DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING,

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

Tennis Ball Machine

MIE 301: Design Report

Due: Dec. 7, 2016

Richard Salas Chavez - 1002711274
Zhanguang Zhang - 1002110280
Shao Zhang - 1001570445
Han Wu - 999797242
Group 41
1 Table of Contents

2. Introduction 2

3. Current Mechanism 2

4. Objectives 3

5. Conceptual Design 3

6​. Analysis 4
6​.1 Determining Required Mechanism Limit Positions: 4
6​.1.1 Horizontal Limit Positions: 4
6​.1.2 Vertical Limit Positions: 4
6​.2 Analysis of Five Bar Mechanism in Generating Random Motion 5
6.3 Analysis of Vertical Motion Mechanism 7
6​.4 Determining Required Motor Torque and Power 7
6​.5 Combined Output of Four and Five Bar Mechanism 8
6​.6 Cost 9

7​. Conclusion 9

References 1​0
2. Introduction
Elite tennis players improve their stroke by working with a high quality tennis ball
machine. Such machines use two or more servos and computerized systems to
control the launch of the ball. A high end tennis ball machine can cost several
thousands of dollars. There is a notable lack of mid-to-low-end tennis machines
which offer adequate functionality for amateur players. This inspired us to reduce the
cost of tennis ball machines by targeting this empty space in the market.

The objective of this report is to produce a design with similar functionality to high
end tennis ball machines, emulating playing with another player, but at a
significantly lower price. The cost reduction will be achieved through the
replacement of expensive computer systems and servos with purely mechanical
systems.

Figure 1: Lobster Phenom II Tennis Ball Machine[1]

3. Current Mechanism

The Phenom II Machine is one of the

best machines on the market because of
its cutting edge digital technology,
unfortunately it is quite expensive, with
a cost of $3,595. The machine is able to
produce a variety of different shot
patterns shown in the images to the
right. It also has a random mode which
will cover a similar area of the court,
but in a unpredictable manner [1].

The Phenom II uses four independent power and transmission systems.

Two motors are used to drive the two drums that are mounted on a rigid
plane. By adjusting the relative speed of the top and bottom drums, the
machine is able to launch flat balls or balls with topspin or backspin.
The launch angle of shot can be adjusted by pitching up or down the
drum plane with the help of one servo and two linkages. Another set of
servo and linkages are used to control the side-to-side rotation of the
drum plane. Combination of these two motions allows the balls to be
shot in different trajectories.

Figure 3: Stick Diagram of Current Mechanism

The Phenom II is mechanically very simple, making the analysis trivial. Its functionality comes mainly
from the use of electronics that allows the Phenom II to have control over the ball’s spin, speed. Being
able to launch the ball anywhere on the court, and also generating random shot patterns creating
interesting play for the user. However, these electronics also lead to the high price of the machine.

4. Objectives

To produce a machine that is competitive to current tennis ball machines (eg: Phenom II) these following
objectives should be met:

1. Emulate the functionality of high end tennis ball machines at a significantly reduced price. Proposed
design to cost at most half the price of the Phenom II ($1797.5)

2. All balls must land within the court’s boundaries

3. Shot coverage of the machine should be able cover a majority (greater than 50%) of of the court. Since
the Phenom II can launch a ball to all point on the court, it is able to have 100% coverage. This will serve
as the upper limit of coverage for the proposed design

4. Be able to shoot the ball in a unpredictable manner such that the player cannot easily predict the
location of the next ball

5. The balls should be evenly distributed over the court, meaning that shots are not concentrated in any
particular area of the court. In other word, the probability of a ball landing on a certain location on the
court should be close to equal for all locations on the court.

5. Conceptual Design
Our proposed design will make use of a five-bar mechanism to
control the motion in the horizontal plane, and a four-bar and slider
mechanism to control motion in the vertical plane. The total output
of these mechanisms determines the angle and direction in which the
tennis balls will be launched.

