Phase 3 Report

Autonomous Mobile Robot

for Environmental
Monitoring

Mechanical Engineering Building, 5-2

University of Alberta
Edmonton AB T6G 2G8
December 5, 2016

Nicolas Olmedo, System developer and robotics R&D

COPPERSTONE TECHNOLOGIES LTD.
250 Toscana Gardens, NW
Calgary, AB, T3L 3C3
Re: Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Applications
Phase III Deliverables
Dear Mr. Olmedo
10SILE Engineering Group is pleased to present the final Phase III report, outlining the
completed design of the autonomous mobile robot project. The following are outlined in
the report:
Detailed design description
Engineering analysis for design feasibility
Design compliance matrix
Cost and manufacturing estimates
Part and assembly CAD drawings
Upon completion of this report, a total of 403 hours of engineering has been allocated to
the project, costing $39,570. This is compared to an initially estimated 391 hours at a
cost of $38,490. The final materials and manufacturing cost for the project is estimated
at $5,600.
It has been a pleasure working in cooperation on this design project and we appreciate
your guidance and contributions throughout the term. Please feel free to contact us with
any concerns or comments associated with the project. We look forward to your review
of our final design.

Sincerely,

Saad Taimoor,
Project Manager
10SILE Engineering Group
encl.
cc.

Dr. Mahmood Salimi, University of Alberta

Dr. Walied Moussa, University of Alberta
Dr. Mike Lipsett, University of Alberta
Dr. Zengtao Chen, University of Alberta
Dr. Carlos Lange, University of Alberta
Dr. Jason Olfert, University of Alberta
Dr. Pyiyush Kar, University of Alberta

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Executive Summary
10SILE Engineering was originally tasked with developing a mechanical assembly for
an autonomous mobile robot for environmental monitoring. More specifically, the major
features that needed to be achieved were modularity, affordability and capabilities for
autonomous driving and remote charging.
Based on design conceptualization and analysis done in Phases I and II, the final
concept with features such as a custom box-shaped chassis, inline motor and pulley
system, rocker wheel assembly and solar panel tilt system, are presented in the
following report.
The final concept can be assembled and disassembled into subassemblies, which
allows for transportability by commercial airline and to be assembled easily in the field.
The budget for the total cost of the robot has been updated to $6,000, including ordered
and manufactured parts. Actual total cost has been estimated at $5,600, much more
affordable than competitors currently on the market.
The goal of this robot in the field is to complete mission, defined by the client as 10 km
of driving and one hour of payload deployment, followed by a charging period. The team
has estimated that their design is capable of driving at 1.3 m/s, giving a mission time of
approximately three hours, following by a charging time of approximately three days.
Based on these specifications, a maximum of 32 missions could be completed over a
three month period.
Phase III of this project has involved the group members of 10SILE in activities such as
design analysis, report writing and technical presentations. These activities have
required a total of 208 engineering hours, which was initially estimated at 183 hours.
Including Phases I and II, the total engineering hours required for this project has
resulted in 403 engineering hours, corresponding to a total cost of $39,570. Originally
the entire project was budgeted at 391 engineering hours, for a total cost of $38,490.

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1
2 BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM DEFINITION ........................................................... 2
3 CONCEPT REFINEMENT ........................................................................................... 3
3.1 CHASSIS ............................................................................................................... 3
3.2 DRIVETRAIN ......................................................................................................... 5
3.3 SOLAR PANEL ASSEMBLY ................................................................................. 6
4 DESIGN OVERVIEW ................................................................................................... 7
4.1 DESCRIPTION OF FINAL DESIGN ...................................................................... 7
4.2 ASSEMBLY AND TRANSPORTABILITY CONSIDERATIONS ............................. 9
5 KEY ANALYSES .......................................................................................................... 9
5.1 POWER CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................ 9
5.2 MATERIAL STRENGTH CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................... 11
5.3 DRIVETRAIN ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 11
5.4 STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................... 12
5.4.1 STABILITY WHEN DRILLING ....................................................................... 12
5.4.2 STABILITY WITH OBSTACLES .................................................................... 13
5.5 MOBILITY CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................... 14
5.6 SHOCK ABSORBER CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................... 15
5.7 MASS CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................. 15
5.8 COST ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 15
6 DESIGN COMPLIANCE MATRIX .............................................................................. 16
7 PROJECT MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................ 22
8 FUTURE WORK......................................................................................................... 25
CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 25
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS ................................................................................................ 26
APPENDIX A SOLAR CHARGING CALCULATIONS ................................................ 27
APPENDIX B SOLAR PANEL ASSEMBLY TORQUE REQUIREMENTS.................. 28
APPENDIX C POWER CALCULATIONS AND COMPONENT SELECTION ............. 31
APPENDIX D CHASSIS STRENGTH CALCULATION .............................................. 35
APPENDIX E BOLT STRENGTH CALCULATION ..................................................... 35

