|
Eastman Kodak Focuses on Animated
Camera Design
Peter Newman, a Senior Engineer at Eastman
Kodak, uses Working Model to show other product engineers how complex
mechanisms operate, and to design and analyze the many small levers, switches
and components that go into each camera. Working Models automatic
contact handling, shown in the high-speed switch below, saves Eastman
Kodak countless hours during the design and analysis phase.
Imagine trying to explain
to a small group the inner workings of a new complex camera mechanism
if they've never seen it before. Without the aid of a physical object
or motion picture, how would you tell them how it works? Even with the
use of slides and drawings, it has proven to be difficult and time-consuming
for viewers to comprehend.
The above scenario is all
too familiar for Peter Newman, Senior Development Engineer for Eastman
Kodak Company. As an expert on camera mechanisms, Newman collaborates
on the mechanics of camera designs with fellow engineers and designers.
The design engineers have expertise in many different areas and Newman
often experienced difficulty verbally describing the specific workings
of a design. He found that complex camera designs are better explained
through the use of animation.
Fortunately for Newman, that
difficulty is in the past. He solved his problem by finding a software
program that lets him animate his mechanisms, resulting in a more realistic
and interesting presentation to his engineering associates. He purchased
Working Model, a desktop-based dynamics/kinematics software program from
Design Simulation Technologies. Automatic Contact Handling.
Intermittent contact is one aspect of camera mechanisms that Newman analyzes.
To assist in his analysis, Newman initially utilized a workstation-based
kinematics analysis software package to create rigid bodies known as links
and connected them with joints. Since the links were joined together,
it was difficult to get the workstation program to simulate the links
coming apart. Yet, in the real world of camera design, that is just what
happens as small parts (like latches and switches) open and close when
the camera operates. From Newman's perspective, this intermittent contact
needs to be easily simulated and is of key importance in visualizing the
mechanism with the design engineers.
The workstation kinematics
software was difficult to use in simulating intermittent contact. It required
significant expertise, so Newman asked Kodak's kinematics expert to provide
the animations he needed to communicate with other engineers. Because
the expert's involvement was time consuming, Newman often resorted to
using slides and drawings to present the mechanism with intermittent contact.
"It would take long discussions to get my ideas across using static
images," said Newman.
Desktop Dynamics.
It was at this frustrating
point that Newman knew he needed a software package for a desktop system
that could more easily animate mechanisms. By animating the mechanisms,
he hoped to show the interaction of several parts and their effects on
each other. This would help his colleagues understand the dynamics of
a mechanism and the forces acting on the parts. "I looked for several
years to find a product that does what Working Model does for me,"
said Newman. "So, you can imagine how astounded I was to see animation,
plus intermittent contact and friction modeling performed so quickly and
easily by Working Model. Other programs may have the capability, but they
have to be programmed to perform what Working Model does automatically."
Working Model does not require
special programming to simulate intermittent contact or friction. Using
the Collide command, Newman sees how rigid bodies will collide and come
apart and can evaluate the consequences. Friction is present in all rigid
body contact and its coefficient can be easily changed.
In his collaborations with
other design engineers, Newman was impressed with how many of his associates
embraced the use of Working Model into their designs once they saw how
easy it was to use.
Shutter Mechanism.
In one instance, Newman simulated
a shutter mechanism for a new camera model. The initial design was created
using the Unigraphics CAD program on a Hewlett Packard workstation. Building
a model of the mechanism in Working Model took about two hours.
The first hour was spent
in the CAD system generating 2D geometry from the 3D solid model suitable
for use in Working Model. He then imported the geometry via DXF translators
into Working Model on a Macintosh IIfx.
The second hour involved
building the mechanism in Working Model. The lines that represent one
part were all selected to convert to a single rigid body. After all the
rigid bodies were created, the joints and other elements such as springs
and actuators were created. Immediate feedback that a mechanism had been
built correctly was available, even for a partial mechanism, with a single
click of the Run button. Default values are provided for all properties.
Defining actual values was easy using the Properties window that changes
as different objects are selected with the mouse. When the complete mechanism
was built, graphs and digital readouts needed to measure results in the
simulation were created and the force vectors that Newman wanted to visualize
were defined.
The simulation was then run.
Simple models will finish in several minutes but complex models can take
over an hour to compute. Fortunately, the results are saved so they can
be quickly replayed as a movie, over and over again. By playing the animation,
Newman was able to explain to anyone how tile mechanism worked in just
a few minutes. Without the animation, it would have taken much longer.
Working Model had created
a graphic simulation to let Newman see the physical consequences of intermittent
contact, motion, and force vectors, indicating how much force was being
applied and in which direction. He was able to simulate the shutter speed
that a particular shutter design would deliver. By changing the parameters
in the model such as spring rates and masses, he was able to evaluate
the effects of those changes and select a final design that met the design
requirements. Each subsequent design iteration took only thirty minutes.
Once perfected, the final design was used to build a working prototype.
Excellent agreement was obtained between the results from Working Model
and the prototype results.
Virtual vs. Physical Prototypes.
An alternative to analyzing
designs in Working Model was to conduct tests on physical prototypes to
make sure that the designs would meet requirements. Prototyping this way
was both time-consuming and costly, since it took nearly two days to create
physical models. Building a virtual prototype with Working Model took
Newman only two hours.
When a physical prototype
is built without being tested by software like Working Model, it may come
back from the model shop inoperative. It can take several days to understand
why it is inoperative. Afterwards, the prototype requires rebuilding,
possibly going through several iterations that are, again, costly and
time-consuming. Working Model gives insight into why initial designs of
a model do not work, since all the forces in the mechanism can be visualized
and measured. This allowed Newman to make his first iterations quickly,
arriving at a final design about ten times faster than using prototypes
alone.
According to Newman, using
Working Model has provided the product design team with better feedback
than ever before. They understand new mechanism dynamics much faster now,
and since they are perfecting their designs more quickly, they are more
productive. "I'm thrilled to finally have a product like Working
Model," says Newman. "Our design team creates better designs
faster because they are collaborating more successfully, my job is easier
and Kodak is saving money." |