Report

On
Redesign of Da
Vinci Automobile
BY
MECH 7007:
Lecturer’s/Tutor’s
Name: Hao He
7th June, 2024

PREPARED BY:
SUSHMITA GURUNG
ASHISH SHARMA
BISHWAS KANDEL

1
Table of Contents
Abstract:.........................................................................................................................................................3
Background:...................................................................................................................................................3
Objective:.......................................................................................................................................................3
Systems Engineering Life Cycle....................................................................................................................4
Need Analysis......................................................................................................................4
Risk Management................................................................................................................5
Risk Analysis.......................................................................................................................5
System Design Considerations............................................................................................6
Conceptual Design.........................................................................................................................................7
Detail Design and Validation.......................................................................................................................11
Conclusion and Recommendations..............................................................................................................20
References....................................................................................................................................................20
Minute of the project....................................................................................................................................21

2
Abstract:
This project's goal is to modernize Leonardo Da Vinci's 1478 car design through the use of
systems engineering principles. The primary goal is to utilize design methodology and systems
engineering processes in a practical situation. The project entails making changes to the car's
design and performing analyses such as motion analysis and stress distribution. The report
outlines the stages of the systems engineering life cycle, including requirement analysis, risk
management, design considerations, conceptual design, and detailed design with validation. The
goal of the project is to design a working toy car inspired by Da Vinci's model, with a focus on
safety, efficiency, and user-friendliness.

Background:
Leonardo da Vinci was recognized for predicting the car after a prototype of his design was
praised as the initial self-driven vehicle imagined. The 5ft by 5ft 6in wooden model displayed at
Florence's Science History Museum is powered by springs. It is the initial planned vehicle to
have programmable steering. Created to function like a robot, the car, capable of traveling short
distances, includes a unique additional feature: a steering column. The hidden coiled springs
located in drums under the car are probably the main source of power. Although scholars have
been aware of the car's drawings since 1478, the way it functioned has remained a puzzling
mystery. A demonstration of the rich historical background suggested by "Dream", Da Vinci's
"car" is one of numerous designs at the exhibition that captivates the imagination and surpasses
the common belief that innovative transportation concepts originated solely with Henry Ford.

Objective:
The primary objective of this project is:

 To learn to apply the design methodology and systems engineering process in real world
design scenario.

The secondary objective is:

3
  To modify the design of Leonardo Da Vinci Car model using Systems Engineering
Approach and perform analysis such as motion analysis and stress distribution in various
section of the design.

Systems Engineering Life Cycle

Systems engineering is an interdisciplinary approach and means to enable the realization of

successful systems. It focuses on defining customer needs and required functionality early in the
development cycle, documenting requirements, then proceeding with design synthesis and
system validation while considering the complete problem. (INCOSE, 2005) (Sage, 2014)

Need Analysis

Stakeholder Needs:

 Children (Aged 4-8): The toy car should be easy to reload, fun to operate, and safe to
use.
 Parents: The toy should be safe, affordable, durable, and require minimal maintenance.
 Toy Manufacturer: The toy should be cost-effective to produce, have a high reliability,
and meet safety regulations.

Product Requirements:

 Operational Time: The toy car should operate for 2 hours per day, 7 days a week, with a
lifespan of 3 years (~10,000 hours).
 Performance: The car should reach speeds of up to 10 m/s with a ±5% variation and
cover a maximum distance of 30 m on a smooth concrete surface.
 User Interaction: Reloading the car should be easy for a child aged 4-8.
 Efficiency: The mechanical efficiency should be greater than 95%.
 Drive System: The speed ratio at each drive should be reasonable to ensure smooth
power transmission. (Pahl, 2007)

4
Risk Management

Identifying Risks:

 Safety Risks: Potential injuries from moving parts, choking hazards from small parts,
spring overloading or malfunction.
 Operational Risks: Failure of the power transmission system, reduced efficiency over
time, inconsistent speed.
 User Risks: Difficulty in reloading the toy, user dissatisfaction due to complex operation
or frequent breakdowns.
 Manufacturing Risks: High production costs, supply chain disruptions for parts,
manufacturing defects.