ii

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

APPENDIX F ROCKER STRENGTH CALCULATION ............................................... 40
APPENDIX G SOLAR PANEL CONNECTOR STRENGTH CALCULATION ............. 43
APPENDIX H SHAFT SIZING CALCULATIONS ....................................................... 46
APPENDIX I STATIC STABILITY, DRILLING ............................................................ 52
APPENDIX J STATIC STABILITY, OBSTACLES ...................................................... 59
APPENDIX K DYNAMIC STABILITY ......................................................................... 65
APPENDIX L ROCKER RANGE OF MOTION ........................................................... 71
APPENDIX M MASS CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................. 74
APPENDIX N COST CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................. 77
APPENDIX O TRANSPORTABILITY DRAWINGS .................................................... 79
APPENDIX P DRAWING PACKAGE ......................................................................... 81

FIGURES
Figure 1: Overview of Final Design ................................................................................. 1
Figure 2: Exploded View of Chassis ................................................................................ 3
Figure 3: Chassis Overview ............................................................................................ 4
Figure 4: Original Rocker Design .................................................................................... 5
Figure 5: Revised Rocker Design .................................................................................... 5
Figure 6: Exploded View of Solar Panel Assembly ......................................................... 6
Figure 7: Final Design ..................................................................................................... 7
Figure 8: Robot Scale...................................................................................................... 7
Figure 9: Exploded View of Robot ................................................................................... 8
Figure 10: Estimated Battery Charge over July 2017 .................................................... 10
Figure 11: Free Body Diagram for Static Stability during Drilling on Incline .................. 12
Figure 12: Free Body Diagram for Static Stability Analysis with Obstructions ............... 13
Figure 13: Free Body Diagram for Dynamic Stability on Decline ................................... 14
Figure 14: Breakdown of Engineering Hours for Phase III ............................................ 23
Figure 15: Breakdown of Work Hours for Entire Project ................................................ 24
Figure 16: Breakdown of Engineering Cost for Entire Project ....................................... 24

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

TABLES
Table 1: Robot Parts List ................................................................................................. 8
Table 2: Key Features ..................................................................................................... 9
Table 3: Power Specifications ....................................................................................... 10
Table 4: Material Strength Safety Factors ..................................................................... 11
Table 5: Minimum Mass for Stability.............................................................................. 13
Table 6: Minimum Mass for Stability.............................................................................. 15
Table 7: Design Criteria Changed from Phase I ............................................................ 16
Table 8: Design Compliance Matrix............................................................................... 17
Table 9: Working Hours for Phase III ............................................................................ 22
Table 10: Engineering Costs for Entire Project ............................................................. 23

Word Count: 2479

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

1 INTRODUCTION
Copperstone Technologies, a mechanical and electrical engineering company in
Alberta, is exploring the possibilities of developing various unmanned vehicles to apply
remote sensing technologies to environmental monitoring. For this project, 10SILE
Engineering Group was tasked to develop a design for an unmanned ground vehicle for
environmental monitoring applications in various conditions that was small, modular,
affordable and capable of long-term autonomous missions without human intervention.
This vehicle is to be used as a prototype to test the feasibility of autonomous operation
for environmental monitoring robots.
During Phase I, 10SILE Engineering Group reviewed the current market and, together
with the client, developed a series of specifications for the robot. During Phase II, three
unique concepts were developed based on the client specifications and research done
by the team, these concepts were evaluated using various engineering analyses and
one was chosen to proceed to the detailed design phase.
This report details Phase III of the project, giving a description of the final design and its
refinements, as well as detailed engineering analysis, the design compliance matrix,
cost estimates and CAD drawings for manufacturing.
For context, an overview of the final design is shown below in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Overview of Final Design

