand weighs only 2.6 lbs and is
totally self-contained, linked by serial communications. The hand has three multi-jointed
fingers operated by 4 brushless motors and offers various advantages over standard
grippers. The hand does not need to be custom design as do grippers, and it can adapt to
almost any robotic arm. Also, with the BarrettHand, a robot does not need multiple tools
for end effecters. The hand can adapt to any task a human hand can perform. The robot
is not limited to switching between grippers because it has human quality dexterity.22

Figure 23 - BarrettHand10

32

Chapter 3 Concept Development

3.1 The Customer: Foster-Miller Inc.
Foster-Miller, Inc., is an engineering and technology development firm principally
located in suburban Boston, MA. The company also has offices in Washington,
DC and Albany, NY. In August 2002, it was named one of the most innovative
businesses in America by Inc magazine.
The firm was founded in 1956 by three graduates of MIT who believed there was a need
for a company that could solve clients' difficult technical problems through first-class
analysis and design. Foster-Miller became an independent, wholly owned subsidiary
of QinetiQ North America, Inc., in November 2004.
The company maintains over 200,000 sq. ft. of offices, laboratories, and shops and has
a staff of more than 360 composed of mechanical, electrical, thermal, chemical, nuclear,
aerospace, software and materials engineers as well as metallurgists, physicists,
mathematicians, chemists, biologists and support staff.
Foster-Miller has a substantial history of innovation in most of today's major markets.
They have been developing new food, medical and industrial products and equipment
since the late 1950s when they invented the Jet Spray beverage dispenser, which is still in
use today. FMI also built the machines that made it possible to continuously mold
Velcro and to produce Raychem shrink sleeves. Utilities are another area of the
companys specialization, and engineers have invented robots to work on overhead power
lines and in underground piping and nuclear steam generators. They have done projects
for all branches of the military, NASA, the Department of Transportation, Environmental
Protection Agency, Department of Energy and National Institutes of Health. They are
also working on several programs that will aid the Department of Homeland Security.
Foster-Miller has extensive experience in all aspects of mobile and fixed robotic
technologies including hardware, controls, sensors, communications, software, and
systems integration. Robots can be characterized by the type of operation they perform:

Autonomous, where the robot operates without operator input or direction, usually
mobile.
Remotely operated, where the device is controlled by an operator in another
location.
Automated in which the robot repeats programmed operation, typically in a fixed
position.

Foster-Miller has developed machinery and products in all of these robotic categories for
clients in diverse areas such as military, law enforcement, utilities, industrial, process
plants and construction. Applications range from laboratory automation to bomb squad
operations. These robots have saved lives, reduced labor costs on critical production

33

lines, and have enabled workers to perform critical operations while in hostile and
hazardous environments.
Foster-Millers biggest and most successful robotics program is that of the TALON
explosive ordnance device mobile robot. TALON robots have been in continuous, active
military service since 2000 when they were successfully used in Bosnia for the safe
movement and disposal of live grenades. They were the only American-made robots
successfully used at Ground Zero in search and recovery efforts after the Sept. 11 attack
on the World Trade Center and the only robots to last through the entire mission without
requiring a major repair.
TALON robots were the first robots taken into Afghanistan during action against the
Taliban and Osama bin Laden in February 2002. They initially accompanied the Special
Forces on a classified mission, and are still there doing EOD work. They were on the
ground in Kuwait when coalition forces massed in 2003 and have been in Iraq ever since
performing EOD/IED (improvised explosive device) missions. TALON robots have now
completed more than 20,000 EOD missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

3.2 Communications with Foster Miller

A number of people within the TALON program have been instrumental to the progress
of this Capstone project. Tony Aponick is an executive at Foster-Miller and was
instrumental in the initiation of the project. Mr. Aponick provided the group with a broad
overview of the robot as well as a list of requested arm design changes in the first
meeting at FMI. Ray Jenoski and Hoi Tong joined the team as mechanical engineers to
provide technical assistance and direction. Both have extensive experience with the
TALON program, and are responsible for much of the current arm design. Mr. Jenoski
has taken the role of project leader at the company and is the groups primary technical
contact. Jeff Wiley, the head technician, trains members of the military in operation and
repair of the TALON and gives insight into field operations and strengths and
weaknesses of the current design. Joe Dunne, an electrical engineer, assists the group
with issues related to the electrical engineering of the TALON robot. He will be assisting
with the development of software and wiring for motor control.
There have been a total of five meetings at Foster-Miller covering approximately 13
hours. These meetings began with initial project definition. The group was initially
given basic background information on the TALON, and from this point the project was
narrowed to the current scope. Foster-Miller initially informed the group of the deficits
in the current design. Foster Miller then collaborated with the group in assessing the
importance of these deficits. Over the course of the meetings that scope was narrowed to
improving upon the arms dexterity by allowing the shoulder joint to rotate in a
horizontal plane. The company has been helpful with feedback on conceptual ideas, and
has provided the group with technical data, Pro-E models, and supplier contacts. A final
set of design criteria was agreed upon for the project as discussed in subsequent sections.

34

3.2.1 Design Criteria

In the course of the meetings with Foster-Miller a list of design criteria and the relative
importance or weight of each criterion was agreed upon. Table 5 is the full list of these
criteria shown with an importance weighting from one to three, three being the most
important. Most important to the design are robustness, ease of use, volume taken up on
the vehicle, and backdriveability of the system. Following Table 5 is a description of
each criterion discussing the definition, significance and challenge of each.
Table 5 - Full Design Criteria
Criteria
Robustness
Ease of Use
Volume Taken Up On Vehicle
Backdriveability
Ease of Repair
Stability
Ease of Manufacture
Increase Lift/Pull capacity
Use of OTS and Current Components
Weight
Power requirements
Physical Operational Space
Current Attachments
Self Righting Ability
Patentable

Weight
3
3
3
3
2.5
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Robustness The TALON is used in hostile situation and extreme conditions.

Lives depend on its reliability, so simplicity and strength are paramount. The
design must keep the same strength characteristics as the current arm. This will
require meticulous attention to the strengths and weaknesses of the design.

Ease of Use The arm design must be simple to use as operators generally do not
have a high level of education or the technical expertise of the designers. In
addition the robot is used in high stress and extreme situations, complexity would
not only be unfortunate but dangerous. An understanding of the users of the
TALON and the conditions under which the TALON will be used must be taken
into consideration by the designers.

Volume Taken up on Vehicle There is limited space on the base of the robot
that the arm and any motors or additional geometry must fit into. This constraint
must be considered from the beginning of the design process, as the arm must be
used with the current TALON platform

Backdriveability The drive system of the arm should be backdriveable as to

minimize the chance of damage in an impact and so that the operator can

35

reposition the arm when power is off. This will require the designer to know the
limitations of the power transmissions in consideration before incorporation.

Ease of Repair The operating conditions are the same as the conditions in which
it must be repaired. The robot must be made serviceable with minimal equipment
in a short amount of time. An understanding of these conditions and limitations
will be important to consider in all design decisions.

Stability The robot must be able to function in rough and uneven terrain. If the
arm compromises the robots stability it will negate the robots usefulness.
Particular attention must be applied to the TALONs center of gravity when
designing the arm.

Ease of Manufacture The current robotic arm is built modularly. This allows
the arm to be assembled easily. Using motors and parts already on the TALON
will reduce the cost and complexity of assembly.

Increase Lift/Pull Capacity The TALON can lift 17.6 lbs at full arm extension
and drag up to 200 lbs. These parameters should remain the same or be improved
upon. As a major limiting factor of the lift capacity is the center of gravity,
special attention to the arms weight is important.

Weight The robot must be light enough to be carried by one soldier. As such
the arm design should not have a large weight increase. An increase in weight of
the arm would also make the robot potentially unstable and reduce its lift
capacity. Knowledge of the materials and their properties, as well as the use of
solid modeling and finite element analysis will be important to the weight
optimization.

Power Requirements The TALON is a battery powered robot, so there is a finite

amount of power available to the arm drive systems. Drive methods that require
large amounts of power are not feasible. Motors power requirements must be
considered before integrating them into the system.

Physical Operation Space The arm must not interfere with attachments on the
platform including cameras, antennae, tracks, and other auxiliary equipment. As
the purpose of the additional degree of freedom is to add dexterity it would be
counter-productive to make the arm overly cumbersome. The design should try to
maintain the current designs size envelope, as well as considering the current
robot designs geometry.

Current Attachments The TALON has many optional modular attachments

available. The new design should allow the mounting of these attachments, or
provide an alternative method.

36

Self-Righting Ability The arm needs to be strong enough so that in the case that
the TALON is flipped over, the arm can right the robot. As the current arm is
capable of self righting, this feature should be maintained.

For the purposes of evaluating and comparing the concepts, the group produced a
truncated version of the design criteria. This matrix is shown in Table 6. The shortened
version allows for an easier comparison of the various concepts.
Table 6 - Top Design Criteria

3.2.2 Design Specifications

Based upon Foster-Millers requested criteria, the design team came up with a set of
design specifications for the new robot arm. Through discussions with Foster-Miller the
desired attributes and requirements for the arm have been compiled and are listed below
in Table 7.
Table 7 - Design Specifications

37

The following in depth design specifications are especially important in the development
of design concepts.

Lift Capacity at full extension - This is the heaviest item that the Talon can lift
with its arm at its farthest reach. This is currently limited by the center of gravity
of the robot.
Lift Capacity while retracted - This is the heaviest item the Talon can lift. This is
currently limited by the power of the motors.

Shoulder Torque at output shaft - This is the torque that is placed on the arm after
the planetary gearbox.

Shoulder RPM at output shaft (max) - This is the fastest we can rotate the output
shaft without changing the gearing. Currently it is limited to 7 RPM in the
software.

Weight of the arm (unloaded) - This is the allowable increase in weight to the arm
module that is worth the increase in dexterity.

Degrees of freedom - This is the major goal of our project, to add an additional
degree of freedom to the shoulder.

Length of arm - This is the total distance from the front of the tracks to the tip of
the gripper. Variation in this would slightly affect the lift capacity.

Motor current draw - This is information on the electrical systems to help us

choose a new motor if needed.

Slip Ring Requirement - For the auxiliary items on the arm (cameras, lights,
gripper) at least 16 pins need to pass through our mechanism.

Wire gauge in slip ring - This is the smallest gauge wire capable of handling the
load for the auxiliary devices.

Robustness - The arm must be able to withstand a 100g load. The rating is
established by Foster-Miller.

Ease of repair - A very hard quality to quantify, but one which is crucial to the
soldiers in the field that need the robot running while in combat situations.

Volume of arm base - The arm can only use the area allotted.

Pull capacity - The pull capacity is typically limited to the drive system that
cannot be changed. However, the arm must be able to withstand the force
associated with the pull capacity.

38

Physical operational space - The arm must not interfere with cameras, antennas or
any other auxiliary device. It also cannot take up more space than the current arm
when folded into the platform.

Back-drivability - The robot must be able to be folded back into the platform by
hand when un-powered. This is important because it cannot affect the lift
capacity.

Self-righting ability - The robot must be able to use its arm to right itself if flipped
over. The arm can be damaged in this process.

Factor of safety - Foster-Miller designed the original arm to a 1.5 factor of safety.

Elbow motor required torque - Because of the shorter moment arm, the elbow
motor does not need as high a torque as the shoulder.

Stiffness of arm tube - The new arm on the robot will match or beat the stiffness
of the current arm.

39

3.3 Preliminary Shoulder Design Concepts

The primary aim of this project is the addition of a shoulder to the TALONs robotic arm.
In designing this shoulder joint there are many different options available for transmitting
power to the needed areas of design. The two degrees of the shoulder are shoulder pitch,
and shoulder rotation. When designing a shoulder that can perform these two functions it
is important to remember that power must also be transmitted to the elbow. In some of
the more complicated concepts of this section, the power to the elbow is less straightforward and thus will be included with their associated shoulder concepts.
3.3.1 Fixed Shoulder Rotation Motor
This concept attempts to keep as much as possible of the current TALON intact. It raises
the existing arm onto a rotating platform which is rotated by a shoulder rotation motor.
Figure 24 below illustrates this concept.

Figure 24 Shoulder Concept 1: One Fixed, Shoulder Rotation Motor

Figure 24 of Concept 1 shows the shoulder rotation motor (blue) mounted to the robot
platform. The shoulder pitch and elbow pitch motors (red) are both mounted on a rotating
plate. The sketch shows a configuration with two bevel gears. The shoulder rotation
motor could also be mounted vertically and transmit power to the plate using spur gears
or a belt.
The advantage of this concept is its simplicity. This design is basically the current
TALON Arm lifted up onto a shoulder rotation. Because of this design would be simple
and be very likely to work. However, there are several disadvantages to this concept.
For example, to transmit electric power to the shoulder pitch and elbow pitch motors a
very large slip ring would have to be used at the base of the arm. Also, the center of
gravity would be raised significantly which would likely decrease lift capacity and
stability. Most importantly, there is simply not enough space for the two red motors to
rotate within the given volume on the TALON platform.

40

3.3.2 Floating Shoulder-Pitch Shaft

Since volume on the vehicle is limited, this concept moves the elbow pitch motor off of
the platform. The motors controlling shoulder pitch and shoulder rotation remain on the
vehicle (see Figure 25).

Shoulder
rotation
motor

Shoulder
pitch motor

Figure 25 Shoulder Concept 2: Fixed Shoulder Pitch and Shoulder Rotation Motors

Figure 25 shows a setup allowing 2 motors to be fixed to the base. The blue fixed motor
on the left drives the shoulder rotation. The output shaft of this motor is attached to a
bevel gear which spins the large green bevel gear that is fixed to the rotating shaft. The
red motor on the right drives the shoulder pitch. The output shaft of this motor is attached
to a bevel gear, which spins the large orange free-mounted bevel gear. This orange bevel
gear turns the blue bevel gear which is coupled directly to the first stage of the arm. This
concept requires software control to ensure that the shoulder pitch does not change with
shoulder rotation. One could envision that when the shoulder rotation motor is turning, in
order the keep the shoulder pitch from changing, the motor controlling shoulder pitch
must turn the orange bevel gear at the same but opposite rate as the rotating shaft. FosterMiller has assured the design group that software will be able to coordinate this motor
movement.
The advantages of this concept are that two motors can still be fixed at the base of the
arm just like the current TALON arm. The concept is still relatively simple and is very
likely to work. The disadvantages of this concept are that a slip ring must still be used
and the motor controlling elbow pitch must be located above the shoulder rotation, which
raises the center of gravity.
As the previous figure ignores the elbow control, the following examples show how the
current chain-drive could be implemented into this concept. Figure 26 shows the motor
mounted inside the base of the arm.

41

Figure 26 Shoulder Concept 2a: Variation of Concept 2 Showing Elbow Motor and External Chain
Drive

The drawing in Figure 26 shows the elbow control motor (blue) mounted on top of the
shoulder rotation shaft. The first stage of the arm surrounds the blue motor. The blue
motor turns a spur gear that drives a tooth belt or a chain which is responsible for the
actuation of the elbow joint.
Another possibility to include the chain-drive in this concept would allow the chain to run
inside the arm. This is illustrated in Figure 27.