Mitigation Strategies:

 Safety: Incorporate safety features like enclosed gears, use non-toxic materials, and
design parts to be larger than choking hazard size.
 Operational: Use high-quality materials and robust design for power transmission
components. Implement thorough testing procedures.
 User: Design an intuitive and easy-to-use reloading mechanism. Provide clear
instructions and robust customer support.
 Manufacturing: Optimize the design for cost-effective production, maintain strong
relationships with suppliers, and implement quality control measures. (Blanchard, 2010)

Risk Analysis

Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA):

Potential RPN (Risk

Severity Occurrence Detection Mitigation
Failure Cause Effect Priority
(1-10) (1-10) (1-10) Strategy
Mode Number)

Spring Overloading Loss of power 8 5 3 120 Use durable

failure or wear materials, limit

5
 Potential RPN (Risk
Severity Occurrence Detection Mitigation
Failure Cause Effect Priority
(1-10) (1-10) (1-10) Strategy
Mode Number)

maximum load

High-quality
Continuous Reduced materials,
Gear wear 6 4 4 96
operation efficiency regular
maintenance

Ensure parts are

Choking Small parts larger than
Safety risk 10 2 2 40
hazard detaching choking size,
secure fastening

Simplify
reloading
Reloading Complex User
5 6 4 120 mechanism,
difficulty mechanism dissatisfaction
provide
instructions

(Haimes, 2009)

System Design Considerations

Power Transmission:

 Use Single coiled springs to store potential energy.

 Gears: High-quality, precision gears to ensure smooth power transmission.

Efficiency:

 Design the system to minimize friction losses.

 Ensure all components are well-aligned and lubricated for smooth operation.

Safety:

6
  Enclose all moving parts to prevent accidental injuries.
 Use materials that are safe and non-toxic.

Reloading Mechanism:

 Design a simple winding mechanism that a child can easily operate.

 Ensure the mechanism is robust and cannot be overwound.

Maintenance:

 Design for low maintenance with durable components.

 Provide clear guidelines for any necessary maintenance.

Cost:

 Optimize the design for mass production to keep costs low.

 Use cost-effective materials without compromising quality.

Size:

 Design the toy car to be compact and lightweight for easy handling by children.

Reliability:

 Conduct extensive testing to ensure long-term reliability.

 Use high-quality components to minimize the risk of failure. (Ullman, 2010)

Conceptual Design
Designing our Da Vinci-Inspired Toy Car

Here's how we have approached designing your toy car based on Leonardo da Vinci's 1478
model:

1. Team Decision: 4 Wheels: As it offers more stability and potentially easier steering
implementation.

2. Power Source:

7
 Torsional Spring: In our design the car will be powered by torsional spring made of steel.

3. Power Transmission:

We have opt for gear as it offers precise speed control.

Given Parameters & Assumptions:

 Desired Car Speed: 5 m/s

 Wheel Diameter: 4.22 cm (0.0422)
 Car Weight: 0.2 kg (200 grams)
 Desired Travel Distance: 30 meters
 Energy Loss: No energy loss as surface is smooth.
 Spring Material: Music wire (ASTM A228) with a shear modulus (G) of 79 GPa
 Maximum Allowable Shear Stress: 690 MPa for music wire (with a safety factor of 1.2
applied)

Calculations for spring:

1. Target Travel Distance: We are given the desired maximum distance of 30 meters.
2. Wheel Rotations for Travel Distance:

Number of wheel rotations (n) needed to travel 30 meters:

 n = Travel distance / Wheel circumference

 Wheel circumference = pi * diameter = pi * 0.0422 m ≈ 0.1326 m
 n ≈ 30 m / 0.1326 m ≈ 226 rotations

3. Kinetic Energy of the Car:

 KE = 1/2 * m * v^2
 KE = 1/2 * 0.2 kg * (5 m/s)^2 = 2.5 Joules

4. Total Energy Required

 Total Energy Required = KE

8
  Total Energy Required = 2.5 J

5. Spring Torque (Assuming 4.5 Revolutions):

 Torque = Energy / (2 * π * Number of Revolutions)