1|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

2 BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM DEFINITION

Environmental monitoring is becoming an increasingly important aspect for many
industries as government regulations and public awareness of environmental issues
increase. However, most current processes are expensive or dangerous as many areas
that require monitoring are difficult to access and require sampling over long periods of
time. Therefore, developing autonomous robots capable of collecting the needed data
would be ideal for these scenarios as monitoring objectives could also be achieved at
an affordable price and without the risk of endangering human life.
The task outlined for the 10SILE group was to create a small, modular, affordable robot
that could be autonomously driven and remotely charged. This platform could perform
for extended periods of time without human intervention as well as be utilized for a
variety of different functions. While in the field, the robot is to complete missions,
defined by the client as 10 km of driving and one hour of payload deployment, to collect
geotechnical information or perform other tasks. Each mission would be followed by a
charging period. By studying the feasibility of this prototype, this project would be one of
the preliminary steps to implementing autonomous robots for environmental monitoring.
This project is one step in an overall goal of having a positive environmental impact. It is
designed to operate for long periods, not to be disposable, to increase project
sustainability.

2|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

3 CONCEPT REFINEMENT
During Phase III, the concept chosen in Phase II was refined and details of the design
were considered. The following section outlines this refinement process for three main
components of the design.

3.1 CHASSIS
During Phase II, a custom designed, box shaped chassis, constructed out of aluminum
was selected by the team on the basis of cost effectiveness and good sealing.
Aluminum was chosen for its relatively low mass and high strength. Figure 2 illustrates
the exploded view of the final design for the chassis.

Figure 2: Exploded View of Chassis

The main structural frame comprises of solid aluminum bars that are bolted together;
this internal frame provides the lateral, axial, longitudinal and torsional stability for the
chassis. Furthermore, the frame also serves as the mounting point for the motor
brackets, bearing brackets and electronic components. The bottom and side panels are
aluminum sheets that will be bolted to the main frame. A silicon based sealant will be
applied to all joints on the interior of the chassis and around all the bolt holes to ensure
the entire enclosure remains waterproof. An overview of the chassis is shown below in
Figure 3.
3|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Figure 3: Chassis Overview

The top panel will be removable for access via bolted connections on the top flange of
the chassis. A rubber seal will be installed around the lip of the top cover to keep the
chassis sealed from dust and water. 8020 T-slotted aluminum bars are bolted on the top
of the chassis and serve as mounting points for payloads.

4|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

3.2 DRIVETRAIN
The rocker design from Phase II was taken forward and simplified. Initially the design
involved four pulleys on four shafts with one long driving belt as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Original Rocker Design

This design was simplified to four pulleys on two shafts with two belts, each belt driving
one wheel as shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Revised Rocker Design

5|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

This design change allowed the design of the rocker itself to be simpler, reducing
manufacturing costs. The construction of the housing uses three pieces, two aluminum
sheets and one plastic enclosure. All pieces are simply waterjet cut out of plastic or
aluminum for cost effectiveness.

3.3 SOLAR PANEL ASSEMBLY

The solar panel configuration presented in Phase II consisted of two 20 W solar panels
in a tent shape. During Phase III the team decided they could significantly increase the
power output of their charging solution by employing dual axis solar tracking. It was
calculated that using one 30 W panel with solar tracking can produce 211.2 W-hr per
day during the summer months, as compared to the 143.5 W-hr per day offered by the
configuration presented in Phase II. See Appendix A for calculation. Since the robot
itself can rotate, dual axis solar tracking could be achieved by designing a system to tilt
the solar panel from horizontal to vertical, a full 90 range of motion.
The team achieved this 90 tilt by choosing a waterproof servomotor and gearbox with
sufficient torque to rotate the panel and designing custom 3D printed parts to connect
the gearbox to the panel. The system is pictured below in Figure 6. See Appendix B for
gearbox torque requirement calculations.

Figure 6: Exploded View of Solar Panel Assembly

6|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

4 DESIGN OVERVIEW
The following section details the final chosen design and its features.

4.1 DESCRIPTION OF FINAL DESIGN

10SILEs final solution to the project problem is a mobile robot platform, capable of
autonomous operation, with a dual axis sunlight tracking solar panel assembly, a rocker
drive system and a waterproof sealed chassis built using aluminum bars and plates.
The final design is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7: Final Design

The size of the robot compared to a human, for scale is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Robot Scale

7|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

An exploded view of the robot and corresponding parts list are shown in Figure 9 and
Table 1, respectively.