Figure 4: SolidWorks Model of Proposed Design

6. Analysis

6.1 Determining Required Mechanism Limit Positions:

To conduct a limit position analysis we first assume that the
machine will be placed halfway up the baseline as shown below.
The desired limit positions will ensure balls do not land outside of
the court.

Figure 4: Dimensions of Tennis Court [2]

6.1.1 Horizontal Limit Positions:

To get the maximum angle of the horizontal direction we consider how far up we can rotate the 78 foot
line (length of court) before the ball would go out of play. The upper limit occurs when this line hits the
singles sideline, labeled in Figure 4 above. We can determine the max angle from the image below.

Figure 5: Limit Positions of Horizontal Mechanism

Therefore,the output of the horizontal five bar

mechanism must be between ± 9.97° to ensure that
the tennis ball is not launched out of bounds.

6.1.2 Vertical Limit Positions:

For the vertical limit positions we need to ensure that the ball can both clear the the tennis net of 3.5 feet
and that it does not exceed the maximum range of 78 feet. If we cannot clear the net or if we cannot keep
the ball inside the court we will not be able to meet our objective of keeping all balls in the court.

Figure 6: Vertical Limit Positions

Projectile range formulas can be used to determine the minimum and maximum limit angles.
A launch speed of 60 km/hr was used since existing tennis ball machines for beginners to
intermediate-level players have a ball ejection speed of 16-80 km/h [3].

The vertical mechanism output must be within 14.6 ° ​and 26.41 ° to ensure balls stay in the court
6.2 Analysis of Five Bar Mechanism in Generating Random Motion

For the five-bar mechanism, a vector loop analysis was conducted to obtain the equations of motions
which were put into Matlab to obtain the position, velocity, and acceleration of all links. Plotting the
positions over time will validate that the motion is unpredictable. Knowing the accelerations is necessary
for the force analysis which will be conducted afterwards.

Equations of Motion:

where θ2 and θ5 are the independent motor inputs to the mechanism.

The above equations are then solved to find

the other angular positions θ3 and θ4 . The
position of any point in the mechanism can
then be determined. Theses positions can
then be numerically differentiated to give the
velocity and acceleration for all points on the
mechanism.

To extract an angular oscillatory output

motion from the five-bar, we attach a slider
to the turning pair of middle two links. A
new link is then connected to the slider from
a fixed support which directly drives the
horizontal launch angle of the tennis ball
launcher.

Since the five-bar has a mobility of two, that is the mechanism requires two inputs to predict all the
outputs, both motor speeds at θ2 and θ5 must be defined to set the motion of the mechanism. Randomness
can be generated by first setting a constant rotation speed of one motor input. The rotation speed of the
second motor must equal to the first motor’s speed multiplied by an irrational number like ​π​ (eg. θ5 = ​π *
θ2 ). This idea is analogous to a clock that has an hour hand and a minute hand. The motion of the hands
are periodic since one rotation of the minute hand is 601 th of the hour hand. Thus, after 60 rotations of the

minute hand the hour hand rotates once. The minute and hour hands start at the same position and repeats
this cycle periodically, making its motion predictable. However, if one rotation of the minute hand where
to correspond to 1/π rotations of the hour hand the two hands would never align and reset. This is because
π is an irrational number, which by definition cannot be expressed by the ratio of two integers. As a result,
it does not matter how many turns the minute hand does, it will never align with the hour hand in the
starting position,, meaning it is non-periodic.. This property is used to generate non-periodic and
unpredictable motion in the five-bar.

The plot on the left displays the angular position of the output overtime. θ5 is rotating at a rational
multiple to the rotation speed of θ2 ( θ5 = ​2 * θ2 in this case). It is evident that the motion is periodic and
predictable.