Figure 27 - Shoulder Concept 2b: Variation of Concept 2 Showing Elbow Motor and Internal Chain
Drive

The drawing in Figure 27 shows the elbow control motor (red) mounted within the first
stage of the arm. It is connected to the green ninety degree gear box which turns a spur
gear that drives a tooth belt or a chain. The tooth belt or the chain would, in turn, operate
the elbow joint. While several variations of this concept have been shown, other elbow
concepts will be presented in section 3.3
3.3.3 Two Fixed Motor Design with Clutch
With the drawback of the previous concept being the location of the elbow motor, this
concept aims at removing the additional motor. Figure 28 illustrates how a clutch is used
to accomplish this.

42

Figure 28 Shoulder Concept 3: Two Fixed Motors with Clutch

The motor on the left in Figure 28 can be coupled using clutches to both the shoulder
rotation and the shoulder pitch drives either one at a time or in tandem. When the green
clutch is engaged, it spins an output shaft with a bevel gear at the end. This bevel gear
turns the blue bevel gear which is fixed to the rotating shoulder shaft (blue). When the
purple clutch is engaged it turns an output shaft with a bevel gear at the end (purple).
This bevel gear turns a free floating bevel gear (light blue) which, in turn, spins the
orange bevel gear that is coupled to the first stage of the arm. The problem with this idea
is that these two degrees of freedom cant move in opposite directions at the same time or
at different speeds at the same time.
The motor on the right operates a set of bevel gears that ultimately transmits power to the
elbow joint. The red bevel gear can ride with the orange bevel gear when the shoulder
rotation is being adjusted due to software that governs motor position. When the red
bevel turns however, the belt driving the elbow will turn. When the shoulder pitch is
adjusted, the belt powering the elbow joint will simply go through a bend about the
shoulder pitch axis.
The left side of this concept has the potential to become extremely complex. The
clutches would most likely be electromagnetic friction clutches that add another electrical
element and more weight as well as another potential failure point. The design becomes
even more complex when gearing and gear selectors are added in order to drive shoulder
pitch and shoulder rotation in different directions or different speeds.
3.3.4 Three Fixed-Motor Design: Vertically Mounted
Noting the difficulty of clutch-integration in shoulder concept 3, but again trying to move
the weight of the elbow motor closer to the base of the vehicle, Figure 29 shows how
three motors could be vertically mounted within the base.

43

(a)

(b)

Figure 29 - Shoulder Concept 4: a) Lateral Section View; b) Isometric View

Another option for the power transmission from the elbow pitch motor to the elbow joint
is the inclusion of a U-Joint (see Figure 30). Since there are large limitations to the UJoint, a possible option would be to continue to use the chain drive. However, this chain
drive would not be able remain stationary, so it is shown mounted to the rotating platform
in Figure 31.

Figure 30 Shoulder Concept 4: Elbow Rotation, Shaft

Figure 29 shows a concept that has all of its motors mounted vertically to use space
beneath the platform. The shoulder pitch motor drives a large helical gear although, a
belt or face gear could also be incorporated for this mate. This free rotating disk (green)
then drives shoulder pitch by use of a bevel gear (green). The shoulder rotation is
controlled by the motor on the right. Its output shaft is attached to a small helical gear
(blue) which turns a large helical gear (red) that is also the outside of the shoulder
44

rotation plate. Control of elbow pitch in the concept shown in Figure 30 is a simple flex
shaft and was incorporated to make the drawing appear less cluttered. The concept of a
flex shaft is a good idea but for this application is inappropriate since 180 degrees of flex
is needed at 1000 in-lbs of torque and no such flex shaft could be found to fit our
parameters. Instead, an elbow pitch similar to that of Concept 3 could be used with either
a bending belt or chain, or that fixed motor could become a vertical mounted motor
beneath the platform. This elbow drive concept is shown in Figure 31.
An advantage for this concept is its simplicity; however there will probably not be
enough room on the TALONs platform for vertically mounted motors. In addition, by
vertically mounting the motors the center of gravity is raised significantly.

Figure 31 Shoulder Concept 4: Rotating Elbow Motor with Chain

3.3.5 Flat, Brushless Motor as Third Fixed Motor

With the drawbacks associated with vertically mounted motors, a concept integrating a
smaller motor was next explored. As shown below in Figure 32, a flat, brushless motor is
placed at the bottom of the arm assembly.

Figure 32 Shoulder Concept 5a: 3 Fixed Motors with Concentric Shafts

45

The drawing in Figure 32 shows three concentric shafts that are adjoined with bearings.
The blue motor is responsible for shoulder rotation. This motor directly drives the blue
shaft which is attached to the orange axle. The orange axle spins freely in the blue
supports. When the orange axle spins it turns a belt that drives the elbow joint. The
orange axle is activated by the purple motor on the left. This motors output shaft has a
bevel gear at the end that drives the red bevel gear which is fixed to the free red shaft. At
the top of the red shaft an internal red bevel gear will turn the orange bevel gear which is
fixed to the orange shaft. The green motor on the right is responsible for the shoulder
pitch. The output shaft of this motor has a green bevel gear at the end which turns the
brown bevel gear. The brown bevel gear, in turn, spins the light blue bevel gear which
freely spins about the orange axle and is fixed to the first stage of the arm.
The drawing in Figure 33 is essentially the same as the drawing in Figure 32, except the
motor positions are switched.

Figure 33 - Shoulder Concept 5b: Variation of Concept 5a

Here the blue motor directly drives the blue shaft which has a blue bevel gear fixed on
top. This bevel gear turns the dark blue bevel gear which is fixed to the blue axle. The
blue axle turns a belt which is responsible for the actuation of the elbow joint. The purple
motor on the left is responsible for shoulder pitch. The output shaft of this motor is
attached to a purple bevel gear which turns the green bevel gear. The green bevel gear is
fixed on the green shaft. At the top of the green shaft is another green bevel gear which
turns the orange bevel gear. The orange bevel gear spins freely on the blue shaft and is
fixed directly to the first stage of the arm. The brown motor on the right is responsible
for shoulder rotation. The output shaft of this motor has a brown bevel gear on the end
which turns a red bevel gear. The red bevel gear is fixed to the red shaft. The blue axle
is supported by the end of the red shaft and spins freely inside it.
If a smaller motor can be used for either shoulder rotation or elbow pitch and placed
beneath the whole system, then one of these concepts would be suitable. Disadvantages
of these concepts are that the volume three fixed motors would take up on the TALON
platform would be too great. There is also concern with mounting and bearings between
the three concentric shafts. Finally, manufacturing and repair would be extremely
difficult.

46

3.4 Preliminary Elbow Design Concepts

While many of the shoulder concepts had elbow concepts native to their design, the
following section will explore the possible elbow concepts that are independent of the
shoulder design. While power to the motor is ignored in this section, it would definitely
be accounted for in the final design.
3.4.1 External, Vertically-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint

Figure 34 shows an elbow drive system

with the elbow motor mounted to the
outside of the first stage of the arm. The
power is transmitted to the elbow joint
using bevel gears.

Figure 34 - Elbow Concept 1: External

Motor: Bevel Gears

3.4.2 External, Horizontally-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint

Figure 35 shows a similar elbow drive

system. Here, the elbow motor is
mounted horizontally and drives the
joint using helical gears.

Figure 35 Elbow Concept 2: External

Motor: Helical Gears

47

3.4.3 Internal, Vertically-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint

Figure 36 shows an elbow drive system

with the motor mounted within the first
stage arm tube. Power is transmitted to
the elbow joint using bevel gears.

Figure 36 Elbow Concept 3: Internal Motor:

Bevel Gears

3.4.4 In-Line, Vertically-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint

Figure 37 shows an elbow drive system

with the motor mounted on top of the
first stage arm tube. This means that the
motor itself is responsible for some
amount of structural integrity, but this
may be necessary due to the motor size.
Power is transmitted to the elbow joint
using bevel gears.

Figure 37 Elbow Concept 4: In-Line Motor:

Bevel Gears

48

3.4.5 In-Line, Horizontally-Mounted Motor at Elbow Joint

Figure 38 shows an elbow drive system

with the elbow motor mounted on top of
the first stage of the arm. Power is
transmitted to the elbow joint using
external helical gears.

Figure 38 Elbow Concept 5: In-Line Motor:

Spur Gears

3.5 Concept Selection

Concept selection is based on the six most important design criteria. These design
criteria are: robustness, ease of use, volume taken up on vehicle, back-drivability, ease of
repair, ease of manufacture. Each of the concepts was valued against each criterions
weight on a scale of one through three, three being the most important. Concept selection
is summarized in Table 8.

49

Table 8 - Concept Selection Matrix

Criteria
Robustness
Ease of Use
Volume Taken Up On
Vehicle
Back-drivability
Ease of Repair
Ease of Manufacture

Weight
3
3
3
3
2.5
2

Concept 1
Value Weighted
3
9
3
9
0
3
3
3

0
9
7.5
6

TOTAL

Criteria
Robustness
Ease of Use
Volume Taken Up On
Vehicle
Back-drivability
Ease of Repair
Ease of Manufacture

Weight
3
3
3
3
2.5
2

Concept 2
Value Weighted
3
9
3
9
2
3
2
2

6
9
5
4

Concept 3
Value Weighted
1
3
1
3
2
3
1
1

6
9
2.5
2

40.5

42

25.5

Concept 4
Value Weighted
3
9
3
9

Concept 5
Value Weighted
2
6
3
9

Concept 6
Value Weighted
2
6
3
9

0
3
2
1

0
9
5
2

TOTAL

34

2
3
1
1

6
9
2.5
2
34.5

2
3
1
1

6
9
2.5
2
34.5

Concept 1 meets the design criteria nearly as well as Concept 2 when looking at total
weighted value. However, there are other factors that rule out concept one completely.
The criterion that scores a zero for Concept 1, volume taken up on vehicle, scores a zero
because the maximum volume on the vehicle platform cannot be exceeded. Since
Concept 1 exceeds the maximum volume it cannot be chosen at all. Concept 2, therefore,
is the most viable concept to proceed with.

50

3.6 Final Concept

The Final Concept is a combination of Concept 2: Fixed Shoulder Pitch and Shoulder
Rotation Motors and a variation on Elbow Concept 3: Internal Motor, Bevel Gears. The
shoulder pitch and shoulder rotation control is just as described in section 3.3.2, but a
small change was made to the elbow pitch drive. In the interest to minimize the torque
load on the arm due to additional drive mechanisms the motor was put at the base of the
upper arm. This minimizes the moment caused by the motors weight and therefore
minimizes the lift capacity loss. The power is transferred from the motor to the bevel
gear assembly at the elbow by a drive shaft internal to the arm body. A sketch of this
concept can be seen in Figure 39.

Figure 39 - Proposed Concept

51

This concept has several design challenges to keep in consideration. As the system
requires the use of concentric shafts and precision gearing, a thorough analysis is required
for the selection and design of the gears, shafts, and bearings. A structural analysis of
key components such as the upper arm and main rotation shaft is important to ensure the
arm has adequate strength and maintains stiffness. Finally the electrical system and
controls will have to be considered and developed simultaneously. The software
coordination of the shoulder pitch and rotation motors must be closely developed with the
mechanical design to ensure proper motion control. The mechanical design and analysis
considerations that exist are discussed in subsequent text.
Throughout this section all references pertain to Figure 39. Since the orange and the
brown motors have software to coordinate their movements, it is very important that the
exact gear ratios are known. If the gear ratios are incorrect when entered into the
software, then any adjustment of the shoulder rotation would result in an unwanted
adjustment in the shoulder pitch. Also, since the elbow pitch motor is located above the
shoulder rotation, a slip ring must be used to transmit electrical power through this degree
of freedom. This slip ring must be located at the bottom of the blue shaft since that is the
bearing surface of the shoulder rotation. The slip ring would probably be of fair size
considering all the leads that it must carry up the arm and the amperage necessary to
operate the motors. Fitting this slip ring in the base may pose a challenge. The elbow
pitch motor could also have some software associated with it. This is so that when the
shoulder pitch is adjusted, the elbow pitch can remain in one set plane. This makes
lifting easier for the arm and for the operator of the arm. Foster Miller has shown full
support in working on the software and electrical components for the prototype. They
have dedicated an electrical engineer to the project to help with any problems that might
arise.
The current upper arm will need to be redesigned to accommodate the motor used for the
elbow. This entails geometry changes and possibly new material selection. Either the
current Foster-Miller motor will be accommodated into the arm or a new, smaller motor
will be chosen that will still give the necessary torque. This motor will also need a gear
head, electromagnetic brake and a potentiometer.
Structurally mounting everything will be a challenge in itself. Both the orange and the
brown motor output shafts must be secured onto a mounting plate. The blue shaft must be
secured with shaft mounts below the blue bevel gear and also somewhere between the
two free riding green bevel gears. The elbow pitch joint will have to be mounted
securely as well.
Bearings will also play a very important roll in this design. Bearings will exist between
shaft mounts and shafts on both the orange and brown output shafts. There will be a
bearing between the bottom of the blue shaft and its mount. There will also be a bearing
for the green bevel gear to ride independently of the blue shaft, and there will be another
bearing in between the two green bevels and their shaft mount for support. There will be
bearings between the red bevel gear (which is fixed to the first stage of the arm) and the
blue shoulder pitch shaft, and another one between the arm attach point on the left and

52

the blue shoulder pitch shaft. This bearing configuration will also occur at the elbow
joint.
Another major concern is gear selection. It is imperative that each tooth of each gear be
strong enough to support the dynamic loads associated with this arms application. Most
likely, gears will be custom made for this project. A shop has been found that can rapidly
produce SLS (selective laser sintering) parts that will have qualities similar to tool steel.
This is one option for obtaining custom gearing while avoiding long lead times. A better
option is to have gears professionally cut. If a vendor is located that can produce custom
cut gears in the allotted time period this would be the best option for the designs bevel
gears.
All elements of the arm will need to be analyzed using finite element analysis. This will
show the stresses associated with each part of the arm. When that information is
calculated, the maximum static and, most importantly, dynamic loads will be known.
This analysis will be done in conjunction with a Pro-E model.

53

Chapter 4 Design and Analysis

Having decided upon a concept to pursue, the next step was to develop a concrete design
that will be ready for production. To most accurately develop the design the
Pro/Engineer solid modeling package was utilized. Pro/Engineer not only offers basic
mechanical part and assembly design, but also allows kinematics analysis on the model.
Due to the complex gear interaction involved in this project, the kinematical analysis
ability is invaluable to the verification of the motions in the design.
A thorough analysis was done to all major components of the new arm. Analysis
included bevel gear selection calculations, spur gear train calculations for the elbow drive
system, finite element analysis of the shoulder rotation shaft, and finite element analysis
of the bevel gears.