Figure 9: Exploded View of Robot

Table 1: Robot Parts List
Label Component
1
Chassis
2

Payload

Drivetrain

Rocker assembly

Shock absorber

Solar panel

Emergency stop button

Feature
Sealed to ensure IP65 rated
waterproofing
Collects data based on various types of
geotechnical testing of tailing ponds
Skid steering system with 0 turning
radius
The rocker assembly can rotate to
increase the mobility of the robot on
rugged terrain
Acts as the suspension system and also
prevent the rockers from over rotating
Dual-axis sunlight tracking to absorb the
maximum amount of solar power
To ensure user safety

A detailed cost analysis can be found in Section 5.8 and Appendix N. All engineering
analyses for feasibility are summarized in Section 5. Appendix P shows detailed
drawings for manufacturing and assembling the robot. The key features of the final
design are listed in Table 2.
8|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Table 2: Key Features

Feature
Waterproof

Description
In order to ensure the mobile robot is waterproof to protect electronic
components, the chassis is sealed using a rubber seal and IP67
waterproof bearings are used for the driveshafts
Rechargeable Dual axis tracking solar panel system enables the robot to be remotely
rechargeable so that it can operate for three months in the field without
human intervention. Charging time following a mission (10km driving
and one hour payload operation) is approximately 2.9 days and the
maximum travel range for each charge is 14.9 km.
Mobility
The rocker drive assembly restricted by shock absorbers gives the
mobile platform increased mobility on rugged terrain, allowing it to move
over 3 in obstacles and climb inclines of 35
Modular
Industry standard 8020 T-slot aluminum extrusions on the top of the
chassis are able to accommodate a variety of payloads
Transportable The weight of the robot is 39.9 kg and the overall dimensions are
34.4x25.3x30.7 in, it can be disassembled and transported by two
standard size suitcases
Affordable
The cost for parts and manufacturing is estimated at $5600, which is
under the budget restriction of $6000. Most components are off-the-shelf
while the other parts are manufactured using inexpensive techniques,
such as 3D printing and water jet cutting

4.2 ASSEMBLY AND TRANSPORTABILITY CONSIDERATIONS

The robot can be disassembled to fit in two standard size pieces of luggage, each
weighing less than 23 kg as originally specified. The wheels can be easily removed
using set screws, and the solar panel assembly can be easily removed from the bolted
connection to the top of the robot. The first module, the main body of the robot with the
batteries removed, would have a mass of 22.6 kg. The second module would include all
the other components such as the solar panel assembly, eight wheels, batteries and
payload. The second module has a mass of 16.8 kg. For a drawing illustrating this, refer
to Appendix O.

5 KEY ANALYSES
Many important engineering analyses were performed to prove the viability of the
presented design. These are outlined in the following sections.

5.1 POWER CONSIDERATIONS

To begin this analysis a target speed was set to 1 m/s. Based on this target speed and
a wheel size of 5.4 in, angular speed and torque requirements for the gearmotor were
specified. Based on these, and the use of a 24 V power source, a suitable motor was
chosen. Torque required to climb a 35 incline was also taken into account. Total power
requirements were then calculated using motor specifications and accounting for 120 W
9|Page

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

for electronics and 60 W for payload operation. Once the total power required to
complete a mission, defined as 10 km driving and one hour of payload deployment,
was determined, a battery with an appropriate rating was selected. See Appendix C for
calculations and component selection process.
Charging time was then calculated based on solar data extracted from a Government of
Canada database, using a 30 W panel with dual axis solar tracking. See Appendix A for
calculation.
Key specifications for the robot based on the above calculations are summarized in
Table 3.
Table 3: Power Specifications
Maximum
Travel Range

Time to
Drive 10km

Charging Time
Following Mission

Total Battery
Rating

14.9km

2.1 hours

2.9 days

40 Amp-hr

Maximum
Missions over 3
Months
32

Based on these specifications, a plot of estimated battery charge over a one month
period was developed, shown below in Figure 10. Each peak on this graph represents a
point where the battery charge has reached 100% and the robot is ready to embark on
another mission.

Battery Charge Over a One Month Period

100

Battery Charge (%)

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

June-01-17

June-08-17

June-15-17

June-22-17

Figure 10: Estimated Battery Charge over July 2017

10 | P a g e

June-29-17

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

5.2 MATERIAL STRENGTH CONSIDERATIONS

Material strength was not considered to be a very important piece of analysis for this
project, since the stresses induced by the applied loads are significantly below material
strength in most components. Rough analysis was done on the chassis, bearing
connection bolts, rockers, and plastic connecting pieces for the solar panel assembly to
ensure that the loads applied to these components are acceptable. Safety factors are
listed in Table 4.
The 3D printed connecting piece for the solar panel assembly was analyzed to
determine if its rod portion could withstand the torque that will be applied to move the
solar panel by the servomotor and gearbox. Initially the rod was specified with a
diameter of in, to match the gearbox output shaft. This was determined to fail under
the applied torque, so the rod diameter was increased to in and a coupler was added
to connect to the gearbox output shaft. See Appendix G for calculation.
Table 4: Material Strength Safety Factors
Safety Factor
Appendix