In the plot on the right, θ5 is now rotating at φ (phi) times the speed of θ2 , where φ is the Golden Ratio,
an irrational number. It can be seen from the plot that the output still follows a general oscillatory motion,
but now no clear period can be defined. This implies that the motion is not periodic and thus difficult to
predict.

By tuning the mechanism parameters, values were determined which allowed the mechanism to operate at
an appropriate speed and within the specified limit positions.

r1 = 2 r2 = 0.25 r3 = 2 r4 = 2 r5 = 0.25

ω2 = 0.1 rads/s ω5 = phi × ω2 = 0.1618 rads/s

Note: the link lengths above are dimensionless since as long as these ratios are maintained the lengths can
be in any dimension as long as it is consistent.

The additional horizontal lines on the right plot indicate the previously determined limit positions of the
mechanism. The output is shown to be bounded within these limit positions.

It was determined from analytically solving the equations of motion that the output limit positions to were
98.83​0​ and 81.10​0​. Which is within the previously specified limit angles, this agrees with the Matlab
model. Therefore, this mechanism is able to produce random motion, and keep the balls within the court
as specified by the objectives.
6.3 Analysis Vertical Motion Mechanism
The vertical launch angle of the tennis ball is controlled by a
combination of a four-bar and slider-crank (Fig. 11). The input
being a constant rotation of link 2, and the output of the system is
the angular position of link 6 where the launching drums are
mounted.

Vector loops were used to determine the position of output angle θ​6
overtime with constant motor input. By adjusting the lengths of
linkages the range of θ​6​ can be adjusted fit within the previously
determined limit angles, and launched balls will stay within the
court.

The link lengths found to be:

r1 = 20 r2 = 4 r3 = 30 r4 = 20 r5 = 22.5 r7 = 22.5

Note: the link lengths are dimensionless above since as long as these ratios are
maintained the lengths can be in any dimension as long as it is consistent.

6.4 Determining Required Motor Torque and Power

Finding the minimum required motor torque and power will lead to
the choice of less expensive motors that still satisfy requirements,
thereby further meeting the objective of low cost. Graphical force
analysis was used to calculate the maximum torque need from the
two five-bar input motors. The rotational inertia of the tennis ball
launcher assembly was estimated to be 0.116 kg m2 from the
SolidWorks model. We assumed the links to be weightless as the
weights of linkages are relatively small compared to the weight of
the launching mechanism. The maximum torque of motors occurs
when angular acceleration of link 6 reaches its maximum value
0.0603 rad/s2 determined from Matlab​ ​. At this point the launcher
assembly also as the greatest acceleration since the output of the
five-bar directly drives the rotation of the launcher assembly .

The maximum torque applied on link 2 motor is 0.084 oz·in, while

the maximum torque applied on link 5 motor is 0.035 oz·in. As
most DC motors in the market meet this requirement, cheaper motors can be used to reduce which will
significantly reduce the price of the machine. This result makes sense since the mechanism is moving
slowly and not very heavy, thus only requiring small torques to operate.
6.5 Combined Output of Four and Five Bar Mechanism
From the angular outputs of the four and five bar
mechanisms, the launch trajectory and landing position
of the tennis balls can be determined using a Matlab
simulation. The series of images on the right show the
distribution of ball landing locations for one minute
time intervals at different times during an hour of
running the machine.

The black rectangle on the bottom side of the court

represents the location of the tennis ball machine.

The distributions are different for all of the three time

intervals, which implies the output of the machine is
indeed random/unpredictable. The distributions are
also within the and spread out across the court.

Note: The links have been made such that all of the balls will land within the 18 ft by 27 ft rectangle
behind the service line. This was done since the the Phenom II’s pre programmed settings are designed to
also launch balls into this area of the court [1].

By running the simulation for very long periods of time,

a probability distribution of ball landing locations can be
determined.

In the image on the right, the area has been partitioned

into equal sized squares (1ft by 1ft). The color of the
square indicate the probability of a ball landing there.