4.1 Design
The selected concept that was fully described in section 3.6 of this report has experienced
many design changes after parts analysis and manufacturing research was completed.
After this extensive design process, a finalized version of the arm has been fully modeled
and is ready to be produced.
It is easiest to look at the final design when it is broken down into its major sub
assemblies. First there is the base of the arm. This assembly consists of the shoulder
rotation system and the shoulder pitch system. The next assembly is the upper arm which
is also called the first stage of the arm. The upper arm is made up of the elbow drive
system, the elbow joint, and the connection tube between the elbow and the elbow drive
system. The last portion of the design to look at is the connection between the two
aforementioned sub-assemblies which is called the arm support. This portion of the
TALON arm consists of an arm support plate, and a connector shaft which connects the
base of the arm to the upper arm.
The most important difference between the proposed concept and the actual design is the
elbow drive system. In the proposed concept the elbow drive system is made up of a
vertically mounted motor and a shaft that turns a bevel gear combination which makes
the elbow pitch. The new design uses a chain drive system for elbow drive. A FosterMiller motor and gear box are mounted one on top of the other, connected with spur
gears, and have an output shaft that turns a chain to operate elbow pitch. The reason for
this design change will be discussed further in section 4.4.1
4.1.1 Arm Base
There are two fixed motor assemblies on the base of the arm shown in Figure 40. These
motor assemblies are attached to a front panel that will directly interface with the
TALON robot platform. This panel will be attached to the platform using two connector
rods though pin holes. The motor assemblies have been staggered to create more room
54

for the creation of a new gearbox. The motor assembly that operates the shoulder pitch
has been lowered by of an inch, while the motor assembly that operates the shoulder
rotation has been lowered by of an inch as compared to the old TALON arm. Not only
does this allow for more room for a transmission but it will lower the center of gravity of
the robot. Both of these motor assemblies are custom built by Foster-Miller and are used
on the current TALON robot. The motor assemblies consist of a 36V, 3 phase DC
brushless motor, a two stage planetary gearbox custom made from 440C stainless steel
that yields a 90:1 gear ratio, an electromagnetic break, a potentiometer, and a connector
with 16 pins. As stated, one of these motor assemblies operates the shoulder pitch, while
the other operates the shoulder rotation

Motor
Assemblies

Front Panel
Pin Holes
Gear Box

Figure 40 - Design Assembly

The first degree of freedom is the shoulder rotation motion. The shoulder rotation begins
with the turning of the output shaft of the motor assembly (shown on the left of figure
41). A bevel gear is fixed onto the output shaft using a key and keyway. This bevel gear
(shown in Figure 41 in blue on the left) is made out of 17-4 PH stainless steel, has an
outer diameter of 2.34 inches, a pitch of 16, and a face width of 0.625 inches. The 17-4
PH SS has been chosen just for the prototype and a 440 stainless steel or a 17-7 PH
stainless steel is specified for production. An analysis of this gear and description of
what decisions were made appears in subsequent text (Section 4.3).

55

Shoulder Rotation Shaft

Shoulder
Pitch Axis
Motor

Shoulder
Pitch Output
Shaft

Gear Box

Shoulder
Rotation
Output Shaft

Bevel Gear

Connector Pins

Figure 41 - Cross section of base

Between the motor assembly and the bevel gear are a mounting surface plate (shown in
Figure 41 in grey) and a thrust bearing (shown in Figure 41 in orange). The motor
assembly screws on to the aluminum mounting surface using four #10-24 screws. The
thrust bearing is set between the mounting surface and the bevel gear. This thrust bearing
will absorb the loads experienced from the resultant axial force of the bevel gear
interface. The bevel gear interface occurs between the bevel gear that is fixed to the end
of the shoulder rotation motor assembly output shaft and the bevel gear that is fixed to the
shoulder rotation shaft. There is also a radial force that results from the bevel gear
interface. The output shaft and the shoulder rotation shaft should absorb these radial
forces. However, for additional contact support, a Rulon bushing is placed on the very
end of shoulder rotation output shaft and a dowel pin (shown in Figure 42 in grey) is
placed above the bushing.

56

Support Dowel
Pins

Figure 42 - Internal View of Power Transmission

The two bevel gears involved in the shoulder rotation system mesh in a one to one gear
ratio with the same material and gear properties. The only difference between these two
gears is the inner bore diameter. The bevel gear on the shoulder rotation shaft is fixed
using a key and keyway. It sits on a thrust bearing (shown in Figure 43 in orange) which
in turn is seated on a mounting surface plate. The shoulder rotation shaft is made out of
17-4 PH stainless steel and has two steps in it which results in three different shaft
diameters. The smallest shaft diameter will be the shaft base. This portion of the shaft
drops through the thrust bearing that supports the shoulder rotation bevel gear and then
drops through a hole in the mounting surface. On the underside of the mounting surface
is a slot for a control bearing (shown in Figure 43 in orange) that surrounds the very base
of the shaft. The shaft comes just short of being flush with the bottom of the bearing so
that a washer can be placed on the bottom of the bearing and a screw can be inserted
through the washer and into the base of the shaft. What this does is pull the shaft tightly
down onto its thrust bearing. At the base of the second largest diameter of the shoulder
rotation shaft is where the bevel gear is fixed.

57

Connector
Shaft

Transfer Gear
Assembly

Shoulder Rotation
Output Shaft
Shoulder
Rotation Shaft

Thrust Bearing

Mounting
Surfaces

Angular Contact Roller Bearing

Figure 43 - Cross Section of Shoulder Power Transmission

The shaft continues up though a part which has been termed the transfer gear assembly.
The assembly (shown in Figure 43 in green) is part of the shoulder pitch drive system but
also provides support for the shoulder rotation shaft. It is made up of a bevel gear on the
top and bottom of a tube. The bevel gears are dowel pin press fit into the tube. The
shoulder rotation shaft runs within the tube of the transfer assembly. Between the
shoulder rotation shaft and the tube are two roller bearings (shown in Figure 43 in
orange) so that the tube and the shaft my spin independent of each other. On the outside
of the transfer gear assembly are two control bearings (shown in Figure 43 in orange) that
come between it and the mounting surface. Above the top of the transfer gear, the
shoulder rotation shaft steps up to its largest diameter. Two flat surfaces are created on
either side of this part of the shaft. A hole is drilled at the center of these flat surfaces for
a connector shaft to be inserted through. This connector shaft (shown in Figure 43 in
grey) adjoins the shoulder rotation shaft with the yoke. The yoke is a component that
contains the elbow pitch drive system, supports the upper arm and forearm, and pitches
about the shoulder rotation shaft.

58

Shoulder Pitch Motion

Yoke Assembly

Shoulder Pitch Axis

Shoulder Pitch Motor Assembly

Figure 44 - Illustration of Shoulder Pitch Motion

The shoulder pitch operation (shown in both Figures 44 and 45) starts with the motor
assembly that is opposite of the one which operates the shoulder rotation. Like the
shoulder rotation drive, the shoulder pitch motor assembly output shaft has a bevel gear
fixed to it using a key and keyway. Between the bevel gear and motor assembly are a
mounting face and a thrust bearing. The motor assembly mounts to the face plate in the
same way that the shoulder rotation motor assembly is mounted. Between the mounting
face and the bevel gear is a thrust bearing that will absorb the force that is the resultant of
the axial force seen in the meshing of the two bevel gears. There is also a resulting radial
force just like the one seen in the shoulder rotation system. To add support to the
shoulder pitch output shaft, a Rulon bushing is added to the end of the shaft after the
bevel gear and a dowel pin is fixed directly beneath the bushing. This will prevent the
bending of the shoulder pitch output shaft if a large axial load is seen. The gear meshing
that creates these axial and radial forces occurs between the bevel gear on the shoulder
pitch motor assembly output shaft and the bevel gear that makes up the bottom of the
transfer gear assembly. These gears meet in a one to one ratio and are the same bevel
gears as mentioned before except for the diameter of the inner bore. The transfer gear
assembly, which is also called the hat assembly (shown in green in Figure 45), is made up
of two bevel gears top and bottom that are dowel pin press fit into a connecting tube.

59

Shoulder Rotation Shaft

Output Shaft
Bevel Gear Fixed to Yoke

Shoulder Pitch Motor Assembly

Connector Shaft
Transfer Gear Assembly (hat)

Bottom Plate and Bearing Housing

Figure 45 - Shoulder Pitch Components

Shoulder pitch drive continues as the bevel gear on the top of the hat assembly transmits
power into a bevel gear that is fixed to the inside of the yoke. These two gears also meet
in a one to one ratio and are the same bevel gears as mentioned before but with different
inner bore diameters. The bevel gear that is attached to the yoke is attached using five
dowel pins that are press fit into both the gear and the side of the yoke. The top of this
gear is made into a flat section that will butt up against the top of the yoke and give added
mechanical advantage. The connector shaft which the yoke pitches about runs through
the center of the bevel gear. Between the bevel gear and the shoulder rotation shaft is a
shaft seal. On the other side of the shoulder rotation shaft there is a bushing a spacer and
another bushing before the yoke. This set up will constrain the side to side motion of the
yoke on the shoulder rotation shaft.

60

Below are views of the transfer gear assembly, the bottom plate, and the shoulder rotation
shaft. Having these exploded views helps to see exactly how these key components go
together. All three of these key sub-assemblies interact with each other as can be seen in
the above Figure 45.

Spacer

Bevel Gear

Shoulder Rotation
Shaft

Bottom Plate

Brass Busing

Bearing Cover

AST Roller
Bearing

Control Bearing

Connector Tube

Figure 47 - Bottom Plate

and Bearing Support

Bearings

Figure 46 - Transfer Gear

Assembly
Figure 48 - Shoulder
Rotation Shaft

61

4.1.2 Upper Arm Assembly

Elbow Joint

Chain

Yoke

Figure 49 - Upper Arm (First Stage of Arm)

The yoke (Figures 49 and 50) is the supporting link between the shoulder/base and the
rest of the arm. The yoke is also the housing for the elbow drive system. The elbow drive
motor assembly is the same motor assembly that is used for the shoulder pitch and
shoulder rotation, however, it has been reconfigured. The motor and the planetary gear
set have been removed from their housings. Housings are machined into the yoke that
will support the motor and planetary gear set. The assembly is configured with the gear
box directly above the motor. Initially a high speed belt was considered to connect the
gear box with the motor. However, after further analysis a set of spur gears will be used.
There will be a spur gear on both the input and output shafts of the gear box and motor
respectively and an idler gear to connect them (shown in Figure 51 in grey). These spur
gears will be made from 303 stainless steel with a pitch of 24 and a face width of 3/16
inches. The spur gears must transmit power from the motor which turns at 4000 rpm and
delivers 15 in-lbs of torque. After the motor undergoes the 90:1 reduction of the gear
box, power is outputted via the gearbox output shaft to a chain sprocket. The chain
sprocket will turn a chain that will then turn a sprocket that is fixed to the elbow joint,
thereby operating the elbow pitch. The chain and the portion of the arm above the yoke
are the same as the ones found on the old TALON arm. However these parts have been
shortened to fit this design. All parts between the elbow joint and the gripper are
maintained exactly from the old TALON arm design.

62

Potentiometer

Planetary Gear Box

Gear Box Input Shaft
Motor

Chain Sprocket

Motor Output Shaft

Encoder
Electromagnetic Break

Figure 50 - Yoke Assembly

The yoke must also house the electromagnetic break and the potentiometer. The
electromagnetic break is affixed to the motor shaft on the opposite side of the motor
output to the gearbox. A bracket was created to hold the electromagnetic break onto the
motor. This bracket is especially important because it allows the encoder to be removed
without the removal of the break. The electromagnetic break is responsible for holding
the motor in place when power is off to the motor. The encoder tells a computer the
position of the motor when the motor is operating. The potentiometer has been moved
directly above the gearbox output shaft. Motion is transmitted to the potentiometer
through three equal sized spur gears. The potentiometer is important because it tells the
computer the position of the output shaft when the motor is off.

63

Spur Gears (connect

motor and gear box)

Gear Box Output Shaft

Figure 51 - Yoke Assembly Gear Train

4.1.3 Connection of Assemblies

The final portion of the design is the connection between the two previously described
assemblies. The upper arm is connected to the arm base by using a connector shaft. This
shaft goes through the arm support, the yoke, the shoulder pitch bevel gear, the shoulder
rotation shaft, a spacer, and two bearings. With this one shaft acting as the connection
between the two assemblies, the design is kept modular and can come apart with the
removal of one screw and the shaft. The arm support was added to the design to aid in
reducing the bending stress in the shoulder rotation shaft. When the shoulder rotation
shaft was designed a worst case scenario loading was used, however the stresses seen in
the shaft came close to failure. To counter this worst case scenario the arm support rides
freely with the shoulder rotation a few thousandths above the top plate. If there is any
severe bending stress applied to the arm, the arm support will contact top plate and
prevent the shoulder rotation shaft from bending.

64

Connector Shaft

Yoke

Shoulder Rotation Shaft

Arm Support

Figure 52 - Connected Assemblies

When both assemblies with all three systems work in conjunction as shown in Figure 52,
the TALON arm possesses three degrees of freedom from the elbow down. There is one
drive assembly responsible for each of these degrees of freedom, which helps keep the
design simple and modular. Because the shoulder rotation system and shoulder pitch
system are intertwined, operating one motor while keeping the other still will alter both
the rotation and pitch degrees of freedom. Since this occurs, software motor control is
necessary to coordinate the movement of the two motors. All of the bevel gears in this
design are 1:1 ratio, which makes the creation of the software control relatively easy.
With software control the position of the motors will be known at all times and there will
be no unwanted adjustment of position arm. The elbow pitch system will also require
some software control because as the shoulder pitches the elbow will not. A beneficial
attribute would be to have the elbow pitch adjust as the shoulder pitch adjusts. This
would enable the second stage of the arm to remain parallel to the ground as shoulder
pitch or shoulder rotation is adjusted.
4.1.4 Design Challenges
Since the selection of the design concept, there have been many challenges that have
presented themselves. The design concept was transformed into a Pro-Engineer solid
model. When this was done it became easier to see which areas of the arm were going to
require more design attention. Figure 53 shows a 3D model of the arm assembly.

65

Figure 53 - Arm assembly

The Foster-Miller motor assembly was taken from the old Pro-E model and inserted into
the new design. One of the first design challenges was fitting both motor assemblies and
the gearbox at the base of the arm. After realizing that if the motor shafts were kept on
the same centerline (as they are on the current arm) the gear ratio would not be able to be
1:1 without interfering with one another. In order to solve this problem the Foster-Miller
motor assemblies were staggered. One of motor assemblies was moved down 1/4 in.,
while the other motor assembly was moved down 3/4 in. This stagger of the motor
assemblies allows for a 1:1 gear ratio in every gear used in the robotic arm without
interference. It also opens up more room to use larger gears which are stronger and able
to carry a larger load.
Gear selection was a very important process in itself. A gear analysis was performed to
see which type of bevel gear would be best to suit the design. A thorough explanation of
gear selection follows in subsequent sections of this report. After the correct gear was
specified, a gear manufacturer was found that could cut gears and ship them well within
three weeks. What this means is that the robotic arm will be using production quality
gears instead of rapid prototype gears.
The next area of design was the shaft that controls the shoulder rotation (Figure 54). This
shaft ends up being the base support section of the entire arm. It is very important that
66

the shaft is supported correctly and it is able to withstand every possible type of loading
that it might see. The entire shaft will have two steps in it resulting in three different
diameters. The largest diameter of the shaft will be at the top where the yoke adjoins to
the through shaft. The smallest diameter of the shaft will be at the bottom where it sits on
a thrust bearing. There are washers located above and below the thrust bearing which
allow the lower most bevel gear to sit on the thrust bearing as well as the shaft. Below
the washer that the thrust bearing sits on is a support plate. The smallest diameter of the
shaft drops through the thrust bearing and washers and then though a hole in the support
plate. Between the walls of the support plate and the shaft there is an angular contact
bearing. The bottom of this bearing will be lower than the bottom of the shoulder
rotation shaft and a washer will be seated on that overhanging bearing surface. A screw
will pull that washer tight to the bottom of the shoulder rotation shaft. This set up pulls
the shaft down tightly and sandwiches the bearings, making a well supported base.