Chassis
5.6
D

Bolts
3.4
E

Rocker
14.5
F

Solar Panel Connector (Rod)

2.2
G

5.3 DRIVETRAIN ANALYSIS

The shafts on the drivetrain were analyzed to ensure that they would be able to
withstand operation. The factor of safety given the worst-case scenario was calculated,
as shown in Appendix H. The worst-case scenario was defined as the entire weight of
the robot being supported by one shaft, as well as the full torque of the motor acting on
one point. Stress concentration factor due to the shaft step was also considered. The
factor of safety is listed in was found to be 2.0. Therefore, the shaft can operate under
the worst-case scenario indefinitely without fatiguing or failing.

11 | P a g e

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

5.4 STABILITY CONSIDERATIONS

Good stability for the robot is required to ensure proper function and prevent
unnecessary damage. Two specific cases were considered, shown below.

5.4.1 STABILITY WHEN DRILLING

During drilling activities, the robot will be subjected to reaction forces and torques
caused by the payload. This may cause the robot to tip or the wheels to slip, which may
cause damage to the robot. As specified in the design matrix, a reaction force of 100 N
and a reaction torque of 2 Nm are assumed to be caused by the drill. In addition, the
robot may also encounter inclines and declines of up to 35. A sample free body
diagram used for this analysis is shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Free Body Diagram for Static Stability during Drilling on Incline

The robot was evaluated under four different conditions, and the minimum mass to
prevent tipping or slipping during each scenario was calculated. Table 5 summarizes
the minimum mass for each case. For detailed calculations, see Appendix I.

12 | P a g e

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Table 5: Minimum Mass for Stability

Case 1
Front axle will
Description lift off flat
ground

Case 2
Front axle will lift
off ground on
35 incline

Case 3
Front axle will lift
off ground on 35
decline

Case 4
Torque of the drill will
cause slipping

Minimum
Mass

41.9 kg

35.2 kg

0.214 kg

31.3 kg

Comparing these values to the actual mass of the robot (39.9 kg), the robot will satisfy
all these cases except Case 2. However, this case can be neglected, as drilling at a 35
incline will be extremely unlikely to be encountered. If this becomes a more relevant
situation, the mass distribution or amount of mass can be reevaluated. Therefore, the
robot will have sufficient stability during drilling activities.

5.4.2 STABILITY WITH OBSTACLES

Stability calculations for the robot considering a rugged incline were updated based on
the final design. The incline angle was defined as 35 with a height/depth for the
obstructions of 3 in. An example of the free body diagram used to solve the question
was shown below in Figure 12.

Figure 12: Free Body Diagram for Static Stability Analysis with Obstructions

13 | P a g e

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Detailed analyses were performed for two cases, considered to be the scenarios most
likely to lead to failure, or tipping. The two cases considered were:
1.

Moving uphill with an obstruction under both front wheels

2.

Moving downhill with a pit under both front wheels

After performing the analysis, it was determined that the minimum weight to prevent
tipping was 4.3 kg. Since the minimum mass to prevent tipping is significantly less than
the expected mass for the robot (39.9 kg), it is rational to assume that tipping while
driving on a rugged incline should not pose a problem for the final design. See Appendix
J for detailed calculations.

5.5 MOBILITY CONSIDERATIONS

Dynamic stability, or mobility, of the robot on an incline was also considered during the
final design. The incline angle was defined as 35, as per design specifications and
DAlemberts principle was applied for this analysis. An example of the free body
diagram used to solve the question was shown below in Figure 13.

Figure 13: Free Body Diagram for Dynamic Stability on Decline

Note that the -ma force shown is an inertial force, defined as per the specified
analysis.
Similar to the static analysis, two cases were considered to be the scenarios most likely
to lead to failure, or tipping. Maximum acceleration for each case is summarized below
in Table 6.
14 | P a g e

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Table 6: Minimum Mass for Stability

Description
Maximum Acceleration (m/s^2)

Case 1
Case 2
Moving uphill with sudden Moving downhill with sudden
acceleration
deceleration
9.1
-6.4

The acceleration shown above is significantly larger than the expected acceleration for
the robot, as estimated speed of the robot is 1.3 m/s. This level of acceleration would
mean the robot would completely stop or reach top speed in a fraction of a second,
unrealistic for the motors specified. It is therefore rational to assume that tipping while
driving on an incline with sudden stop or start should not pose a problem for the final
design. See Appendix K for detailed calculations.