Here is a larger image of the color

distribution. It can be seen that the ball has a
larger chance of landing near either ends,
with lowest probability of landing on the
left and right sides. It can also be seen here
that the distribution has a cone shape where
balls cannot land in the most left and right
edges, this is due to the conical nature of the
launch angle.

Note: Units of color bar in percent

 While the distribution is not perfectly even, the individual probabilities are low enough (less than 1.2%)
that balls will likely not cluster to specific areas of the court.

From the color probability distribution, the design is able to cover approximately 71% of the court area.

6.6 Cost
5 DC motors at $40 dollars each [4]

Assume links made of aluminum alloy, density 2800 kg/m​3​, at $1.56/kg [5]
Volume of five bar = 0.0012 ​m3​​ Volume of 4 bar = 0.0018 ​m3​​ Volume to launcher assembly = 0.0008 ​m3​

Estimated price of fasteners, bearings, transmission = $130 [6]

Assume manufacturing and distribution cost is equal the material cost

Total cost = (5 * 40 + 0.0038*2800*1.56 + 130) * 2 = $693.20

With the goal of showing the lower cost of the proposed design. the prices in the estimate have been
purposefully overestimated to allow for a stronger conclusion to be drawn from a price comparison.

7. Conclusion

The following chart compares the proposed design to other market options based on how each meets the
previously stated objectives
:

Objective Lobster Phenom II [1] Sports Tutor Twist [7] Proposed Design

Unpredictable/Random Yes No Yes

Launch Patten

Court Coverage 100% Can only launch ball to 71%

same point every time

Even Ball Distribution Yes No Not perfectly even, but close,

max 1% difference between
individual probabilities

Cost $3,595 $289 $693.20

The Sports Tutor Twist was included in the comparison as it represented a low cost and low functionality
machine that would increase the breadth of the comparison.

The proposed design was able to meet the specified objectives, which are:

1. At most half 50% of the cost of the Phenom II

Proposed design only costs 19.28% of the price

2. All balls must land within the court’s boundaries

See figures in section 6.5

3. Should be able to cover a majority (greater than 50%) of the court’s area
Proposed design covers 71% of the court area

4. Launch balls in random and unpredictable trajectories

See figures and results from section 6.2 and 6.5

5. Evenness of ball distribution; ie. balls are not concentrated on specific sections of the court
Proposed design achieves a fairly even distribution; approx 1% probability difference
between max and min location on the distribution (see section 6.5)

From the analysis in this report, the proposed design is worth consideration as a low cost alternative to
high end tennis ball machines for amaetur players. Further and prototyped would be needed to determine
possible issues outside the scope of analysis in this report. For example, stress analysis to determine
geometry of links and real life testing to gauge user experience.

References

1. "Phenom Two." ​Lobster Tennis Ball Machines. Lob-ster Inc, n.d. Web. Dec. 2016.
<http://www.lobstersports.com/products/electric-machines/phenom/phenom2.htm>.

2. "Tennis Court Dimensions & Measurements." ​Www.courtdimensions.net. Explorations Media Group, LLC,
n.d. Web. Dec. 2016. <http://www.courtdimensions.net/tennis-court/index.php>.

3. "TENNIS CUBE." ​Sports Tutor. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.

4. "12V 5310 RPM "CIM" Brushed DC Motor." ​RobotShop. Www.robotshop.com, n.d. Web.
<http://www.robotshop.com/ca/en/12v-5310-rpm-cim-brushed-dc-motor.html>.

5. "London Metal Exchange: Aluminium Alloy." L ​ ondon Metal Exchange: Aluminium Alloy. The London
Metal Exchange, n.d. Web. Dec. 2016. <http://www.lme.com/metals/non-ferrous/aluminium-alloy/>.

6. "McMaster-Carr, Screws." ​McMaster-Carr. McMaster-Carr, n.d. Web. Dec. 2016.

<https://www.mcmaster.com/#screws/=15cr282>.