Shoulder Rotation Shaft

Arm Support

Thrust Bearing

Angular Contact Bearing

Figure 54 - Shoulder Assembly

When the shoulder rotation shaft was designed, a worst case scenario was used for
loading when doing failure calculations. The calculations reveled that the shoulder
rotation shaft would be strong enough to withstand these loads on its own, and would not
fail in torsion, shear, or bending. However, even though the shoulder rotation shaft will
not fail in bending, the bending stress value was very close to allowable stress. For this
reason an arm support (shown in Figure 54) was added. This arm support connects to the
outsides of the connector shaft, just outside the connection points of the yoke. The arm
support rotates with the shoulder rotation and has a few thousandths of clearance between
it and the top plate. On the bottom of the arm support are small skids made out of PTFE.
These skids will contact the top plate for added support when extraordinary amounts of
force are put on the arm.
Another design consideration was properly supporting the output shafts of the shoulder
pitch motor assembly and the shoulder rotation motor assembly. Fixed to each of these
output shafts are bevel gears that mesh with two other bevel gears. Each of these meshes
has resultant forces associated with them in the radial and axial direction. To counter the

67

axial force along each of the output shafts a thrust bearing has been placed in between the
bevel gear fixed to the output shaft and the mounting surface. The radial force induced
by the bevel gear mesh may result in the bending of the output shaft. To counter this, a
Rulon bushing has been placed on the very end of each motor assemblys output shaft
and a dowel pin is fixed on the opposite side of the respective bevel gear meshes.
Surrounding the shoulder rotation shaft is the twin bevel gear set which has been termed
the transfer gear assembly. This assembly has a bevel gear pinned into the top and
bottom of a tube with a pair of bearings pressed into the tube. The shoulder rotation shaft
rides within the assembly, and it, in turn, rides freely from the support plate around it via
another set of bearings. The transfer gear assembly is the idler gear for the shoulder pitch
system and also offers support for the shoulder rotation shaft.
The next major area of design is the elbow drive system (Figure 55). In the chosen
concept a shaft drive system was used to operate the pitch of the elbow. After
performing an analysis it was found that the shaft drive splits its resultant forces on the
arm into a bending moment as well as a torsional force that the joint between the yoke
and shoulder rotation shaft was not designed to withstand. The design team decided
against the use of a shaft drive due to the additional loading and the fact that the forearm
and elbow joint geometry of the current TALON arm can be maintained with the use of a
chain drive system. Detailed analysis comparing the two drive systems can be found in
section 4.4.1.

Figure 55 - Elbow Assembly

The chain drive system selected will require mounting a motor on the arm of the
TALON. Since the size and weight of the motor will affect the center of gravity of the
robot, a large amount of time was put into searching for what motor should be used. The
motor that drives the elbow pitch system had to meet the requirements laid out by FosterMiller. The motor must be DC brushless, not much more than 24V, draw a maximum of
10 amps, with a resulting output torque of at least 11.12 in-lbs (1000 in-lbs after 90:1
gear ratio). The current Foster-Miller motor meets these requirements, weighs 1.6
pounds, and takes up a total volume of 2 5/8 X 2 5/8 X 1 . A number of other
motors were considered, but the motor that Foster-Miller currently uses on the TALON is
68

the best suited for the elbow drive, especially since it limits the number of new
components in the design. More information on the other motors that were considered
can be found in section 4.4.2.
Changing the elbow drive system to a chain drive causes yet another design challenge.
Instead of stacking the motor assembly such that the shafts run vertically as they would in
a shaft drive system, the motor assembly output shaft would have to be horizontal for the
incorporation of a chain sprocket. Several packaging options were considered for all the
components of the motor assembly, which consists of a motor, a planetary gear box, an
electromagnetic brake, and a potentiometer. Many of the considered configurations had
one or more components overhanging the front or the sides of the yoke, which caused
interference problems when the pitch or rotation was adjusted. Finally, a design was
created to stack the gearbox directly on top of the motor and connect them with a set of
spur gears. When stacked in this orientation, the existing housings become redundant,
and so the existing Foster-Miller motor and planetary gear set will be removed from their
housings and placed in a custom housing that will also offer support for the upper arm.
Removing the motor and gears from their current housing will save space and weight on
top of the yoke. Detailed design information can be seen in section 4.4.2 and 4.4.3.
The set of spur gears that connects the motor output shaft to the gearbox input shaft had
to be designed. Before it was decided that spur gears would be used a high speed belt
drive was specified for the power transmission. It was found that a 3mm pitch belt that is
9mm wide with 65 teeth would be required to transmit the rated peak torque of 22.5 inlbs. Hand calculations for belt-selection can be found in Appendix A and design of the
belt set is explained more in section 4.4.4. Though a high speed belt would be adequate
for the task, the use of a belt is better with a continuous speed application, which this is
not. Because of the stopping and starting of this belt at high speeds there is a concern of
early belt wear, therefore spur gears were specified for the application. Each of the spur
gears would be made from 303 stainless steel. The two pinions would have a pitch
diameter of 1.25 inches, a diametral pitch of 24, a face width of .1875 inches, a bore
diameter or .1875 inches, and a hub diameter of .375 inches. The idler gear would have
a pitch diameter of 1.625 inches, a pitch of 24, a face width of .1875 inches, a bore
diameter of .25 inches and a hub diameter of .5 inches. Section 4.4.5 covers the spur gear
selection in more detail.

69

4.2 Shaft Design and Analysis

After the configuration of the shaft was decided upon a finite element analysis (FEA) was
performed on it. The shaft was given a loading in torque and in bending. The bending
moment was calculated as if 100 pounds of force applied laterally to the distal end of the
arm if the arm is held straight up. The torsional force was found as if the motor were
applying 1000 in-lbs to the shaft at the base keyway; however, a factor of safety of three
was used here. Both of these loading scenarios are worst case, and would most likely
never be seen in actual usage. The finite element analysis of the shaft is shown in Figure
56. The maximum stress that the shaft will see is 143 ksi and the maximum allowable
stress of 440 stainless steal is 186 ksi, therefore the shaft will not fail.

Figure 56 - FEA of shoulder shaft.

Appendix B contains hand calculations that were made to determine bending, shear and
torsional stresses in a different loading profile than that of the FEA. Point loads where
gear contact occurs and resultant torsion and bending moments were used to find other
stresses.

70

4.3 Gear Selection and Analysis

The group was given the task of designing custom bevel gears for power transmission to
both the TALONs shoulder pitch and shoulder rotation. The gear ratio was kept at 1:1
so that the same gear could be used throughout the design. Bevel gears with a 1:1 ratio
are known as miter gears. Keeping the ratio at 1:1 also decreases the mass production
cost of the gears. Below is a list of gear nomenclature. Also, a cross-sectional diagram
of two bevel gears including nomenclature is shown in Figure 57.
Diametral Pitch (P) The ratio of the number of teeth to the pitch diameter.
Face Width(F) The length of the teeth.
Pitch Circle The circle derived from a number of teeth and a specified diametral or
circular pitch. The circle on which spacing or tooth profiles is established and from
which the tooth proportions are constructed.
Pitch Diameter(D) The diameter of the pitch circle.
Pressure Angle() The angle at a pitch point between the line of pressure which is
normal to the tooth surface and the plane tangent to the pitch surface.

Figure 57 Bevel gear diagram.

71

The tooth load along the pitch line of the gear had to be calculated in order to determine
which geometry and which material were to be used for the design. From the tooth load,
the maximum allowable torque was determined. This value was compared to the
TALON arms operating torque of 1000 in-lb and speed of 7 RPM. The formula for the
load on a single tooth of the bevel gear is given below:
W = (SFY/P) x (600/(600 + V)) x 0.75
The tooth load is given as W where S is the safe material stress, F is the face width, Y is
the tooth form factor, P is the diametral pitch, and V is the pitch line velocity. The tooth
form factor is shown in Table 9. The safe material stress in the Boston Gear method of
analysis is the ultimate tensile strength divided by three. The pitch line velocity is
calculated by the following formula:
V = 0.262 x D x RPM
Bevel gears also develop both axial and radial loads in addition to the tangential load
along the gear tooth. This requires bearings to account for the thrust and radial loading.
The formulas for the axial (Wa) and radial (Wr) loads are given below:
Wr = W tan cos
Wa = W tan sin
In these equations is the pressure angle and is the pitch angle shown in Figure 57.
Table 9 - Tooth form factor.

All of the gear analysis was compiled in Microsoft Excel to allow for easy comparison of
materials and geometries. Table 10 shows the analysis of miter gears for a set geometry
and varying materials. The gears in the final design have a face width of 0.625 in, a pitch
72

of 16, and a pitch diameter of 2.25 in. With this geometry and an operating speed of 7
RPM, the gears have a pitch line velocity of 4.13 ft/min.
Initially, selected laser sintering (SLS) prototypes were considered for the gears. SLS
material would be sufficient for a gear prototype, but would not be able to transmit
enough torque to be a production gear. The price of fabricating these gears, however, is
roughly equal to having production gears cut. 440 stainless steel was selected due to its
ability to transmit over 1000 in-lb of torque safely. The stainless steel is also corrosion
resistant which is important for the TALONs ability to be submerged.
Table 10 - Analysis of 16 pitch gears

Miter Gear Analysis (16 Pitch)

SLS
17-7 PH
17-4 PH
440 SS
Material
SS
SS
Tensile Strength (psi)
88000
265000
254000
210000
Safe Static Stress (psi)
29333
88333
84667
70000
Face Width (in)
0.625
0.625
0.625
0.625
Tooth Form Factor
0.408
0.408
0.408
0.408
Diametral Pitch (1/in)
16
16
16
16
Number of Teeth
36
36
36
36
Pitch Diameter (in)
2.25
2.25
2.25
2.25
RPM
7
7
7
12
Pitchline Velocity (ft/min)
4.13
4.13
4.13
7.07
348.23 1048.65 1005.12
826.97
Tooth Load Along Pitchline (
Torque (in-lbs)
391.76 1179.73 1130.76
930.34
OD (in)
2.34
2.34
2.34
2.34
HP
0.04
0.13
0.13
0.18
Tangential Thrust Load (lb)
347.97 1047.85 1004.35
826.34
Axial Thrust Load (lb)
89.56
269.71
258.51
212.69
Radial Thrust Load (lb)
89.56
269.71
258.51
212.69

Table 10 shows that the 440 stainless gear can transmit 1130.76 in-lb of torque safely. At
this torque and a speed of 7 RPM, the gear will develop a tooth load of 1005.12 lbs, an
axial load of 258.51 lbs, and a radial load of 258.51 lbs. The current stainless steel used
by Foster-Miller on TALON components is 17-4 PH. Using the given geometry, this
material is not able to transmit enough torque. An alternate material to the 440 stainless
is 17-7 PH stainless. A gear cut from this steel would have the ability to transmit
1179.73 in-lb of torque. If there are any issues with the 440, 17-7 PH can be used in its
place. Figure 58 shows how the pitch of the gear impacts the torque that gear can
transmit depending on the material used. As pitch and the number of teeth increase, the
allowable torque decreases. This is due to the fact that the higher the number of teeth, the
smaller each tooth is. The gear needs to have relatively large teeth to transmit 1000 in-lb
of torque. This is why a pitch of 16 was chosen. Figure 59 shows another parameter that
impacts the allowable torque. As the face width of the gear increases, allowable torque
increases linearly. Face width is a gear tooth size parameter, so this shows that larger
teeth can transmit more torque.

73

Pitch vs Allowable Torque

5000
4500
4000

Torque (in-lb)

3500

440 SS
3000

SLS

2500

17-7 PH

2000

17-4 PH

1500
1000
500
0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

Diametral Pitch (1/in)

Figure 58 - Torque and pitch curve for selected materials

Face Width vs Allowable Torque
1200

1000

Torque (in-lb)

800

600

400

200

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

Face Width (in)

Figure 59 - Torque and face width curve

74

0.5

0.6

0.7

FEA was also conducted to confirm that the gears could transmit the necessary torque
without failure. Seeing as all the gears are the same geometry, all see the same loading,
and all are a 1:1 ratio, only one gear needed to be analyzed. For this analysis, the gear
was given a pressure loading of 35,750 psi along a single tooth. This value comes from
the 1000 in-lb and a factor of safety of 3. The 1000 in-lbs was converted into a force
along the pitch line and then distributed over the area of the tooth. With the pressure
loading, the maximum stress in the gear is 172000 psi occurring along the base of the
tooth. The yield strength of 440 stainless steel is 186000 psi, so the gear would not fail.
Figure 60 shows an overall view of the stresses in the gear, and Figure 61 shows a crosssection highlighting the tooth.

Figure 60 FEA of miter gear

75

Figure 61 Miter gear FEA cross-section

Another part of the gear analysis is the key. Each shaft and gear will have a keyway and
a key for coupling. There are two shaft sizes in the design. They have diameters of in
and in. The bore of the gear will be the same size as the diameter of the shaft to which
it is attached. The standard face size for a square key size on a in shaft is 3/16 x 3/16
in. The length of the key is the same as the thickness of the gear which is 0.538. The
Distortion-Energy Theory was used to determine if this size key was appropriate for this
application. The force at the gear was calculated by the following formula:
F = T/r
T is the torque transmitted by the gear and r is the radius of the bore. The shear strength
of the material was calculated from the yield strength:
Ssy = 0.577 Sy
The factor of safety was determined from the force, shear strength and the dimensions of
the key using 17-4 PH stainless steel, and the material the Foster-Miller uses for keys:
Ssy/n = F/tL
A key made of 17-4 PH stainless steel with dimensions 3/16 x 3/16 x 0.538 in on the in
shaft will not fail. Also, a key of the same material and dimensions 1/8 x 1/8 x 0.538 on
the in shaft will not fail.

76

4.4 Elbow Drive Design

4.4.1 Power Transmission Method
There were many factors involved in choosing the power transmission method for the
elbow joint. Since moving a power source up the arm would decrease its load capacity, a
design that keeps the bulk of the mass concentrated near the base of the arm is desired.
Of these designs considered, the two that are the most feasible are shown in the figures
below. Figure 62 shows the chain drive and Figure 63 shows the shaft and gear drive.

Figure 63 - Shaft for elbow motor power

transmission

Figure 62 - Chain drive for elbow motor

power transmission

In the shaft design, a large amount of weight is added near the elbow joint of the TALON
in the form of a bevel gear set and a large yoke for support. This added weight at the
elbow joint decreases the TALONs lift capacity significantly.
The shaft design does have several benefits associated with it. A shaft results in a more
stream-lined look. Also, the design would be more compact, allowing the arm to stow
easier and fit in some harder to reach areas. However, the benefits of the chain design
outweigh those of the shaft. In both designs, there is a bending moment at the shoulder
joint due to the weight on the arm. With the shaft design, there is a complex torque
associated with the elbow motor and its mounting. In the chain design, the dual sprockets
convert the supported weight into tension in the chain which, in turn, transmits the
loading to the shoulder as an additional bending load. The arm of the TALON is
designed to resist bending loads and the introduction of high torsion would add to the
complexity in its design. Another major benefit of using the chain drive system is that it

77

can be easily incorporated into the existing design as the sprocket on the elbow and the
entire forearm will be utilized in the new overall design.