5.6 SHOCK ABSORBER CONSIDERATIONS

Although a rocker design allows for increased mobility to the robot, the additional
degree of freedom must be restricted to prevent over rotation. Therefore, the team
decided to implement a shock absorbing component. Robotic shocks will be mounted in
such a way that the shock will be in the middle of its maximum and minimum length
range when the rocker is in its equilibrium position. Maximum arc length of the shock
can be used to determine the maximum rotation angle of the rocker. The maximum
amount of rotation that the rocker can move restricted by the shock is 14.1. See
Appendix L for calculation.

5.7 MASS CONSIDERATIONS

The total mass of the robot is estimated at 39.9 kg. For transportation by commercial
airline, it can be divided into two groups of modules, each with a mass of less than 23
kg, as shown in Appendix O. For a full breakdown of the total mass of the robot, see
Appendix M.

5.8 COST ANALYSIS

The total cost of the robot, including parts and manufacturing is estimated at $5,600,
under a revised budget of $6,000. Off-the-shelf components were used for the robot as
often as possible, minimizing cost. Note that assembly costs are not considered as it is
assumed that the client will be assembling the robot. See Appendix N for a full cost
breakdown.

15 | P a g e

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

6 DESIGN COMPLIANCE MATRIX

The following section outlines how the final design meets all criteria defined during
Phase I. The most important criteria include transportability, stability and budget. All
specifications have been met, as outlined below in Table 8.
Some specifications put forward in Phase I have been altered in order to make the
design objectives feasible. These are shown with client approval in Table 7.
Table 7: Design Criteria Changed from Phase I
Item Number
1.1.2

8.1

16 | P a g e

Description
This criterion was not considered for the final design.
The robot was larger than initially planned in order to
fit all necessary components. The suitcase sizing
criterion was decided to be of greater important.
Budget was revised from $5,000 to $6,000 to
account for manufacturing costs larger than initially
considered.

Client Approval

Description

Airline Size
Restriction

Backpack Size
Restriction

Flat Top Area

Modular
Assembly

Weight
Requirements

Appearance
Requirements

1.1.1

1.1.2

1.1.3

1.2

1.3

1.4

17 | P a g e

2.1

Type of
Equipment

2. Payload Specifications

Overall Dimensions

1.1

1. Physical Requirements

Item
#

Accommodates several self-contained

modular payloads, such as material strength
testers, geotechnical instruments.

Color not yellow or red.

Weight of each group of modules to be

contained in one suitcase/backpack must not
exceed 23kg.

Assemble by two people in 30 minutes using a

maximum of two tools.

Suggested approximate flat top area of a 16in

laptop.

Disassembled modules must fit in a typical

75L backpack with dimensions of
65x35.5x26cm.

Limited by luggage size restriction by airlines.

Modules must fit in two suitcases with a linear
dimension (sum of length, width and height) of
158cm.

Specification

Client

Client

Client/Air
Canada

Client

Client

Client

Client/Air
Canada

Design
Authority

Importance

Table 8: Design Compliance Matrix

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

The chassis is fitted with industry standard 8020

aluminum channels all along the top edge of the
body. These can serve as mounting points for
various payloads.

Current Design Involves no Yellow or Red aside

from Emergency Stop Button.

Masses of modules are 22.6kg and 16.8kg. Refer

to Section 4.2/5.7

This specification has been met, the robot is

mainly bolted together, using the same bolts
wherever possible. All chassis bolts are #8-32.
Refer to Section 4.2

The flat top area of the robot is larger than a 16in

laptop, ~12inx24in.

Refer to Table 5

Refer to Section 4.2. The robot can be

disassembled into two groups of modules, each
fitting into a suitcase.

Quantitative/Qualitative Achievement

Weight

Behavior of Payload

Up force

Torque

2.3

2.4

2.4.1

2.4.2

Withstands torque of 2Nm.

Withstands up force of 100N.

Carries 5kg payload.

Encompasses payload with 20 height, 4 x 4

base.

Client

Skid steering system with 0 turning radius to

be used.

Maximum Turning
Radius

Maximum
Inclination

Suspension
System

3.3

3.4

3.5

18 | P a g e

Rechargeable

4.1.1

Power source to be able to recharge remotely.

Power Source Requirements

Not required, could be added. Dependent on

kinematic compliance.