 Torque = 3.125 J / (2 * π * 4.5) = 0.0497 N-m

6. Spring Rate (k) Calculation (Assuming 180-degree Deflection):

 k = Torque / Angular Deflection

 k = 0.0497 Nm / π rad = 0.0031 N-m/rad

Calculation for Gear

Assumed Gear Train Configuration:

Spring Gear: 32 teeth

Compound Gear 1:

Gear A: 32 teeth (connected to the spring gear)

Gear B: 8 teeth

Compound Gear 2:

Gear C: 12 teeth (connected to the wheel gear)

Gear D: 8 teeth (connected to Gear A of Compound Gear 1)

Wheel Gear: 12 teeth

Gear Ratios:

• Stage 1: Spring Gear (32 teeth) to Compound Gear 1B (8 teeth)

• Gear Ratio 1 = 32 / 8 = 4

9
• Stage 2: Compound Gear 1A (32 teeth) to Compound Gear 2D (8 teeth)
• Gear Ratio 2 = 32 / 8 = 4
• Stage 3: Compound Gear 2C (12 teeth) to Wheel Gear (12 teeth)
• Gear Ratio 3 = 12 / 12 = 1

Overall Gear Ratio:

Overall Gear Ratio = Gear Ratio 1 * Gear Ratio 2 * Gear Ratio 3 = 4 * 4 * 1 = 16

2. Output Speed (Wheel RPM):

Spring-Driven Shaft RPM = 1000 RPM

Wheel RPM = Spring-Driven Shaft RPM / Overall Gear Ratio

Wheel RPM = 1000 RPM / 16 = 62.5 RPM

3. Car Speed:

Wheel Circumference = π * Wheel Diameter = 3.1416 * 0.0422 m ≈ 0.1326 m

Car Speed = Wheel RPM * Wheel Circumference

Car Speed = 62.5 RPM * 0.1326 m/rev * ≈ 8.1325 m/s

10
Detail Design and Validation
Here the detail design along with creation of parts and assembling it into a prototype and
conducting FEA analysis has been done.
All Dimensions are in mm
All gears are spur gear.

No. Parts Dimensions design

1 Gear 8T 15mm diameter
No of tooth=8

2 Gear12T-toolbox -Metric - Spur gear 1.5M 12T 20PA 8FW

gear ---S12N75H50L0.8N -Hexagonal shaft
cut(6.35mm length)

3 Gear Idler 32-8T Metric - Spur gear 1.5M 32T 20PA 8FW
---S32N75H50L5N

11
4 Gear Pawl 32T Metric - Spur gear 1.5M 32T 20PA 8FW
---S32N75H50L5N

5 Gear 12-8T Metric - Spur gear 1.5M 12T 20PA 8FW

---S12N75H50L0.8N

6 Pawl

7 Spring

8 Key

9 Rim Outside diameter= 42mm

12
10 Tire Outer diameter= 53.2mm
Inside diameter = 42.2mm

11 Pinion 5.9mm diameter, 24.5mm length

12 Idler spacer Outer diameter= 8mm

Inside diameter = 6.8mm
Length = 6.3mm

13 Idler Length = 46mm

Diameter1 = 7.2mm
Diameter2 = 6mm
14 Axles Front axle=10mm*59mm
Rear axle = 10mm*59mm + hexag0n
cross section = 12.2mm*8mm

15 Spring Axle 16mm*52mm

16 Cross Member 46mm length

13
 17 Left Pinion 7.4radius*10.6mm slot *8mm length
Guide

18 Right Pinion 7.4radius*10.6mm slot *16.5mm length

Guide

19 Left Body 152mm length * 64 mm diameter

-Slots made for holding each shafts and
other parts.
20 Right Body 152mm length * 64 mm diameter
-Slots made for holding each shafts and
other parts.