4.4.2 Elbow Motor Selection

In the chosen design, the motor driving the elbow pitch needs to be mounted on the arm.
This motor needs to meet the power requirements and should also minimize its negative
impact on the lifting capacity of the shoulder motor. Below are the specifications given
to us by Foster-Miller for the elbow drive motor and gearbox:
DC Brushless Elbow Motor All motors used in the TALONs arm will use DC
brushless motors. These motors may be more expensive then brushed DC motors, but in
exchange for the added cost they are very thermally efficient, have an excellent torque to
volume ratio, can reach efficiencies of around 90%, and require very little maintenance
(no brushes to replace).
24 Volts are required Since the batteries on the TALON are only charged up to 42
volts and those batteries do not hold that potential for very long, it would be best to be
conservative in choosing a voltage such that the motors are able to run at the proper speed
for an extended period of time.
Motor output torque of 11.12 in-lbs before the 90:1 gearbox Foster-Miller wishes to
keep the ratio at no more than 90:1 to ensure that the arm will remain backdriveable.
This gearbox must be capable of sustaining the 1000 in-lbs [113 n-m] of stall torque at its
output shaft.
10 amps max with this current rating, the torque constant must be at least 17.78 in-oz /
amp (125.6 mNm / amp) to reach the required torque.
Smaller then the current motors - The current motors weigh 1.6 lbs and measure 2 5/8
X 2 5/8 X 1 . There would be no reason to use a motor larger than these.
After an exhaustive search, no pre-existing motors were found to meet all of these
specifications. One of the major problems involved finding a motor in the right size
range that met both the required torque of 1000 in-lbs and also had a torque constant such
that current to the motor did not exceed 10 amps at stall torque. Only motors larger than
the current Foster-Miller met the other specifications. Some of the major motors that
were considered for the design were:
Moog The TD-4882-A-1-XX motors supplied more than enough torque, and while they
are rated at 34 VDC, they could be run at lower voltage. However, these motors weigh
around 2.5 lbs and therefore it would be better to use the FMI motor.
Ametek Several motors were strong enough but the torque constant was too high for
the motors that were smaller than the current FMI motors (around 7.5 in-oz / amp)
Hurst Motors were around 149 in-oz maximum, and even these were too large to be
used (NEMA 23).
Allied Motion The best DC brushless motor (020301) available supplied enough torque
at a low enough current, and was still able to turn at a fast enough rpm. However, its
unframed model was of equivalent weight and size of the unframed FMI motor.

78

Aeroflex The motors that supply a high enough peak torque have large diameters and
weight approximately as much as the FMI motor.
Parker Many of the BM060 frame-size motors provide enough power and are within
specifications. However, even the smallest motors offered by Parker are larger than the
FMIs.
Maxon: EC Powermax 40, and EC max 40 were found to be smaller and more powerful
than the Foster-Miller motors. However, when running at the required load the current to
the motors exceeded the maximum allowable current.
Maxon: EC 90 Flat motor more met power requirements, supplied nearly twice the
required torque, and weighed slightly less than the FMI motor. Packaging this 90mm
diameter motor may have presented some problems, but the design team decided using
the existing FMI motor was more beneficial then having a motor that was stronger than
was presently required.
Table 11 highlights the reasons why only planetary gearboxes were analyzed for use in
the design:
Planetary gearheads are generally specified for their high rated torque
and high input speed. Planetary gearheads are more robust with higher
accuracy, lower backlash and longer life than spur gearheads. They are
well suited for higher load applications in small packages ranging from
nut runners and nut setters to small medical tools, pumps, and other
devices.23
Table 11 - Comparison of spur and planetary gearheads23

Before an extensive search was performed for gearboxes it was decided that no off-theshelf gearbox will be as optimal for the arm as the custom gearbox that was designed by
Foster-Miller. While this gearbox at first seems larger and heavier than it should be, the
stainless 440c components are made to be as small as is safely possible for this
application.
4.4.3 Elbow Motor and Gearbox Layout
The Motor and gearbox will be directly integrated into the yoke of the arm. Starting from
a block of aluminum, material has been removed to allow every component of the FMI

79

motor assembly to fit inside of it. There are also plates that will guard an input connector
and the output chain to the elbow on each side of the yoke.
By eliminating the housing of the motor and gearbox, we can save a lot of girth and
height on the yoke. The motors stator assembly can be pressed directly into the housing.
Similarly, the ring gears of the planetary gearbox will be pressed in and secured from
rotation in a manner similar to the way FMI originally solved a rotation problem with
their current motor.
To go from the motor to the gearbox, a belt and pulley was considered because it is a low
torque, high rpm situation (15 in-lbs at 4,000 rpm). With the layout of the parallel shafts,
either a belt system or a set of spur gears could be used. A belt system will add less
weight to the arm than a set of spur gears (center to center distance is 2.75 minimum).
A belt will also be significantly quieter than spur gears running at high speed.
Calculations and data on the belt and pulley setup can be found section 4.4.4.
The final design is implementing a spur gear system rather than a belt and pulley due to
concerns with belt tension and the need to preload the belt before installation. The spur
gears were analyzed in a similar manner to the bevel gears. A detailed description of the
spur gear selection follows in section 4.4.5.
The electromagnetic brake that FMI currently uses is slightly larger than preferred. They
were able to provide a brake that was custom made for them by Inertia Dynamics that
they eventually want integrated into their new motor assembly. It will take up less space
than the current brake without losing holding torque.
The same potentiometer setup is being used since FMI has had good reliability with it. It
uses aluminum spur gears to minimize weight. These gears are practical because they
operate under minimal torque and rpm. Connectors will be maintained which will help
with the final build and repairs.
4.4.4 Elbow Belt System Selection
Stock Drive Products / Sterling Instrument offer a very detailed procedure for selecting
the correct pulleys and belt for a desired application in their Handbook of Timing Belts
and Pulleys. For this application, the following values and inputs were used:
Torque Required: 15 in-lbs
Speed: 4,000 rpm
Speed Ratio: 1 (will be using the same size pulleys)
Center distance between shafts: 2.75 minimum
While detailed calculations can be found in Appendix A, the criterion listed above was
used for the analysis and 10-step selection process. These steps are as follows:
Step 1: Determine design load (we used a 1.5 service factor)
Step 2: Choice of belt pitch (found a 3mm GT2 would be strong enough)

80

Step 3: Confirm belt pitch selection (graphs confirmed the selection)

Step 4: Speed Ratio (again, 1:1 will be used)
Step 5: Check belt speed (over 6,500 fpm would have required a special belt)
Step 6: Determine belt length (63 tooth belt allows 16 tooth pulleys to be 2.78 apart)
Step 7: Determine belt width (required width was found to be 9mm)
Step 8: Check # teeth in mesh (under six teeth in mesh decreases torque rating)
Step 9: Determine proper belt installation tension (found to be 30.40 lbs)
Step 10: Check availability (required components are in stock)
As stated above, the GT2 belt has a 3mm pitch, is 9mm wide, and has 63 teeth, which
give result in a torque rating of 26.37 in-lbs. The SDP/SI part number for the belt is
A_6R53M063090 and costs $7.42 for a quantity of 1 to 24. Dimensions are shown in
Figure 64. The values are in millimeters. Inches are in parentheses.

Figure 64 - GT2 belt dimensions

The two pulleys are identical and have the specifications shown in Table 12. They cost
$11.20 for a quantity of 1 to 24. Figure 65 shows pulley dimensions and Figure 66 is an
overall view of the pulley.

Figure 66 - Isometric of pulleys to be used

Figure 65 - Pulley Dimensions

Table 12 - Pulley Dimensions and Specifications

81

4.4.4 Elbow Spur Gear Selection

The elbow drive spur gears were analyzed with methods given by Boston Gear. The
nomenclature and variable descriptions for the following formula are given in section 4.3
with the bevel gear analysis. The safe tooth load for a spur gear is determined by this
formula:
W = (SFY/P) x (600/(600 + V))
The difference between this analysis and that of the bevel gears is that the spur gears are
stock parts supplied by SDP-SI. The bevel gears are custom. The tooth form factor (Y)
for the spur gears is also different than that of the bevel gears. Spur gear tooth form
factors are shown in Table 13.
Table 13 - Spur Gear Tooth Form Factor

82

Table 14 shows a comparison of different gear geometries for 303 stainless steel. The
geometries are given values from SDP-SI. A gear with a pitch diameter of 1.25 in, a
pitch of 24, and a face width of 3/16 in was chosen due to its ability to carry the safe
tooth load. This gear also has a bore of 3/16 in which will fit on the in motor shaft.
Two of these gears will be used; one on the motor and one on the gear box mounted
above. To maintain a center to center distance between the two gears of 2.78 in, an idler
gear is needed. The idler gear used has a pitch diameter of 1.625 in, a pitch of 24, and a
face width of 3/16 in. This gear has a bore of in. The Pro-E model of the spur gear
drive is shown in Figure 51. The idler is offset slightly to keep the center to center
distance.
Table 14 - Spur Gear Geometry Comparison

Tensile Strength (psi)

89900
89900
89900
89900
Safe Static Stress (psi) 29966.67 29966.67 29966.67 29966.67
Face Width (in)
0.1875
0.125
0.125
0.125
Tooth Form Factor
0.358
0.347
0.361
0.358
Diametral Pitch (1/in)
24
24
24
24
Pitch Diameter (in)
1.25
1.125
1.375
1.25
Number of Teeth
30
27
33
30
RPM
4000
4000
4000
4000
Pitch Line Velocity (ft/mi
1310
1179
1441
1310
Torque (in-lb)
15
15
15
15
HP
0.952003 0.952003 0.952003 0.952003
Safe Tooth Load (lb)
26.3287 18.26594 16.56352 17.55247
Actual Tooth Load (lb)
23.98176 26.6464 21.8016 23.98176

4.5 Bill of Materials

The current bill of materials (BOM) is included in Table 15. This is a truncated version
of the full list. The BOM shown in this report includes all of the major components and
breaks the design down into assemblies and sub-assemblies. Design for this project is
focused on two assemblies, the yoke and the shoulder. The shoulder itself is broken
down into several sub-assemblies. These include the hat assembly, tilt motor assembly,
pan motor assembly, bottom bearing assembly, and top bearing assembly. At this point
in the design phase, the custom gears have the longest lead time of two weeks. The BOM
allows for tracking the status of each component whether it is to be ordered, ordered, or
already procured. It also helps to keep track of which parts need what type of analysis
such as, FEA or hand calculations. There is also a comments section in the BOM that
helps to keep track of important notes like desired material of if the part is able to be
provided by Foster-Miller

83

Table 15 Truncated Bill of Materials

Part Name
Gripper Assembly
Forearm Assembly
Elbow Assembly
Upper Arm Assembly
Chain
Yolk Assembly
Yolk
Planetary Gearset
Electromagnetic Brake
Potentiometer
Frameless Motor
Encoder
Connector
Pulley
Belt
Gearbox Input Shaft
Potentiometer Gear
Output Gear
Idler Gear
Sprocket
Shoulder Pitch Shaft
Shoulder Pitch Gear
Shoulder Assembly
Hat Assembly
Connecting Tube
Top Bevel Gear
1/8" 416SS Dowel Pins
Shaft Seal
Roller Bearing
Tilt Motor Assembly
FMI Motor
1/8 Key
Motor Output Bevel
Pan Motor Assembly
FMI Motor
1/8 Key
Motor Output Bevel
Front Plate
Bottom Bearing Assembly
Bottom Bearing Plate
Shoulder Bearing
Back Plate
Top Bearing Assembly
Top Plate
Top Bearing
Shoulder Rotation Shaft
3/16" Key
Shoulder Rotation Gear

Analysis Qty.
~
~
~
~
Calcs
~
FEA
~
~
~
~
~
~
Calcs
Calcs
~
~
~
~
FEA
~
~
Calcs
FEA
Calcs
~
Calcs
~
~
Calcs
FEA
~
~
Calcs
FEA
~
~
~
Calcs
~
~
~
~
FEA
Calcs
FEA

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
12
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1

84

Source
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
~
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
SDP-SI
SDP-SI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
Rush Gear
~
~
Rush Gear
McMaster
MSC
McMaster
~
FMI
Rush Gear
~
FMI
Rush Gear
~
AST
~
AST

Rush Gear

Cost
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$5.15
$0.00
$0.00
$400.00
$185.00
$50.00
$300.00
$200.00
$50.00
$22.40
$7.42
$0.00
$6.65
$6.65
$6.65
$10.78
$0.00
$985.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,970.00
$2.95
$5.64
$16.86
$0.00
$2,000.00
$2.31
$985.00
$0.00
$2,000.00
$2.31
$985.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$21.95
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$81.60
$0.00
$2.95
$985.00

Comments
FMI Part
FMI Part
FMI Part
FMI Part, Modified
FMI Part, Modified
Aluminum, Machined
Aluminum, Machined
Current Gearbox Components
24VDC (DSI-500-0006)
FMI Part
Current Motor Components
FMI Part
FMI Part
Wire EDM Internal Profile
9mm GT2 Timing belt
440C SS
FMI Part
FMI Part
FMI Part
FMI Part
440C SS
17-4 PH SS
Final Assembly
Assembly
FMI Part, Modified
17-4 PH SS
Packs of 50
.125" thk Nitrile .75"/1"
Sealed 1" OD, 3/4" wd.
FMI Motor with Bevel
FMI Part, Modified
17-4 Standard Key
17-4 PH SS
FMI Motor with Bevel
FMI Part, Modified
17-4 Standard Key
17-4 PH SS
Aluminum, Machined
Pressed Assembly
Aluminum, Machined
0.625" Bore Sealed Slim
Aluminum, Machined
Pressed Assembly
Aluminum, Machined
1.5625" Bore Sealed Slim
440C SS
440C SS
17-4 PH SS

4.6 Lifting Capacity

One aspect of the TALON robot that has been improved by adding a rotational degree of
freedom is its lifting capacity. On the old TALON robot, lifting capacity was limited by
its center of gravity. The motors may have been strong enough to lift up an object of a
given weight, however at some point the platform would lift off the ground instead of
lifting up the object. Now that the arm can rotate 360 degrees, the center of gravity will
change at each position of rotation. For example, the location of the center of gravity
when the arm is outstretched directly behind it (180 degrees from its start position) allows
for a greater amount of weight to be lifted. With this added characteristic, the limiting
feature for lift capacity is now the strength of the motor. If a motor is found with higher
power density then lifting capacity can increase greatly for the TALON robot. Shown in
Figure 67 is a chart reflecting the lift capacity due to the center of gravity for all 360
degrees around the platform.

Talon Lifting Capacity Due To Center of Gravity

Lifting capacity (Pounds)

Overall Lift Capacity

Overall Lift Capacity
50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0
0

45

90

135

180

225

270

315

360

Direction of Arm (Degrees)

Figure 67 - 360 TALON Lift Capacity due to COG

85

Chapter 5: Manufacturing and Assembly

The prototype is the true test of design. The solid model created in Pro/Engineer was
fully designed and analyzed. Of course, transferring the design into reality never occurs
as smoothly as is hoped. Machining methods have to be decided upon for each part being
created. Some parts require fixtures or special tooling in order to be created. Still, other
times, parts or features that were designed are nearly impossible to be manufactured. A
working prototype still must be created despite any problems that arise. Because of this,
the manufacturing process required some troubleshooting decisions to be made.

