Design Analysis
Determination of the Shaft Speed:
To calculate the shaft speed, the following parameters are
D1 N 1
= ……………………………..1
D2 N 2
Where N1 = revolution of the smaller pulley rpm
N2 = revolution of the larger pulley, rpm.
This shaft speed is only obtained when there is no slip condition of the belt over the pulley. When slip
and creep condition is present, the value (700 rpm) is reduced by 4% (Spolt 1988)
Determination of Length of the Belt:
Assume the center distance between the larger pulley and the smaller pulley = 600 mm, the pitch
length of the belt is given by (John and Stephens 1984)
( D 1 + D 2)
L=2C+1.57( D 2 + D 1) + ……………………………….2
4C
Where L = length of the belt, mm
C = center distance between larger pulley and the smaller one, mm From the standard table, a belt
designated as A60 was selected.
Determination of the Belt Contact Angle:
−1 Rr
The belt contact angle is given by equation 3sin β=¿ ¿ ……………………….3
C
Where
R = radius of the large pulley, mm
R = radius of the smaller pulley, mm
The angles of wrap for the pulleys are given by:
rc
a 1= 180 - sin−1 ❑( ) …………………………………4
R
r−c
a 1= 180 + sin−1 ❑ ( ) …………………………………5
R
Where
α1 = angle of wrap for the smaller pulley, deg
α2 = angle of wrap for the larger pulley, deg
Comparing the capacities, eµ a/sin ½ θ of the pulley,
Using µ = 0.25; Θ = 40o
For the smaller pulley e0.25 x 3.04/sin20 = 9.22
For the larger pulley e0.25 x 3.04/sin20 = 10.68
Since that of smaller pulley is smaller, the smaller pulley governs the design.
Determination of the Torque and Power Transmitted to the Shaft:
Power transmitted to the shaft is given by
P = (T1 − T2) V ………………………6
Torque at the main shaft is given by Spolt (1988)
T= ( T 1−T 2 ) R …………………………7
Determination of the Hammer:
W h =mhg …………………………….8
It can be seen that the action of the weight of hammer shaft on the main shaft is negligible.
Determination of the Centrifugal Force Exerted by the Hammer:
Centrifugal force exerted by the hammer can be calculated from equation 11 as given by:
mv
Fc …………………………….9
r
The angular velocity of the hammer is given by
2 πrN
ω= ……………………………..10
60
Determination of the Hammer Shaft Diameter:
The bending moment on the shaft is given by (Ryder 1996)
2
M b ¿¿ = W l ……………………………11
8
Since the bending moment that can be carried by a beam is a measure of the strength of the beam and
this depend upon, I/yµ a θ (Ryder 1996).
M bYmax
ό s (allowable )= …………………………12
1
I Mb
= Z » ό s (allowable ) = .………………………………… 13
Ymax❑ Z
Where:
Ymax= distance from neutral axis to outer fiber
I = moment of inertia
Z = Section modulus
For a solid round bar:
4
πd
I= ……………………………….14
64
3
πd
Z= ……………………………..15
32
Determination of the Maximum Bending Moment:
The position of the electric motor in relation to the main shaft is such that T1 and T2 act vertically
downward and T1+ T2 = 148N
Determination of the Shaft Diameter:
The ASME code equation for a solid shaft having little or no axial loading is:
16
3
d =
πό √ ❑
(K 2 M 2)2 + K 1 M ¿ 2¿
1
…………………………………….16
AU J.T. 8(3): 124-130 (Jan. 2005)
Table 1. Results of the calculated parameters
PARAMETERS SYMBOLS VALUES UNITS
Shaft speed N2 672 rpm
Length of belt L 1484.10 mm
Belt contact angle B 2.87 Degree
Angle of wrap for a1 174 Degree
smaller pulley
Angle of wrap for a1 184.74 Degree
larger pulley
Tension in the slack T1 16.23 N
side of belt
Tension in the tight T2 132.01 N
side of belt
Torque transmitted to T 7 Nm
the shaft
Power transmitted to P 490 W
the shaft
Weight of the hammer W hammer 0.47 N
Centrifugal forces C.F 244.04 W
exerted by the hammer
Diameter of hammer D 8.7 mm
shaft
Weight of hammer Ws 0.243 N
shaft
Maximum bending M b (max ❑) 20.54 Nm
moment
Diameter of main shaft D 16 Mm
TESTING:
Testing is a vital step in the process of machine development. After the design and construction, testing
is necessary in order to:
(a) Determine the performance of the machine.
(b). Expose defect and area of possible improvement.
(c). Appreciate the level of success in the research. Thus, it is important to test run a machine to
determine its work ability and efficiency.
Testing Using Dry Cassava Tuber:
A 5 kg of dry cassava was fed into the hopper and the hammer mill was switched on. The grinding tin
was noted. This was repeated for four times and averages used for calculation.
Test Using Dry Maize:
The same procedure was reported using 5 kg of dry maize
Results and Discussion
Hammer mill test results using cassava
TRIAL MASS OF CASSAVA MASS OF CASSAVA TIME TAKEN
BEFORE GRINDING(Kg) AFTER GRINDING(Kg) (Mins)
1 5 4.8 15
2 5 4.7 14
3 5 4.8 15
4 5 4.9 16
Aver 5 4.9 15
Average mass of the cassava before grinding = 5 kg Average mass of the cassava after grinding = 4.8 kg
Average time taken =15 min
mass of output material
Crushing efficiency= ×100
mass of input material
M b+¿ M
Losses= a
¿
Mb
Where
Mb = Mass before grinding
Ma = Mass after grinding
Hammer mill test results using maize:
TRIALS MASS OF MAIZE MASS OF MAIZE AFTER TIME TAKEN
BEFORE GRINDING(Kg) GRINDING(Kg) (Mins)
1 5 4.7 15
2 5 4.6 14
3 5 4.8 16
4 5 4.7 15
Aver 5 4.775 15
Average mass of the maize before grinding = 5 kg Average mass of the maize after grinding = 7 kg
Average time taken = l5 min
Crushing capacity is defined as the mass of material ground in kg/hr (Mott 1980).
Discussion:
From the result of the test, the crushing efficiency of the machine was found to be 96 and 94% for dry
cassava and dry maize, respectively. The slight difference may be because of cassava was softer than
maize. It is clear from the crushing capacity and efficiency above that the performance of the machine is
satisfactorily. The loss obtained was due to the sticking of the powdery materials to the wall of the
crushing hammer and some strains that did not pass though the screen.
Conclusion
The paper presents the design of an electrically operated universal milling machine for both domestic
and commercial purposes. From the design consideration and analysis, portability, reliability, safety,
serviceability and cost of construction were given due consideration. The construction was successfully
carried out and a universal-milling machine with the following parameters produced. Crushing efficiency
= 96% Crushing capacity = 31 kg/hr Crushing loses = 0.04 Taking into consideration the various size of
material needed, the screen is detachable, making it possible to fix screens with different sieving
operations.