Materials assigned = Plastic for all the parts which can easily be 3Dprinted for functional Toy

14
Motion Analysis:
Motor on Gear on the spring axle = 100rpm
Results:
The rpm we calculated on wheel = 62.5rpm
Rpm on wheel after motion analysis =371 deg/s =61.833 rpm which is close to the calculated
data.
Hence, the value obtained from the motion analysis is validated with the calculated data.

Figure 1 Angular velocity result for wheel

Static Analysis:

Chassis Analysis:

The structural analysis was conducted using ANSYS software. The process included:

 First static analysis was selected from the analysis system on ANSYS workbench.
 We selected Plastic material to assign from the Engineering data with the following
properties.

15
 Then step file of the assembly toy car was imported from the geometry.
 The model is then opened.
 In the geometry we supressed all the other parts except the chassis of the car for the
analysis.
 The material PLASTIC, PLA was assigned to each parts.
 Then mesh was generated of the following sizing.

16
 Figure 2 Mesh of the chassis Body of the Toy car

 For the support, two cylindrical supports were assigned: on front axle and on the rear axle
on each sides.

 Then the total force of 50N (body weight) was applied vertically (y-axis) on the chassis
body.

17
 For the solution total deformation, Equivalent Elastic stress, Equivalent Stress was
selected.
 The results were calculated.

Figure 3 Total Deformation

18
 Figure 4 Equivalent Stress

Figure 5 Equivalent Stress

The results obtained is tabulated below:

Results Maximum Value Average

Total Deformation 3.9632*10-6 m 1,4529*10-6m
Equivalent Elastic Stress 1.4873*10-4 m/m 2.0646*10-5m/m
Equivalent stress 4.3184*105 Pa 53742Pa
Youngs Modulus of Plastic, PLA 2.8814*109Pa

19
While comparing the results we can conclude that the designed model is a safe toy car design
since the obtained equivalent stress is significantly very low than the Young’s Modulus of the
material used.

From the analysis conducted we can conclude that the toy car designed is fast and the material
used is durable. The material and design is highly recommended for fast, safe, durable and
budget friendly toy car which is equally entertaining and appealing.

Conclusion and Recommendations

By inclusion of the gear and the torsional spiral spring the performance of the design has been
improved. The material used in the design of this machine also has tremendously changed the
way the mechanism sustained all the load and motion analysis in virtual environment. In future,
by increasing the number of torsional spiral spring, using batteries and steering control would
further enhance the performance toy car.

Gantt chart

References
Blanchard, B. S. (2010). Systems Engineering and Analysis. Prentice Hall.
Haimes, Y. Y. (2009). Risk Modeling, Assessment, and Management. Wiley.

20
INCOSE. (2005). INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook: A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes
and Activities.
Pahl, G. B. (2007). Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach. Springer-Verlag.
Sage, A. P. (2014). Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management. Wiley.
Ullman, D. G. (2010). The Mechanical Design Process. McGraw-Hill.

21
 Meeting purpose: Design Planning

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas kandel

Time: 11:30

Date: 20/04/2024

Minute of the project

Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 11:30 Developing creative design operational boundary Ashish Sharma

2 11:30 Discussing operational boundary of the toy car Bishwas kandel

Open Action

Item Action item Who When Status

1 Duty Allocation Week 4

2 Week 4

22
 Meeting purpose: Designing planning

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas Kandel

Time: 11:30

Date: 24/04/2024

Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 11:30 Creating creative design and operational criteria Ashish Sharma

2 11:30 Duty allocation Ashish Sharma

Open Action

Item Action item Who When Status

1 Conceptual design was created Sushmita Week 5 Completed

Gurung

2 Duty allocated Group Week 5 Completed

Discussion notes of current meeting

In the week 5 we allocated duties for the group members and discussed about the conceptual design of the
toy car. The operational parameters were discussed and selected.

