SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING DISCIPLINE

OF

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN

(ENME1ED) 2023

BUHLEBEMVELO
GUMEDE
223055483

1
ABSTRACT

This document presents the design and development of a mechanism to test the resistance to wear of
two materials. It begins with an exploration of the project's background and the identification of a
pressing need in materials engineering. The problem statement emphasizes the importance of
developing a mechanism capable of conducting precise wear resistance tests. The aim and objectives
provide a clear sense of direction for the project, emphasizing the pursuit of reliable and reproducible
results.

The design specifications section presents both customer requirements and engineering specifications,
emphasizing the criticality of meeting specific material, performance, and operational criteria. The
final design section details the outcome of rigorous design processes, describing the mechanism's
configuration, material selection rationale, and the inclusion of commercial off-the-shelf components.
It also provides essential supplier details and insights into the manufacturing processes employed for
the fabrication of individual parts.

The discussion delves into the performance of the designed mechanism, highlighting its efficacy in
wear resistance testing. It addresses conflicting design considerations, elucidates limitations of
engineering specifications, and offers insights gleaned from the Gantt chart. The conclusion section
summarizes key findings and reiterates the significance of the developed mechanism in advancing
material.

2
 DECLARATION: PLAGIARISM & COLLUSION

Identification and Prevention of Plagiarism - Relevant Extracts from UKZN Plagiarism Policy

[Link] Where a published work contains material previously published, even if written by the same
author (which may be referred to as “self-plagiarism”), such previous publication must be properly
acknowledged.

I, the undersigned student declares that:

1. The design work presented in this report, except where otherwise indicated, is my original
work.

2. This report does not contain other persons’ data, pictures, graphs or other information, unless
specifically acknowledged as being sourced from other persons.

3. This report does not contain other persons' writing, unless specifically acknowledged as being
sourced from other literature. Where other written sources have been quoted, then:

i. Their words have been re-written, but the general information attributed to them has been
referenced.

ii. Where their exact words have been used, then their writing has been placed in italics and
inside quotation marks and referenced.

4. This report does not contain text, graphics or tables copied and pasted from the Internet,
unless specifically acknowledged, and the source being detailed in the report and in the References
sections.

5. No CAD drawings and work generated by other students have been dishonestly represented as
being done by myself. (Collusion)

Name: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE

Student No: 223055483

3
Contents

INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………….,5
DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS.................................................................................................................. 5
FINAL DESIGN .................................................................................................................................... 6
DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………………………… 9
CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………………………9
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 10
APPENDIX A ....................................................................................................................................... 11
APPENDIX B ....................................................................................................................................... 12
APPENDIX C

4
INTRODUCTION

PROJECT BACKROUND
In any method of measuring friction, two surfaces are in contact, a force is applied, and the resistance
to motion is measured. Static friction is a special case [1]. Unless all factors can be controlled, it is
best to quote friction at an extremely low velocity, with an indication as to whether friction can be
expected to rise or fall as velocity increases [2]. The old laws of friction were established by
Amontons and Coulomb at about the time Lavoisier was disproving the plogiston theory, but
schoolboys have established that they do not hold for many things they have been asked to test,
especially rubber [3]. Any test program must specify single point test conditions very closely or take
measurements over a suitable range of conditions. When testing polymers at high velocities, caution is
needed because poor heat dissipation leads to marked temperature changes at the surface [4]. It is
advisable to work at low velocities and make predictions of friction values at high velocities using a
relationship between velocity and temperature [5].

IDENTIFICATION OF THE NEED

The project is necessary because it's crucial to assess how materials endure and perform when
exposed to wear and tear. Knowing how various materials degrade in specific circumstances is
essential for choosing the right material for a specific purpose.

PROBLEM STSTEMENT
The task at hand involves creating a mechanism capable of accurately simulating wear processes for
two materials, ensuring consistent and replicable results while accommodating these two different
materials for comparative testing.

AIM

The main aim of this project is to utilize mechanical engineering design techniques to create a wear
resistance testing mechanism. This mechanism will be able to evaluate the performance of two
distinct materials under controlled testing condition.
OBJECTIVES
1. To design a testing mechanism that accurately replicates the resistance to wear of two
materials.
2. Select suitable materials and components for the testing mechanism.
3. Create an interface that is easy for users to operate and adjust test parameters.
4. Assess the frictional characteristics of materials.
5. To ensure the safety and longevity of the testing mechanism
6. Perform relevant calculations to validate design choices.

DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS

DESIGN/COSTUMER REQUIREMENTS AND ENGINEERING SPECIFICATIONS

5
The following table shows the design/customer requirements, engineering specifications, and target.

values for the mechanism required to be design that test the resistance to wear of two materials.

Design/Costumer Engineering Specifications Target Value

Requirements
cost effective cost of the entire mechanism < 𝑅15000
lightweight mass off the assembly < 300𝑘𝑔
It must be user friendly Ease of operation Intuitive interface
Achieve a long lifespan Expected life span > 5 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
hand operated input force 50𝑁 ≥ 𝐹 ≤ 80𝑁
no friction between links bearings usage bearings must be integrated
as specified
the base must not be too length of the base ≤ 850𝑚𝑚
long
Must be safe to use Safety factor 6
Table 1: Generation of Engineering Specifications

ENGINEERING SPECIFICATION ANALYSIS

It would be very easy to achieve the cost of the entire mechanisms by selecting the
cost-effective materials and manufacturing process. Minimizing the mass of the
mechanism can be very challenging as the design may require innovative engineering
and materials. To ensure ease of operation. can be easily achieved because of
standardized procedures and because of the widespread of such equipment in many
industries. Managing the input force can be difficult as it requires precise engineering
and robust components. The usage of bearing is straightforward you just have to choose
the right fit. Achieving the length of the base is also easy it just a matter of correct
measurements.