5.1 Machining and Prototype Decisions

The yoke is made out of 7075 aluminum because it is a very strong material and the yoke
is a structural section of the arm. The rest of the new TALON arms aluminum pieces are
machined from 6061 aluminum including the yoke cover plates. Since the yoke is such a
complex piece it was fully dimensioned on isometric drawings and an SLA mock up was
created for reference. The mock up was even populated with an old gear box and motor
for full effect. During the creation of the yoke it was decided that it would be
extraordinarily difficult to make the top neck up to where it adjoins with the upper arm
tube. To create this feature, the yoke would have to be turned on a lathe. Due the yokes
complex shape, the difficulty and time required to set the process up was prohibitive.
Instead a hole was bored into the top of the yoke so that the upper arm tube can be
pressed into it and welded.
During the machining process, a few modifications had to be made. There is a quartoseal between the potentiometer cover and the yoke that sits in a groove. This groove was
nearly impossible for the machinist to create because they did not have the proper tool to
do so. Since this prototype will not be tested for submergibility, this seal can be omitted
from the prototype and has been done so.
The shoulder rotation shaft has a rounded surface at its very top above where the yoke
connection rod goes through. Due to time limitations the shoulder rotation shaft will now
have a flat surface. This change does not affect the capabilities of the shaft but, will only
affect aesthetics of the shaft.
During the ordering process, the AST bearings were not ordered on time by Foster-Miller
for whatever reason. Because they are a required part and the lead time for ordering is
coming close to the deadline, aluminum bearings will be machined for a prototype test fit.
These AST bearings are the three control bearings that surround the very base of the
shoulder rotation shaft and the outside of the transfer gear assembly which is also known
as the hat. The aluminum bearings will capable of doing their job in the prototype,
however, hopefully the AST bearings will arrive in time for the final prototype build
For the prototype a service loop cable was used to bring power into the elbow drive
system. Because this was done the arm, which was designed to rotate 360 degrees
86

continuously, can only rotate as far as the cable can extend. For a production model of
the arm a slip ring design will likely be implemented.
The bevel gears for the prototype are made out of 17-4 PH Stainless Steel. For a
production model of the TALON arm the gears are specified to be made out of 440
Stainless Steel, which has a higher yield strength than 17-4 Stainless Steel. The 17-4
Stainless Steel bevel gears can be modified or reworked if necessary during the build
process. When all parts have been test fit and the bevel gears are correct, they can be
heat treat hardened which raises its yield strength.
The output shaft of the elbow drive motor has a spline on the end of it. The spur gear that
is fitted to this shaft was originally designed to have a matching spline water jet cut into
it. However, because the water jet spray is 1/32 of an inch and tolerances for the spline
are far smaller, the feature could not be accurately created. As a fix for this, the spline
shaft will be turned down on a lathe into a regular shaft which the spur gear will be
welded on to. For the production version of the TALON arm the spline on the spur gear
will be broached. The reason why the prototype could not have a broached spline is
because the tool that would be used to create the broach would take far too long to create.
In order to create the outside support bracket for the sprocket on the yoke assembly a
fixture had to be created. A mount was made out of aluminum and the bracket was
screwed onto it so that a Bridgeport machine could create its edge features.
Various aesthetic features were omitted from the prototype for time savings in the
machining process. The features that were left out of machining were edge rounds to the
yoke plates and the top of the yoke body.

87

5.2 Creation of Key Components

This section shows the creation of actual prototype parts. The manufacturing and
assembly techniques of key components of the new TALON arm are found within this
section.

Figure 68 - Transfer Gear Assembly

The transfer gear assembly can be found above in Figure 68. This assembly has been
termed the hat. The two bevel gears have been cut out of 17-4 PH stainless steel. The
tube between the two bevel gears has been machined out of 7075 aluminum and connects
the two bevel gears. The bevel gears are press fit into four dowel pins on each side into
the tube. AST needle bearings are press fit on the inside of the tube so that the shoulder
rotation shaft can spin freely inside of it. These bearings have been ordered from AST
who provided limiting load numbers used to see if failure would occur in the design. The
transfer gear assembly spins freely in the top plate using two AST ball bearings.

Figure 69 - Bottom Bearing Plate

88

The bottom bearing plate can be found above in Figure 69. This plate is responsible for
the critical support of the base of the shoulder rotation shaft. The plate and plate cover
are made from 6061 aluminum. The bearing that supports the shoulder rotation shaft was
ordered from AST.

Figure 70 - Shoulder Rotation Shaft

The shoulder rotation shaft can be found above in Figure 70. This shaft is responsible for
providing the majority of support for the arm at the base. The shaft is machined from 440
Stainless Steel. The bushing for the through hole and spacer are machined from 6061
aluminum. The gear on the bottom of the shaft is the same 17-4 PH Stainless Steel gear
found throughout the design, only with a different bore diameter. The key for keying the
gear onto the shaft is made out of 440 Stainless Steel. The three bearings that surround
the very base of the shoulder rotation shaft have been ordered from AST.

Figure 71 - Yoke

89

The yoke was machined on a Bridgeport with a prototrak out of 7075 aluminum. This
portion of the arm is a structural connection between the arm base and the first stage of
the arm. All other machined pieces on the arm are made out of 6061 aluminum; however
the yoke is made from 7075 because it is much stronger. The yoke is a support member
of the arm, but also is the housing for the elbow drive system. It is one of the most
important assemblies within this arm and is certainly the most complex to create.
The electronics system for the arm is being created by Foster-Miller. Because the old
TALON arm never had any auxiliary electronic control, a completely new design for the
electronics system was created from scratch. The circuit board that was created was
required to have a new feature that would drive the shoulder rotation motor and have
expandable functionality for any future upgrades or additions. The expandable
functionality of the TALON electronics system has been termed smart payload
electronics. The circuit board for the system uses a Rabbit 3100 core module and was
originally conceived to have multiple features besides shoulder-motor control.
The boards that can be found on the prototype have the following features:
-Motor driving capabilities for a 3 phase brushless motor
-Additional motor control lines for a second motor
-Two high power MOSFET switches for controlling motor brakes
-Three RS-232 serial ports (one of these will be used to communicate
with the OCU, in the future)
-One serial programming port
-One RS-485 serial port
-Four analog inputs with A/D conversion (for sensors, potentiometers,
etc.)
-Four spare digital I/O's
-Seven programmable diagnostic/status LEDs
The electronics system will also have USB capabilities incorporated into it as the project
goes forward after the capstone course has been completed

5.3 Prototype Parts

Below in Table 16 is a truncated list of all of the parts that go into making the new
TALON arm and the processes that were required to obtain or create them. This makes it
easy to see how each individual part was procured. The full bill of materials can be
found in appendix C. To show how each designed part actually looks once fabricated, a
set of pictures are shown below. Each of these pictures is a key part that can be found in
the prototype.

90

Table 16 - Bill of Materials with Processes

No.
5
6
7
9
18
19
20
22
25
26
27
36
38
39
44
48
51
52
53
57
59
60
65
66
71
74
75
76
78
81
82
83
84
86
87
92
96
102
105
107
113
116

Part Name
Arm Tube
Chain Guard
Chain
Yoke
Potentiometer Mount
Encoder Mount
Motor Bearing Retainer
Sprocket Support
Idler Shaft
Gearbox Output Shaft
Motor Output Shaft
Motor Output Gear
Drive Idle Gear
Gearbox Input Shaft
Gear Train Cover
Brake/Potent Cover
Potent Idler Gear
Potent Idler Shaft
1/8" Key
Shoulder Pivot Shaft
Shoulder Pitch Gear
Wire Mount
Connecting Tube
Top Bevel Gear
FMI Motor
1/8 Key
Bushing
Motor Output Bevel
FMI Motor
1/8 Key
Bushing
Motor Output Bevel
Front Plate
Bottom Bearing Plate
Bottom Bearing Seal
Back Plate
Top Plate
Shoulder Pivot Spacer
Shoulder Rotation Shaft
Shoulder Rotation Gear
Rub Strip
Arm Support

Qty.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1

Type
Modified
Modified
Modified
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Modified
Modified
Modified
Modified
Modified
Machined
Machined
Modified
Modified
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Modified
Machined
Modified
Machined
Modified
Machined
Modified
Machined
Modified
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined
Machined

Material
6061 T6 AL
ABS
6061 T6 AL
7075 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
303 SS
303 SS
~
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
2024 AL
18-8 SS
440C SS
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
6061 T6 AL
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
~
440C SS
Rulon
17-4 PH SS
~
440C SS
Rulon
17-4 PH SS
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
BLACK ABS
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
PTFE
6061 T6 AL

Comments
Cut-to-Length and holes Milled
Cut-to-Fit
Cut-to-Length
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Turned, Manual Lathe
Keyway Milled, Bridgeport
Turned, Manual Lathe
Turned, Manual Lathe
Turned
Existing motor shaft cut to length
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Turned, Manual Lathe
0.75" pin ground to aprox. length
Cut-to-Length with Bridgeport
Turned and Milled
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Turned and Milled
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
Milled, Bridgeport
Cut-to-Length with Bridgeport
Turned, Manual Lathe
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
Milled, Bridgeport
Cut-to-Length with Bridgeport
Turned, Manual Lathe
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
Milled, Enclosed CNC
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Turned and Milled
Turned, Manual Lathe
Turned and Milled
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax

Several picture of the prototype being assembled are shown below. These pictures will
help illustrate how the designed CAD drawings came to be created in the prototype.

91

Figure 72 - Yoke Populated with Elbow Drive System

Figure 73 - Arm Base

92

Figure 74 - Arm Support/Connection Assembly

Figure 75 - Arm Base and First Stage

93

94

Chapter 6: Test
After the new TALON arm was completely assembled, two key tests had to be done to
verify the effectiveness of the design. These two tests will demonstrate arms dexterity
and back-drivability. The prototype was meant to show that the design is kinematically
feasible. This is the reason why 17-4 PH Stainless Steel through hardened gears were
used instead of the 440 Stainless Steel gears that were specified for the production. The
prototype gears will transmit the required torque of 1000 in-lbs necessary for the arms
application. However, since the production arm will have 440 Stainless Steel gears, it is
not useful to do lifting or destructive testing. The production TALON arm may bear
different results for those two tests as well as other tests such as fatigue testing. Motion
will be the same with the prototype as it is with the production arm therefore that is the
aspect that will be verified.
The dexterity test involves the mounting of the arm onto the TALON platform. When the
new arm is mounted, the TALON operator control unit (OCU) is able to activate the
shoulder rotation and shoulder pitch. The new motor controller being developed by
Foster-Miller will control the elbow pitch drive. Using these interfaces, a full range of
motion test will be executed. This test may involve the lifting of a light object in order to
show the usefulness of the added degree of freedom.
Insert picture of Jon operating OCU and TALON with beer in hand
It is important for the TALON to be back-drivable. The main reason for this is to protect
the gearing. If a force over 550 in-lbs is applied to the arm when the motors are off, the
drive systems will back-drive instead of staying locked and damaging the transmission.
It is also important to back-drive the system because if the TALON dies in the field an
operator can stow the arm manually and bring the robot back to be repaired. The backdrivability test will involve shutting down the motors and manually pushing the arm into
a stow position.

95

Chapter 7: Future Steps

There are many improvements that could be made to the new TALON arm design. The
first of these is in the design of the gripper. The rotation of the end effector at the end of
the second stage of the arm is controlled automatically by the Operator Control Unit. The
pitch of this joint, however, can only be controlled manually using a ball and socket joint.
Having this pitch motion be controlled electronically would greatly improve the
effectiveness of the robot and allow it to be more functional in the field. This
improvement was not possible in the time allotted for this project.
Another major improvement that needs to be made from the prototype to a production
arm is the integration of a slip-ring. The prototype arm has the ability to rotate 360, but
this motion is not continuous due to the restrictions of the wiring harness. Integrating a
slip-ring for all of the electronic cables in the arm would allow for 360 continuous
motion.
The development of new motors for the arm could also greatly increase functionality.
Due to the addition of rotation in the shoulder, the lifting capacity of the robot is now
limited by motor strength. Foster-Miller can either continue to improve upon their
current motor, develop a new design, or purchase a stronger motor from a supplier. The
current Foster-Miller motor is the strongest for its size, and there are no other feasible
options on the market. The future, however, could yield improved designs and new
options for the TALON.
Testing during this phase of development for the TALON arm was limited to evaluations
of range of motion and backdrivability. The prototype is being used as a demonstration
model for the company, and, therefore, no destructive testing could be conducted.
Destructive testing would allow operators to push the limits of the robot and analyze its
functionality in the field. Destructive testing could include lift capacity testing,
interaction with live explosive ordnance, and testing of extreme dynamic loading.
The entire TALON robot, including the arm and the platform, was designed to operate
underwater. The new prototype has not been completely sealed. A Quattro seal found in
the yoke design was not incorporated into the prototype due to the lack of special tooling
for the o-ring groove. Other areas of the design are not sealed including the top of the
shoulder rotation shaft and the bevel gear drive in the base of the platform. Sealing of the
entire design is required for submergibility and protection of key components such as
electronics and bevel gears. Extra o-rings along with a rubber boot similar to that of a
standard automobile stick shift could provide much of this sealing and protection.
The prototype was also not designed with manufacturability necessarily in mind. Only
two prototypes were built, so considerations for mass production were not incorporated
into the design. After the prototype phase, the new TALON arm will go into full-scale
production. Some machined parts and assembly processes may need to be modified to
make manufacturing as simple as possible.

96

The shoulder transmission system of the new TALON arm is driven from the operator
control unit. The elbow, however, is controlled by a unit mounted on the platform of the
robot. The two shoulder motors are also not software controlled to adjust for each others
motion. Both of these issues must be resolved as the new TALON arm progresses from
being a prototype to being a full production model. Software and electrical engineers at
Foster-Miller will develop the new software for motor control in the production TALON.

97

Chapter 8: Conclusions
The TALON robot has become far more capable with the inclusion of the new arm
design. Its dexterity has increased and now can be used in many more situations. The
weight of the arm has been increased slightly and therefore the lifting capacity has been
slightly decreased. These detractors are far outweighed by the benefits of the added
shoulder degree of freedom.
One way the shoulder rotation has benefited the TALON is in close quarter operations,
which occur quite often. If there is an explosive device found on the seat of a bus, for
example, the old TALON would be nearly useless. The best outcome that could come of
the use of the old TALON in this situation is the detonation of the device onboard the bus
with the use of another explosive. However, with the use of the new TALON arm the
explosive device can be retrieved and removed from the bus and then detonated, saving
lives as well as the bus.
Another benefit of the shoulder rotation degree of freedom is the ability to vary the center
of gravity. The old TALON had a fixed center of gravity that was the limiting factor for
lift capacity. If an object was a certain weight instead of the arm lifting the object, the
platform would actually lift off of the ground. With the new TALON arm, the lifting
capacity is now limited by the motor strength. This is because when the arm rotates to
the side to lift an object, the center of gravity of the robot shifts to a position where a
much greater weight can be lifted when the arm is fully extended. The current TALON
can lift about 25 pounds limited by center of gravity. If more powerful motors are
developed in the future, it is possible for the new TALON design to lift nearly 60 pounds
at full arm extension.
The new TALON arm was extremely successful. After some slight modifications such as
water proofing and some weight reduction, the arm will be ready for production. FosterMiller will benefit greatly from the design. But more importantly, United States soldiers
will benefit greatly from the new TALON. The increased capability of the arm means
that there are fewer instances where a human has to interact with explosive devices.
Therefore, the new TALON can save even more lives than it ever could before.

