Name: Westley Gomez

Problem Definition
The purpose of this project is to produce an impact testing machine to
simulate blunt force trauma on bone samples. The customer, Dr. Shen,
Professor at Ohio Northern University, would like to investigate skeletal
injuries associated with varying levels of blunt force trauma. Of particular
interest is the pig skull, though long bones may be a future topic. The device
is to be placed in the materials lab, where it can be easily accessible and
operated by both faculty and students. A handbook will be provided that
contains work instructions on safety, setup, operation, components,
calibration, and changing impactors.
Several constraints were decided upon during the beginning stages of the
design process. The first constraint, as assigned by the customer, is that the
machine must generate enough force to break a pig skull. According to The
Journal of Forensic Biomechanics, the energy required to break a pig skull in
an impact is between 14.1 and 68.5 Joules. As such, the machine must be
able to deliver an impact with an energy of 68.5 Joules. Next, it is a
constraint that the force generated must not exceed the limit of the force
plate. To ensure that the force of the impactor does not break the force
plate. A safety factor of 1.5 is required in all calculations.
Subsequently, the bone must not break from the structure by which it is
mounted in the machine. The area of interest on the bone is where it is
impacted, and damage to other areas of the bone during the impact must be
avoided. This constraint will be judged by empirical observation. Also to be
judged empirically is the safety of the operators. Research indicates that
there is not any previously established safety standards used for similar
impacting devices. Because of the lack of safety requirements, the machine
must have shields to avoid operator or bystander injury and be safe to
operate without experience in impact testing. Another constraint is that the
machine itself should not move during operation. The machine as a whole
should move less than 1 mm each test.
The criteria considered in the design was used to narrow our focus to
the best design solution for the customer. To simulate a wide range of impact
scenarios, it is important that the machine is as versatile as possible. The
machine will have at least two different impact heads and masses that will
create several scenarios depending on the bone being tested. Using the
different masses, the machine will be able to achieve a large range of
velocities. The machine will have an adjustable mount, to be able to test as
many bone shapes and sizes as possible besides skulls.. The machine must
be aesthetically pleasing to encourage its use, and should be easy to operate
with minimal set up requirements. Cost is also a consideration in choosing

the best design, an approximate budget can be seen in Table 1. It is

important that the machine is low cost and designed to incorporate as many
readily available materials as possible.

Potential Solutions
The functional decomposition for this project yielded quite a few
different possible solution combinations. The most important part of the
design is the method by which energy is stored and ultimately delivered to
the bone.
The first solution uses gravity in a vertical design (Figure 1). The energy
transferred to the bone comes from gravitational potential energy. The
design has a fixture that moves vertically on a rail guided system. Since this
design is vertical, friction between the fixture and guide is not a significant
issue. Interchangeable impact heads that contact the bone are attached to
this fixture. To vary the velocity and energy of this design, the fixture can be
dropped from different heights. The force plate can be easily, but not
permanently, integrated into this design.
The second solution makes use of a spring in a horizontal design (Figure
2). The energy transferred to the bone comes from the elastic potential
energy contained in the compressed spring. This design still has a fixture
that moves along a guide, but now the guide is horizontal. Its important to
note that because the guide is horizontal, friction is going to be more
significant than a vertical design. The loaded spring pushes against the
fixture and sends it moving down the track towards the target bone. Again,
the impact heads on the fixture are interchangeable. How far the spring is
compressed determines the speed of the fixture. With a horizontal design like
this, the force plate can no longer be used.
The third solution is very similar to the second. The spring, however, is
now replaced by a pneumatic air cannon (Figure 3). The fixture will have a
cylindrical mount that slides in the end of the air cannon, like a bullet inside
a gun. When the cannon fires, the abrupt change in air pressure will
accelerate the fixture down the horizontal track. Again, the impact heads on
the fixture are easily interchangeable. The speed can be controlled by
changing the air pressure released into the cannon. Since this design is
horizontal as well, the force plate can no longer be used and friction is again
going to be significant.
How the design was chosen?

Through the use of a decision matrix, it was determined that the vertical
design utilizing gravitational potential energy would be best. Such a design
should be least expensive, take up the least floor space, and should give the
best control over impact velocity and energy. The decision matrix can be
seen in Appendix C, Table 2.
There are several things to consider for the mounting device that physically
holds the bone in place. Ideally, it needs to hold a variety of bone types from
skulls to long bones, like a tibia. OSU puts the ends of long bones in a plaster
mold to hold them in place (Figure 4). A skull could also be mounted in this
way. Another possible solution would be to use clamps to hold the bone in
place. Memory foam could be used on the end of these clamps to disperse
the stresses from clamping. For skull type bones, big pads of memory foam
could move in from the sides to secure the bone at any orientation relative to
the impactor.
In addition to making it simple enough for anyone to use our customer, Dr.
Shen, was looking for something easy to use and maintain, with parts readily
available. This design also integrates the use of a force plate which can be
used to determine the amount of energy that is transmitted through the
bone. It is through our customer that we were able to get a basis for what is
needed in her design.
Learning Experience
Through this process there are many ways a product can be chosen.
When working with a group it is easy to forget how overcomplicated the
process can get due to conflicting personalities or not asking the right
questions. With a majority decided to integrate some many data acquisition
modules and bells and whistles that were clearly in excess. This blinded the
group from true purpose of what the device was meant to do and what our
client actually wanted. It was form over substance, and even a dissenting
opinion was written off as something that could be done later or just ignored.
Group think is a dangerous notion and it very well would have sent the
capstone project down in flames.
From this I learned verification is probably the best way to ensure the project
is moving in the right direction. Whether it be asking direct questions to the
client/customer, following up on a phone call to various manufacturers, or
just reviewing the math behind a decision matrix. This provides much more
control of the project then force of personality or the title given to an
individual at the time.

Appendix A - Solution Drawings

Figure 1 - Vertical Gravitational Potential Energy

Figure 2 - Horizontal Elastic Potential Energy

Figure 3 - Horizontal Potential Energy due Pressure of Air

Figure 4 - Mounting with bondo

Appendix C - Decision Matrix

Table 2 - Energy Storage Decision Matrix
Vertical Gravitational
Potential

Horizontal Elastic
Potential

Horizontal Pneumatic
Potential

Cost

0.3

10

Size

0.1

10

Look

0.1

10

Interchang- eable
Impactors

0.0
5

Energy Range

0.1
5

Velocity Accuracy

0.1
5

Materials Availability

0.1
5

10

8.9

4.95