Able to climb incline of 35.

4.1

4. Power Specifications

Client

Uses track system for driving.

Track

3.2.2

Client

Client

Client

Client

Wheel

3.2.1

Uses wheel system for driving.

Drive Type

3.2

Client

Travel Range

Travel Range of 10km per single batter charge

Client

Client

Client

Client

3.1

3. Movement and Driving Specifications

Dimensions

2.2

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Robot is remotely rechargeable using solar power.

Refer to Section 5.1

Not considered.

Robot is stable on 35 incline and the gearmotor

chosen has sufficient torque to climb. See sections
5.1 and 5.4/5.

Each side of the robot is driven independently,

enabling skid steering.

Tracks can be added on existing wheels, this may

be included in future work if the robot is used in
environments that require tracks.

See final design summary in Section 4.

Maximum travel range is 14.9 km per charge.

Refer to Section 5.1

Robot is stable under specified torque. Refer to

Section 5.4.1

Robot is stable under specified up force. Refer to

Section 5.4.1

5kg payload built into center of mass calculation

used for determining stability. See Section 5.4/5.5

Model uses payload with this size.

Airline
Compliance

Payload
Requirements

Electronics
Requirements

4.1.3

4.2

4.3

Minimum Height
Clearance

Wind Conditions

Rain Conditions

Snow Conditions

Temperature
Conditions

Humidity
Conditions

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

19 | P a g e

Environmental
Terrain

5.1

5. Operating Conditions

Portable

4.1.2

Withstands 100% humidity (raining).

Functions in temperature range of -40 to 50C.

Withstands snowy weather. Mainly considered

for traction calculations.

Water and dust proof, with an IP65 rating.

Stable in typical wind conditions for Alberta.

Maneuvers over obstacles up to 3in in height.

Traverse rugged, unpaved field with small

rocks. Terrain has bearing capacity of 50kPa.

Provide 120W for electronics. Does not

include payload or drive train.

Provide 60W for payload.

Battery able to be transported via commercial

airline.

Power source to be able to travel with the

robot.

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Chassis is waterproof, refer to Section 3.1

All components can function properly under

specified temperature range

Not considered.

Chassis is waterproof to protect electronics and

motors. Refer to Section 3.1.

Wind stability was considered in Phase II for the

tent solar panel configuration. It is not considered
to be important for this design as the solar panel
will be flat during operation.

Refer to Section 5.4.2

Robot is stable over rough terrain. Refer to Section

5.4.2

Taken into account for power calculations. Refer to

Section 5.1

Taken into account for power calculations. Refer to

Section 5.1

Battery is Nickel Metal Hydride and is able to be

transported by commercial airline (not lithium ion)

Solar panel assembly is affixed to robot body and

able to travel with the robot. Refer to Section 5.1

Wildlife/
Environment

6.3

Repair
Requirements

Full Lifetime of
Robot

7.2

7.3

Production
Volume

8.2

20 | P a g e

Prototyping
Budget Estimate

8.1

8. Cost and Manufacturing

Maintenance
Requirements

7.1

7. Maintenance

Ergonomics

6.2

1-10

Less than $6000 for one prototype. Proposal

originally outlined $10000 budget.

All analysis to be done for infinite cycles.

After three-month mission, repairs costing a

maximum of $500 are acceptable.

Must be able to operate with no human

intervention in the field for three months.

Should be highly visible. To consider some

kind of light/sound deterrent for wildlife.

Must be able to be moved by one person.

Safety
Must have an emergency stop button on the
Considerations for exterior of the robot.
Users

6.1

6. Operational Safety

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Client

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

No consideration has been given to mass

manufacturing

Refer to Section 5.8

Shaft analysis was done for infinite cycles, refer to

Section 5.3

Repair costs have not been quantified at this

stage, however the team does not foresee the
need for any major repairs

Shaft analysis done for infinite cycles, refer to

Section 5.3. All other stresses low, refer to Section
5.2.

Not considered at this stage of the project

Robot is quite heavy to be moved by one person,

will be moved by two people if necessary

Button sits on front of robot, see design overview in

Section 4.

Manufactured
Parts

Disposability and
Recyclability

8.3.2

8.4

21 | P a g e

Ordered Parts

8.3.1

Priority given to components with ROHS

compliance.

Priority given to manufacturing processes

available at University of Alberta machine
shop, such as water jet cutting.

Off-the-shelf components to be used as often

as possible.