98

Works Cited
1

TALON Robots, Foster-Miller: Products and Services. Available at

http://www.foster-miller.com/lemming.htm Date Last Accessed: 8/8/2005
2

Available Robotic Systems, Transit Cooperative Research Program Active Project. Available at:
http://trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_86-v3d.pdf Date Last Accessed: 8/7/2005.
3

PackBot EOD: Hazardous Duty Mobile Robot. iRobot. Available at:

http://www.packbot.com/products/EOD_Brochure.pdf Date last accessed: 8/2/2005.
4

MURV-100, HDE. Available at: www.hdemfg.com/prod01.htm Date Last Accessed:

8/8/2005.

RMI-9WT, Pedsco. Available at:

http://ca.geocities.com/pedsco@rogers.com/rmi9wt.htm Date Last Accessed: 8/8/2005.

Petriu, Emil M. Robotics Introduction, Available at:

http://www.site.uottawa.ca/~petriu/CEG4392-IntroRobotics-Arms.pdf Date Last
Accessed: 8/7/2005.
7

Ryan, V. Gear Wheels (Sprockets) and Chains, (2004). Available at:

http://www.technologystudent.com/gears1/chain1.htm Date last accessed: 8/7/2005.
8

Bounder Drive Train Options, 21st Century Scientific, Inc. Available at:
http://www.wheelchairs.com/drive_train.htm Date last accessed: 8/7/2005
9

Rear Axle Shaft, Available at: http://www.chuckstrucks.net/rear%20axle%20shaft.jpg

Date Last Accessed: 8/7/2005.
10

Flexible Shaft Design Ideas, (1999) Elliott Manufacturing. Available at:

http://www.elliottmfg.com/designideas.html Date last accessed: 8/7/2005.
11

GEARS-EDS technology education in a box, Available at:

http://www.gearseds.com/curriculum/images/figures/pneumatic_cylinder_transparent_tra
nsparent.jpg Date last accessed: 8/7/2005.
12

Air Muscles, Shadow Robot Company. Available at:

http://www.shadow.org.uk/products/airmuscles.shtml Date last accessed: 8/7/2005.
13

Centre for Intelligent Interactive Systems (CIS). The University of Plymouth.

Actuators. Available at:
http://www.cis.plym.ac.uk/cis/projects/insectrobotics/actuators.htm Date last accessed:
8/7/2005.

14

Oikawa, Katsunari. "Development of Co-Ni-Al-based Ferromagnetic Shape Memory

Alloys, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST).
Available at: http://www.aist.go.jp/aist_e/aist_today/ Date Last Accessed: 8/7/2005.

99

15

Riley, Taheri, & Islam. Chemical Institute of Canada, Process Safety Management
(PSM). A Critical Review of Materials Available for Health Monitoring and Control of
Offshore Structures. Available at:
http://www.cheminst.ca/divisions/psm/2001papers/CSChE2001_511_Critical_Review_Pr
esentation.pdf Date last accessed: 8/7/2005.
16

Bar-Cohen, Yoseph. Electroactive Polymers, Electrochemistry Encyclopedia.

Available at: http://electrochem.cwru.edu/ed/encycl/art-p02-elact-pol.htm Date last
accessed: 8/7/2005.
17

Bar-Cohen, Yoseph. ElectroActive Polymers EAPs. Electroactive Polymers as

Artificial Muscles Reality and Challenges (2001), Proceedings of the 42nd AIAA
Structures, Structures Dynamics and Materials Conferences (SDM), Gossamer Spacecraft
Forum (GSF), held in Seattle WA, April 16-19. Available at:
http://www.azom.com/details.asp?articleID=885 Date last accessed: 8/7/2005.
18

Walker, Ian and Hannan, Michael. A Novel Elephants Trunk Robot, Proceedings
of the 1999 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent
Mechatronics: September 19-23, 1999. Atlanta, USA. Available at:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/6508/17391/00803204.pdf?arnumber=803204 Date Last
Accessed: 8/7/2005.
19

Gongliang Guo, William A. Gruver and Xikang Qian. A Robotic Hand Mechanism
with Rotating Fingertips and Motor-Tendon Actuation Center for Robotics and
Manufacturing Systems University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506-0108. Available
at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel2/604/4401/00169822.pdf?arnumber=169822 Date Last
Accessed: 8/7/2005.
20

NASA AMES May 04, Carnegie Mellon: Biorobotics Lab. Available at:
http://voronoi.sbp.ri.cmu.edu/serpentine/deployments/NASA_AMES_MAY04/slides/IM
G_0950.html Date Last Accessed: 8/7/2005.
21

Barret Arm (1997). Available at:

http://www.barrett.com/robot/products/arm/armfram.htm Date Last Accessed: 8/7/2005.
22

Barret Hand (1997). Available at: http://www.barrett.com/robot/products/hand/handfram.htm Date Last

Accessed: 8/7/2005.
23

Brushless DC Overview, Hurst Manufacturing. Available at:

http://www.myhurst.com/hurstmfg/pdf/BrushlessDC031704.pdf Date Last Accessed: 10/30/2005.

100

List of Appendices
Appendix ABelt Calculations
Appendix BShaft Calculations
Appendix CBill of Materials
Appendix DTechnical Drawings
Appendix EBearing Specifications

Appendix C Bill of Materials

Appendix D Technical Drawings

Appendix E Bearing Specifications

Appendix A Belt Calculations

Appendix B Shaft Calculations

No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116

Part Name
Upper Arm
Gripper Assembly
Forearm Assembly
Elbow Assembly
Arm Tube
Chain Guard
Chain
Yoke Assembly
Yoke
Gear Train Cover Screws
Brake Cover Screws
Brake Cover Screws
Brake Cover Screws
Potentiometer Mount Screws
Encoder Mount Screws
Brake Mount Screws
Encoder Mount Screws
Potentiometer Mount
Encoder Mount
Motor Bearing Retainer
Sprocket Support Assembly
Sprocket Support
Sprocket Support Bushing
Sprocket Support Bushing
Idler Shaft
Gearbox Output Shaft
Motor Output Shaft
Planetary Gearset
EM Brake
Potentiometer
Frameless Motor
Motor Bearing
Retaining Ring
Encoder
Support Bearing
Motor Output Gear
Gearbox Input Gear
Drive Idle Gear
Gearbox Input Shaft
Thrust Washer
Thrust Washer
Potentiometer Gear
Gear Train Cover Assembly
Gear Train Cover
Support Bearing
Support Bearing
Brake/Potent Cover Assebly
Brake/Potent Cover
Quattro Seal
Gearbox Output Gear
Potent Idler Gear
Potent Idler Shaft
1/8" Key
Seal
Seal
Sprocket
Shoulder Pivot Shaft
Gear Screws
Shoulder Pitch Gear
Wire Mount
Wire Mount Screws
Dongle
Base Assembly
Hat Assembly
Connecting Tube
Top Bevel Gear
1/8" Dowel Pins
Shaft Seal
Roller Bearing
Tilt Motor Assembly
FMI Motor
Thrust Washer
Thrust Bearing
1/8 Key
Bushing
Motor Output Bevel
Pan Motor Assembly
FMI Motor
Thrust Washer
Thrust Bearing
1/8 Key
Bushing
Motor Output Bevel
Front Plate
Bottom Bearing Assembly
Bottom Bearing Plate
Bottom Bearing Seal
Alignment Pins
O-Ring
Screws
Shoulder Bearing
Back Plate
Bevel Housing Screws
Back Plate Screws
Top Bearing Assembly
Top Plate
Top Bearing
Neck Assembly
Thrust Washer
Bearing
Shoulder Pivot Bushing
Shoulder Pivot Spacer
Retaining Washer
Retaining Screw
Shoulder Rotation Shaft
3/16" Key
Shoulder Rotation Gear
Threadlocker
Retaining Compound
Motor Shaft Support Pins
Thrust Washer
Arm Support Assembly
Rub Strip
Screws
Bushing
Arm Support

Analysis
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
FEA
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~

~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Calcs
Calcs
Calcs
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Calcs
~
~
~
Calcs
~
FEA
~
~
~
~
~
Calcs
FEA
Calcs
~
Calcs
~
~

Calcs
FEA
~
~

Calcs
FEA
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Calcs
~

~
~
Calcs
~
~
Calcs
~
Calcs
Calcs
FEA
Calcs
FEA
Calcs
Calcs
Calcs
~
~
~
~
FEA

Qty.

Type

Drawing

Material

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
2
8
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
3
1
1
16
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
1
2
4
2
1

Assembly
Provided
Provided
Provided
Modified
Modified
Modified
Assembly
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Machined
Machined
Machined
Assembly
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Machined
Modified
Modified
Provided
Provided
Provided
Provided
Provided
Provided
Provided
Purchased
Modified
Purchased
Modified
Modified
Purchased
Purchased
Provided
Assembly
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Assembly
Machined
Provided
Provided
Modified
Modified
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Provided
Machined
Purchased
Machined
Machined
Purchased
Provided
Assembly
Assembly
Machined
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Assembly
Modified
Purchased
Purchased
Machined
Modified
Machined
Assembly
Modified
Purchased
Purchased
Machined
Modified
Machined
Modified
Assembly
Machined
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Assembly
Machined
Purchased
Assembly
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Machined
Purchased
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Purchased
Assembly
Machined
Purchased
Purchased
Machined

~
~
~
Done
Done

~
~
~
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
ABS
6061 T6 AL
~
7075 T6 AL
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
6061 T6 AL
~
6061 T6 AL
iglide
iglide
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
~
~
~
~
~
18-8 SS
~
440C SS
303 SS
303 SS
303 SS
~
18-8 SS
18-8 SS

Done
~
Done
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Done
Done
Done
~
Done
~
~
Done
Done
Done
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Done
Done
Done
~
~
~
Done
~
~

~
6061 T6 AL
440C SS
440C SS
~
6061 T6 AL

Done
~
Done
Done
Done
~
~
~
Done
~
Done
Done
~
~
~
~
Done
Done
~
~
~
~
Done
~
~
~
Done
Done
~
Done
~
~
~
Done
Done
Done
~
Done
Done
~
~
~
~
Done
~
~
~
Done
~
~
~
~
Done
~
~
Done
~
Done
~
~
~
~
~
Done
~
~
Done

2024 AL
18-8 SS
440C SS
Buna-N
Buna-N
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
18-8 SS
17-4 PH SS
6061 T6 AL
18-8 SS
~
~
~
17-4 PH SS
17-4 PH SS
416 SS
Buna-N
~
~
~
18-8 SS
~
440C SS
Rulon
17-4 PH SS
~
~
18-8 SS
~
440C SS
Rulon
17-4 PH SS
6061 T6 AL
~
6061 T6 AL
BLACK ABS
416 SS
Buna-N
18-8 SS
~
6061 T6 AL
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
~
6061 T6 AL
~
~
18-8 SS
~
Bronze
6061 T6 AL
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
17-4 PH SS
416 SS
17-4 PH SS
Purple
Green
18-8 SS
18-8 SS
~
PTFE
18-8 SS
UHMW
6061 T6 AL

Source
~
FMI
FMI
East Coast
FMI
East Coast
East Coast
~
East Coast
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
East Coast
East Coast
East Coast
~
East Coast
IGUS
IGUS
East Coast
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
FMI
SDP-SI
WM Berg
SDP-SI
SDP-SI
East Coast
McMaster
McMaster
FMI
~
East Coast
SDP-SI
SDP-SI
~
East Coast
FMI
SDP-SI
SDP-SI
FMI
FMI
McMaster
McMaster
FMI
East Coast
McMaster
East Coast
East Coast
McMaster
FMI
~
~
East Coast
East Coast
McMaster
MSC
McMaster
~
FMI
McMaster
MSC
FMI
McMaster
East Coast
~
FMI
McMaster
MSC
FMI
McMaster
East Coast
East Coast
~
East Coast
East Coast
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
AST
East Coast
McMaster
McMaster
~
East Coast
AST
~
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
East Coast
McMaster
McMaster
East Coast
McMaster
East Coast
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
McMaster
~
East Coast
McMaster
McMaster
East Coast

Part #
UPPER_ARM
DSI-500-0410
DSI-500-0158
DSI-500-0137
UPPER_ARM_TUBE
RDSI00089
RDSI03067
YOKE
YOKE
MCM_96006A649
MCM_96006A652
MCM_92949A252
MCM_97763A215
MCM_92210A107
MCM_97763A103
MCM_92949A116
MCM_92949A118
POTENT_MOUNT
ENCODER_MOUNT
YOKE_MOTOR_BEARING_RETAINER
YOKE_SPROCKET_SUPPORT
YOKE_SPROCKET_SUPPORT
IGUS_GTI-0814-01
IGUS_GFI-0809-04
YOKE_IDLER_SHAFT
DSI-160-0484_SHORTENTED_0-2IN
DSI-500-0215_ELBOW
DSI-500-0131
DSI-500-0006
157-11103
DSI-500-0133
6004LU
99142A_565
DSI-140-0204
SDP_A 7Y55-PSS3725M
P24S21-30
S1086Z-024S030
S1086Z-024S039_MODIFIED
GEARBOX_INPUT_SHAFT
MCM_95630A237
MCM_95630A239
S1066Z_072A072
YOKE_GEAR_TRAIN_COVER
YOKE_GEAR_TRAIN_COVER
SDP_A 7Y55-PSS3725M
SDP_A 7Y55-PSS3115G
YOKE_BRAKE-POTENT_COVER
YOKE_BRAKE_POTENT_COVER
Q4112-366Y
S1268Z_072A072
S1268Z_072A072_Modified
D4P_125DX500L
KEY_0.125_0.625
MCM_9452K135
MCM_9452K301
RDSI03054
SHOULDER_PIVOT_SHAFT
MCM_96006A646
SHOULDER_PITCH_16P
WIRE_MOUNT
MCM_92196A113
Cable
BASE_SHOULDER_ASSEMBLY
BEVEL_GEAR_HAT
CONNECTING_TUBE
TOP_BEVEL_GEAR_16P
MCM_98380A473
MSC_36676559
MCM_5905K67
TILT_MOTOR
DSI-500-0135
MCM_5909K44
MSC_03380904
KEY_0.125_0.625
MCM_6362K16_MODIFIED
BEVEL_2_1-4DIA_16P_1-2BORE
PAN_MOTOR
DSI-500-0135
MCM_5909K44
MSC_03380904
KEY_0.125_0.625
MCM_6362K16_MODIFIED
BEVEL_2_1-4DIA_16P_1-2BORE
FRONT_PLATE
BOTTOM_BEARING_PLATE
BOTTOM_BEARING_PLATE
BOTTOM_BEARING_SEAL
MCM_98380A544
MCM_9452K116
MCM_96006A213
AST_KP10A
BACK_PLATE
MCM_96006A646
MCM_93791A494
TOP_BEARING_PLATE
TOP_PLATE
AST_KP25B
NECK
MCM_5909K45
MCM_5909K32
MCM_2867T17
SHOULDER_PIVOT_SPACER
MCM_96765A140
MCM_97763A263
SHOULDER_ROTATION
3-16_KEY_L1-2
NECK_BEVEL_GEAR_16P
MCM_91458A15
MCM_91458A47
MCM_90145A553
MCM_95630A246
ARM_SUPPORT
ARM_SUPPORT_RUB_STRIP
MCM_92210A108
ARM_SUPPORT_BUSHING
ARM_SUPPORT
Part
Machining cost
Total Cost