23
 Meeting purpose: Finalising the conceptual design

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas Kandel

Time: 2:30

Date: 3/05/2024

Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 2:30 To finalise the overall design concept of the toy car Sushmita Gurung

2 2:30 Evaluating design alternative criteria Bishwas Kandel

Open Action

Item Action item Who When Status

1 Conceptual design was finalized Sushmita Week 6 Completed

Gurung

2 Evaluation of alternatives of each design criteria Bishwas Week 6 Completed

was done using weighting score table kandel

Discussion notes of current meeting

The alternatives of each design criteria were discussed and decision was made using weighting score
table. Conceptual design was finalised using the previously drafted design.

24
 Meeting purpose: Detailing of the design

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas Kandel

Time: 12:30

Date: 13/05/2024

Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 12:30 Initial detailed design analysis Ashish

2 12:30

Open Action

Item Action item Who When Status

1 Different study loads for design analysis were Aashis Week 7 Calculated and
considered Sharma completed

25
 2

Discussion notes of current meeting

Different loads and design parameters coming into action in design analysis were considered and
calculated.

Meeting purpose:

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas Kandel

Time: 11:00

Date: 21/05/2024

Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 11:00 To study about Force, stress-strain analysis Sushmita Gurung

2 11:00 To study about different design factors and material Bishwas Kandel
selection

Open Action

26
 Item Action item Who When Status

1 Force, Stress- Strain analysis was done based on Sushmita Week 8 Completed
the conceptual design parameters. Gurung

2 Material selection was done. Plastic was selected Bishwas Week 8 Selected
Kandel

Discussion notes of current meeting

Based on the different design parameters and the conceptual design design analysis was carried out.
Different design factors were considered and Material for the toy car was selected considering different
factors like elasticity, cost, availability etc.

Meeting purpose: Conducting stress- strain analysis

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas Kandel

Time: 12:30

Date: 04/06/2024

Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 12:30 To conduct the stress-strain analysis Ashish Sharma

2 12:30

Open Action

27
 Item Action item Who When Status

1 Stress- Strain analysis was done using ANSYS Ashish Week Completed
sharma 10

2 Week
10

Discussion notes of current meeting

Total deformation, Equivalent elastic stress, Equivalent stress analysis was done to evaluate whether the
toy car is fast, durable or not.

Meeting purpose: Conducting motion analysis

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas Kandel

Time: 2:30

Date: 15/06/2024

Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 2:30 To conduct motion analysis Sushmita Gurung

28
Open Action

Item Action item Who When Status

1 Considering the RPM of the motor, Calculated Sushmita Week Conducted

RPM of the wheel motion analysis was done. gurung 11

2 Week1
1

Discussion notes of current meeting

Conducting the motion analysis of the toy car a plot of angular velocity vs time was generated. RPM of
both motor and the wheels of the toy car were used for the analysis.

Meeting purpose: Conducting parametric analysis

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas Kandel

Time: 1:30

Date: 24/05/2024

Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

29
 1 1:30 To evaluate range design values conducting parametric Bishwas Kandel
analysis

Open Action

Item Action item Who When Status

1 Using Ansys analysis was done to determine how Week Conducted

the analysis would respond to change in 12
independent design values.

2 Week1
2

Discussion notes of current meeting

Using optimisation analysis dialogue box of the ANSYS optimisation was defined followed by the
optimisation calculation for the parametric analysis.

Meeting purpose: Preparing Power point slides and oral presentation

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel

Time: 3:20

Date: 01/06/2024

30
Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 2:30 To prepare the slides All member

2 2:30 To give oral presentation All member

Open Action

Item Action item Who When Status

1 Slides were prepared based on the project report Week1 completed

3

2 Oral presentation attended Week1 completed

3

Discussion notes of current meeting

Meeting purpose: Submission of the report

Attendees: Name Signature

Ashish Sharma Ashish Sharma

Susmita Gurung Susmita Gurung

Bishwas kandel Bishwas kandel

Time: 3:00

Date: 07/06/2024

31
Proposed Agenda

Item Time Agenda item Presenter

1 3:00 To submit the report Bishwas Kandel

Open Action

Item Action item Who When Status

1 Submission done Sushmita Week1 Submitted

Gurung 4

2 Week1
4

Discussion notes of current meeting

The final project report was submitted.

32