8.3 Part Production Considerations

Final Client Approval:

Client

Client

Client

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Most parts ROHS compliant

3D printing and water jet cutting to be used

Motors, pulleys, belts, wheels, shafts, etc. to be

purchased off-the-shelf

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

7 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Phase III was initially estimated to take 183 hours of Junior Engineering (Note: this
estimate was revised from 163 during Phase II). The total time to complete Phase III
was 208 hours. Table 9 breaks down the total working hours for Phase III.
Table 9: Working Hours for Phase III
Design Optimization
Detailed Engineering Analysis
Design Compliance Analysis
Cost Analysis
Design Conference
Drawing Package
Final Report
Total

Low Estimate
24
27
15
7
17
35
48
173

High Estimate
26
29
17
8
20
40
53
193

Actual Time
29
39
14
5
25
45
51
208

The additional work hours compared to the estimate came predominantly from:
-

Additional work in engineering calculations to ensure stability of the robot and

strength of materials would meet design criteria in worst case scenarios
(additional 10 hours from high estimate)
Preparations for the presentation during the Design Conference held on
November 25, 2016 (additional 5 hours from high estimate)
Completion of the drawing package (additional 5 hours from high estimate)
Design Optimization (additional 3 hours from high estimate)

Figure 14 provides details on the engineering hours for various aspects of Phase III and
where the discrepancies between expected and actual work hours lie.

22 | P a g e

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Final Report
Drawing Package
Design Conference
Cost Analysis
Actual Time

Design Compliance Analysis

High Estimate
Low Estimate

Detailed Engineering Analysis

Design Optimization
0

10

20

30

Work Hours

40

50

60

Figure 14: Breakdown of Engineering Hours for Phase III

Table 10 and Figures 15 and 16 break down the current engineering costs for the entire
project. Junior Engineering is priced at $90/hr. while Senior Engineering costs $150/hr.
The total number of Junior Engineering hours allocated to the project is 403.
Table 10: Engineering Costs for Entire Project
Project
Phase
Phase 1

Junior Engineer Hours

(Initial Estimate)
101

Junior Engineer
Hours (Actual)
50

Senior Engineer Hours

(Actual/Estimated)
2

Phase 2

127

145

10

$14,550

Phase 3

163 (Initial)
183 (Updated)
391

208

10

$20,220

403

22

$39,570

Total:

23 | P a g e

Total Cost
(Actual)
$4,800

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

Presentation

Engineer Hours
Updated Estimate
Initial Estimate

Poster

Phase 3

Phase 2

Phase 1

50

100

150

200

250

Work Hours

Figure 15: Breakdown of Work Hours for Entire Project

Phase 3

Phase 2
Engineering Cost
Initial Estimate
Phase 1

$-

$4,000.00

$8,000.00

$12,000.00

$16,000.00

Engineering Cost ($)

Figure 16: Breakdown of Engineering Cost for Entire Project

24 | P a g e

$20,000.00

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

8 FUTURE WORK
Although 10SILE has been able to produce a prototype design that satisfies the criteria
outlined by the client, there are still areas of development before this prototype can
become a reality. Two particular areas that require further progress are the electrical
components of the design and the programming. As the scope of this project was to
design the mechanical platform, the electrical and computer systems must be integrated
for the proper function of the robot. The client has affirmed that these systems will be
further developed in the near future.
Another future consideration for this project is the scaling of the robot for larger and a
wider variety of payloads. The scope of this project specified a 5 kg payload, but if
larger payloads are required, further development in the robots design is required.

CONCLUSION
In this report, 10SILE Engineering Group has presented their solution to the challenge
of creating a robot platform to be used for environmental monitoring. Key specifications
included the robot being small, modular, affordable and capable of long-term
autonomous operation without human intervention. Detailed analysis has been
completed and confirms that the final design is feasible and safe. The design has met
all specifications established by the client and the 10SILE team, including budget.
10SILE recommends moving forward to the prototype phase to continue proving the
feasibility of using autonomous mobile robots for environmental monitoring.

25 | P a g e

Autonomous Mobile Robot for Environmental Monitoring Phase III

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
10SILE would like to thank the client, Nicolas Olmedo of Copperstone Technologies, for
providing a unique proposal that requires fundamental engineering design in the
developing field of robotics. The 10SILE group would also like to thank our advisor, Dr.
Mahmood Salimi. Without his mentorship and wisdom, this projects success would not
be possible. Finally, the 10SILE group would like to thank course coordinator Dr.
Michael Lipsett for facilitating this collaboration with industry partners and providing this
valuable and practical experience.

26 | P a g e