Cost Per

$5.15
$0.00
$0.17
$0.20
$0.12
$0.13
$0.05
$0.89
$0.06
$0.06

$2.11
$1.18

$400.00
$185.00
$50.00
$300.00

$200.00
$5.67
$16.77
$17.17
$20.14
$0.24
$0.24
$6.65
$0.00
$5.97
$6.82
$0.00
$0.10
$6.65
$6.65

$0.22
$4.38
$10.78
$0.16
$985.00
$0.04
$50.00
$0.00
$0.00
$985.00
$0.25
$2.82
$8.43
$0.00
$2,000.00
$0.73
$2.39
$2.31
$7.10
$985.00
$0.00
$2,000.00
$0.73
$2.39
$2.31
$7.10
$985.00
$0.00

$0.93
$0.07
$0.09
$21.95
$0.16
$0.15
$0.00
$40.80
$0.00
$0.78
$2.33
$3.78
$0.05
$0.21
$2.95
$985.00
$28.47
$33.07
$1.39
$0.33
$0.00
$0.05
$5.24

Cost
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$5.15
$0.00
$0.00
$0.69
$0.40
$0.25
$0.26
$0.09
$0.89
$0.13
$0.06
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2.11
$1.18
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$400.00
$185.00
$50.00
$300.00
$0.00
$0.00
$200.00
$5.67
$16.77
$17.17
$20.14
$0.00
$0.24
$0.24
$6.65
$0.00
$0.00
$11.94
$6.82
$0.00
$0.00
$0.10
$6.65
$6.65
$0.00
$0.00
$0.22
$4.38
$10.78
$0.00
$0.65
$985.00
$0.00
$0.18
$50.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,970.00
$1.97
$5.64
$16.86
$0.00
$2,000.00
$1.46
$2.39
$2.31
$7.10
$985.00
$0.00
$2,000.00
$1.46
$2.39
$2.31
$7.10
$985.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$3.73
$0.07
$0.27
$21.95
$0.00
$2.60
$0.30
$0.00
$0.00
$81.60
$0.00
$1.56
$2.33
$7.56
$0.00
$0.05
$0.21
$0.00
$2.95
$985.00
$28.47
$33.07
$2.78
$1.31
$0.00
$0.00
$0.19
$10.48
$0.00
$11,473.91
$3,000.00
$14,473.91

Status
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Pending Mod
Pending Mod
Pending Mod
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Mod
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received

Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Received

Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Received
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Mod
Received
Received
Received
Received
Pending Parts
Received
Received
Received
Received

Lead
Comments
(Weeks)
Final Assembly
0 FMI Part
0 FMI Part
0 FMI Part
Cut-to-Length and holes Milled
Cut-to-Fit
Cut-to-Length
Major Assembly
1 Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
0 SHCS 10-24 x 3/4"
0 SHCS 10-24 x 1"
0 BHCS 10-24 x 1-3/4"
0 BHCS 10-24 x 1/2"
0 FHCS 4-40 x 5/16"
0 BHCS 4-40 x 3/8"
0 BHCS 4-40 x 1"
0 BHCS 4-40 x 1.25"(cut 1-1/8")
1 Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
1 Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
1 Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Pressed Assembly
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
iglide 300
iglide 300
Turned, Manual Lathe
Keyway Milled, Bridgeport
Turned, Manual Lathe
Gearbox Components
0 24VDC
0 FMI Part
Current Motor Components

0
1
1
0
0

FMI Part
ABEC 3 with Grease
Turned, Manual Lathe
Modified
Turned
Existing motor shaft cut to length
0 .150 x .312 x .045 PTFE
0 .197 x .250 x .013 PTFE
0 FMI Part

~
1 Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
1 ABEC 3 with Grease
1 ABEC 3 with Grease
~
0 Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Double Seal Buna-N 014
0 FMI Part
0 Turned, Manual Lathe
0.75" pin ground to aprox. length
Cut-to-Length with Bridgeport
AS568A Dash Number 046
0 AS568A Dash Number 051
0 FMI Part
Turned and Milled
0 SHCS 10-24 x 1/2"
2 Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
1 Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
1 SHCS 4-40 x 3/4"

1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0

2
0
0
0

2
1
1

1
1
0

1
0
0
0

1
0
2
0
0
0

Major Assembly
Assembly
Turned and Milled
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
Packs of 50 L=3/4"
.125" thk Nitrile .75"/1"
Sealed 1" OD, 3/4" wd.
FMI Motor with Bevel
Milled, Bridgeport
.032" Thick Washer for 1/2"
Needle-Roller 15/16" OD
Cut-to-Length with Bridgeport
Turned, Manual Lathe
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
FMI Motor with Bevel
Milled, Bridgeport
.032" Thick Washer for 1/2"
Needle-Roller 15/16" OD
Cut-to-Length with Bridgeport
Turned, Manual Lathe
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
Milled, Enclosed CNC
Pressed Assembly
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
D=1/4" L=1-1/4"
Buna-N .062"x1.5" 100
SHCS 4-40x3/8" 100
0.625" Bore Sealed Slim
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
SHCS 10-24x1/2" 50
FHCS 4-40 x 3/8"
Pressed Assembly
Turned and Milled
1.5625" Bore Sealed Slim
Small assembly
.032" Thick Washer for 5/8"
Needle-Roller Thrust
ID=1/2" OD=5/8" L=1-1/2"
Turned, Manual Lathe
ID=9/32" OD=5/8" T=.050"
BHCS 1/4"-20 x 1/2"
Turned and Milled
MCM_99374A100
Cut Gears, Bored and Broached
Loctite 242, 1.69 oz, Blue
Loctite 680, 1.69 oz, Green
D=1/4" L=3"
.500 x .312 x .027 PTFE
Pressed Assembly
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax
FHCS 4-40x3/8"
MCM_57785K69
Milled, Bridgeport with Prototrax

Ball Bearings
ABEC 3

PLAIN

B D

Lo Li

Fig. 1
NO SHIELD

B D

Lo Li

.0002 / .0005 RADIAL PLAY

W2

W1

Fig. 2
SINGLE SHIELD

Lo Li

B D

Fig. 3
DOUBLE SHIELD

Precision
Component

CATALOG NUMBER DESIGNATION:

A 7Y55
Bearing
Code

Fig. 1, No Shield

Fig. 2, Single Shield

PS

Fig. 3, Double Shield

PSS

LUBRICATION
Leave blank for Oil,
MIL-L-6085A
M

Grease,
MIL-G-23827A

Grease, Beacon
325 Commercial

Example: A 7Y55-PS3718 is an ABEC 3, Single-Shielded Bearing with 3/8" O.D. and 3/16" Bore.
MATERIAL: 440C Stainless Steel

B
Bearing
Code
1504
1805
2507
1809
3109
2512
3112
3712
3712W
5012
3115
3118
3718
5018
3725
5025
6225
5031
8737
11250
13762
16275

+.0000
-.0002

Bore
.0469
.0550
.0781
.0937

.1250

.1562
.1875

.2500
.3125
.3750
.500
.625
.750

Outer
Ring Dia.
.1562
.1875
.2500
.1875
.3125
.2500
.3125
.3750
.3750
.5000
.3125
.3125
.3750
.5000
.3750
.5000
.6250
.5000
.8750
1.1250
1.3750
1.6250

Land Dia. (Ref.)

Width

+.000
-.005

+.0000
-.0003

Li
Inner

Lo
Outer

W
Fig. 1

W1
Fig. 2

W2
Fig. 3

All

Fig. 1

.0625
.0781
.0937
.0625
.1094
.0937
.1094
.1094
.1562
.1719
.1094
.1094
.1250
.1562
.1250
.1250
.1960
.1562
.2188
.2500
.2812
.3125

.0937
.0937
.1094
.0937
.1094
.0937
.1094
.1094
.1562
.1719
.1094
.1094
.1250
.1960
.1250
.1250
.1960
.1562
.2812
.3125
.3438
.4375

.0937
.1094
.1406
.0937
.1406
.1094
.1406
.1406
.1562
.1719
.1250
.1250
.1250
.1960
.1250
.1875
.1960
.1562
.2812
.3125
.3438
.4375

.081
.093
.122
.118
.173
.161
.173
.173
.200
.200
.221
.221
.235
.276
.285
.330
.364
.362
.521
.701
.852
1.020

.124
.159
.193
.161
.270
.216
.270
.270
.300
.300
.279
.279
.325
.412
.344
.431
.510
.450
.741
.913
1.133
1.345

Other lubricants available on special order.

Fig.
2&3
.134
.167
.205
.167
.282
.228
.282
.282
.321
.321
.285
.285
.341
.433
.348
.452
.544
.460
.783
.965
1.233
1.415

Load Rating
lb.
Dynamic

Static

16
26
35
21
62
35
63
73
73
73
41
41
81
149
43
123
170
62
569
880
1036
1630

5
9.5
13
7.5
24
13
24
29
29
29
17
17
34
65
20
54
77
31
273
505
624
1000

57

AST Bearings - KPA Control Bearings Deep Groove, Single Row

Page 1 of 2

Reducing Friction to Keep

You in Motion

KPA Control Bearings

BEARINGS
BUSHINGS
ROD ENDS

Deep Groove, Single Row Ball Bearings

SUBASSEMBLIES
LUBRICANTS
TECHNICAL DATA

(H)
(W)
(B)
(D)
OUTER INNER
BORE OUTSIDE
RING RING
PART
DIAM.
DIAM.
WIDTH WIDTH
NUMBER

BALLS

(C)
(A)
(E)
45
45
INNER
CHAMFER CHAMFER
SHOULDER
INNER
OUTER
DIAM.
RING I.D. RING O.D.

+0.0000 +0.0000
-0.0005 -0.0005

+0.000 +0.000
NO. SIZE
-0.005 -0.005

REF.

+0.015
-0.000

+0.015
-0.000

KP3A

0.1900

0.6250

0.234

0.297

10

1/8

0.297

0.005

0.016

KP4A

0.2500

0.7500

0.219

0.281

12

1/8

0.380

0.005

0.016

KP5A

0.3125

0.8125

0.234

0.297

14

1/8

0.415

0.015

0.016

KP6A

0.3750

0.8750

0.250

0.313

16

1/8

0.495

0.015

0.016

KP8A

0.5000

1.1250

0.313

0.375

16

5/32

0.616

0.015

0.016

KP10A

0.6250

1.3750

0.344

0.406

14

7/32

0.768

0.015

0.032

KP12A

0.7500

1.6250

0.375

0.437

16 15/64

0.919

0.015

0.032

KP16A

1.0000

2.0000

0.438

0.500

19

1/4

1.241

0.015

0.032

KP20A

1.2500

2.2500

0.438

0.500

22

1/4

1.478

0.015

0.032

DIMENSIONS IN INCHES
For non-military applications without cadmium plating.
*Teflon is a trademark of E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
For military applications with cadmium plating.

http://www.astbearings.com/p-brng-kpa.php

11/9/2005

AST Bearings - KPA Control Bearings Deep Groove, Single Row

Page 2 of 2

LOAD RATINGS

PART
NUMBER

DYNAMIC
RADIAL LOAD
RATINGS
LBS.

STATIC LIMIT
LOADS
LBS.
RADIAL THRUST

INNER
OUTER
RACE
RACE
ROTATING ROTATING

KP3A

1560

700

1500

1250

KP4A

1880

900

1690

1450

KP5A

2190

1000

1820

1600

KP6A

2500

1100

1920

1710

KP8A

3910

1700

2870

2550

KP10A

6700

3000

4980

4360

KP12A

8790

3900

5980

5320

KP16A

11900

5200

7070

6400

KP20A

13800

6100

7400

6810

http://www.astbearings.com/p-brng-kpa.php

Features:
z
z

Removable Teflon seals

Operating temperature
-65 to +250F
Lubricated in accordance
to MIL-G-81322
Stainless steel also
available
Custom sizes, tolerances,
radial clearances,
lubrication, etc. available
on request

11/9/2005

AST Bearings - KPB Control Bearings - Thin Section, Single Row

Page 1 of 2

Reducing Friction to Keep

You in Motion

KPB Control Bearing

BEARINGS
BUSHINGS
ROD ENDS

Thin Section, Single Row Ball Bearings

SUBASSEMBLIES
LUBRICANTS
TECHNICAL DATA

(H)
(W)
(B)
(D)
OUTER INNER
BORE OUTSIDE
RING RING
PART
DIAM.
DIAM.
WIDTH WIDTH
NUMBER

BALLS

(C)
(A)
(E)
45
45
INNER
CHAMFER CHAMFER
SHOULDER
INNER
OUTER
DIAM.
RING I.D. RING O.D.

+0.0000 +0.0000
-0.0010 -0.0010

+0.000 +0.000
NO. SIZE
-0.005 -0.005

REF.

+0.015
-0.000

+0.015
-0.000

KP16B

1.0000

1.7500

0.375

0.437

23

3/16

1.141

0.024

0.024

KP21B

1.3130

2.0625

0.375

0.437

28

3/16

1.454

0.024

0.024

KP23B

1.4380

2.1875

0.375

0.437

30

3/16

1.574

0.024

0.024

KP25B

1.5630

1.3125

0.375

0.437

32

3/16

1.693

0.024

0.024

KP29B

1.8130

2.5625

0.375

0.437

36

3/16

1.931

0.024

0.024

KP33B

2.0630

2.8125

0.375

0.437

41

3/16

2.231

0.024

0.024

KP37B

2.3130

3.0625

0.375

0.437

45

3/16

2.468

0.024

0.024

KP47B

2.9380

3.8750

0.469

0.531

45 15/64

3.093

0.039

0.039

KP49B

3.0630

4.0000

0.469

0.531

44

1/4

3.222

0.039

0.039

KP52B

3.2500

4.1875

0.469

0.531

46

1/4

3.479

0.039

0.039

KP56B

3.5000

4.4375

0.469

0.531

50

1/4

3.775

0.039

0.039

DIMENSIONS IN INCHES

http://www.astbearings.com/p-brng-kpb.php

11/9/2005

AST Bearings - KPB Control Bearings - Thin Section, Single Row

Page 2 of 2

For non-military applications without cadmium plating.

*Teflon is a trademark of E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
For military applications with cadmium plating.
LOAD RATINGS

PART
NUMBER

DYNAMIC
RADIAL LOAD
RATINGS
LBS.

STATIC LIMIT
LBS.

RADIAL THRUST

INNER
OUTER
RACE
RACE
ROTATING ROTATING

KP16B

8090

3600

4260

3960

KP21B

9840

4400

4590

4290

KP23B

10500

4700

4650

4360

KP25B

11300

5000

4680

4420

KP29B

12700

5600

4760

4530

KP33B

14400

6400

4820

4630

KP37B

15800

7000

4880

4690

KP47B

24700

10900

6600

6390

KP49B

27500

12100

8150

7840

KP52B

28700

12600

8210

7880

KP56B

31200

13700

8240

7970

http://www.astbearings.com/p-brng-kpb.php

Features:
z
z

z
z

Removable Teflon seals

Operating temperature -65
to +250F
Lubricated in accordance
to MIL-G-81322
Stainless steel also available
Custom sizes, tolerances,
radial clearances, lubrication,
etc. available on request

11/9/2005