FINAL DESIGN

FINAL DESIGN ANALYSIS

The main purpose of this friction testing mechanism system is to evaluate or to test the resistance to
wear of two materials. To assure accurate findings, the design prioritizes use and ease of manufacture.
This design has a base made of alloy steel that acts as the enclosure where the two materials come into
contact. The mechanism can function as material b will slide through material a because of Link 1,
which is likewise made of alloy, exerts a controlled force on Link 2 that is of aluminium alloy. Weight
loss, surface roughness, and visual inspection are just a few of the method used to assess the wear
characteristics of the two materials. These components can be produced using standard manufacturing
methods, except for bearings as they are commercially available, in terms of their manufacturability.

MATERIAL SELECTION

6
Components Type of material

Base Alloy steel

Material A polyethylene cross-linked
Material B AISI Type 316L Stainless steel
Link 1 Alloy steel
Link 2 6061-T6
Link 3 6061-T6
Pins Aluminium Bronze
Table 2: Materials of Components

The specific requirements of this mechanism specifically influence the choice of these
materials.
Alloy steel:
Alloy steels are formulated to provide exceptional strength and hardness, which makes them
well-suited for withstanding heavy loads and high input forces which is required by this
mechanism. This property is advantageous for the base and link 1of this mechanism. Steel is
easier to machine and weld some alloy steels are readily available, allowing to produce
complex and custom components tailored to specific input force requirements with precision
[6]
Aluminium alloy (6061-T6):
6061-T6 aluminum this alloy is suitable for various mechanical components and has good
strength. Due to its excellent machinability, it is simple to produce exact pieces. It offers
reasonable resistance to corrosion, especially when the surface is well treated. It is an
excellent option for components where weight is an issue because it is relatively lightweight
[7].
Aluminium bronze:
Aluminium bronze has been selected due to its great strength and is frequently used in heavy-
duty applications. It has strong anti-corrosion properties, which is crucial for components that
are exposed to the elements. is good for applications involving sliding or rotating motion,
such as pins joining massive components, and it can bear high loads and is less likely to
distort. It also has great wear resistance [8].
Polyethylene cross-linked:
Polyethylene, also known as PEX, can have a long service life if properly installed and
maintained. PEX is resistant to corrosion and has great flexibility that can be bent and curved
without the need for installation. It is cost effectiveness, which is one of the technical
characteristics of this mechanism, which also leads to its selection [9].
AISI Type316L stainless steel:

7
Stainless steel AISI Type316L is a strong metal that is readily available from metal suppliers
and stainless steel, so it can be found or not hard to find. It has an austenitic microstructure
that contributes to its mechanical properties, including strength and durability, and can be
formed into various shapes of components, making it suitable for use in this mechanism [10].
Commercial Off-The-Shelf Components and Supplier Detail

COTS QUANTITY SUPPLIERS STOCK COST

COMPONENTS DETAILS NUMBER
Radia ball 2 RS Service and 442-0105 R 425,32
bearing Solution
Contact number
011 691 9300
Tapered roller 8 RS Service and 134-7464 R 1927,28
bearing Solution
Contact number
011 691 9300

A bearing can only perform to it full capacity when it is correctly fitted on the shaft. It is therefore to
provide necessary to provide a bearing with correct fit. So, the selected fit for the above bearing is the
interference bearing as there is rotating load in the friction mechanism that is being designed.

Manufacturing Processes for Part

Base -Drawing number 1 in Appendix C

1. Cut the material into a rectangular prism using hacksaw tool.

Part 1-Drawing number 2 in Appendix c

1. Remove the central material through milling operations.

2. Create the fillets using a corner rounding end mill.

3. Generate the holes through drilling.

Part 2-Drawing number 3 in Appendix C

[Link] the material into a rectangular prism using hacksaw tool.

Part 3-Drawing number 4 in Appendix C

1. Generate the holes using a drill press.

Sub-assemble-Drawing number 6 in Appendix c.

1. Weld together the base, part 1, part 2 and part 3

Link 1 - Drawing number 7 in Appendix C

1. Cut the material into a cylindrical shape.

2. Produce the fillets using a corner round end mill

3. Generate the holes through drilling.

8
Link 2- Drawing number 8 in Appendix C

1. Generate the holes through drilling.

Material A- Drawing number 9 in Appendix C

1. Cut material into a flat rectangle prism.

Material B -Drawing number 10 in Appendix C

[Link] a rectangular flat material
2 Perform rolling process to produce the curved shape.

Pins – Drawing number 11 in Appendix C

1. Create the cylindrical shape through rolling to a specify diameter.

Link 3- Drawing number 12 in Appendix C

1. Produce the fillets using a corner rounding end mill.

2. Generate the holes through drilling.

DISCUSSION

Performance of the Mechanism

Looking at the calculations that were done in appendix c they clearly show that the mechanism
performs well and can be trusted to use. To ensure the suitability of the selected diameter for Link 1, a
tensile calculation was performed. Using the material properties, applied forces, confirm that the
chosen diameter can withstand the tensile loads without deformation. When Link 1 and 2 are
perpendicular, the maximum input torque required at the point where they are connected was
calculated in calculation number 2. This ensures that Link 2 can handle the highest torque load within
the system. In calculation number 4 the contact surfaces of Material A and B were assessed to confirm
that the difference in areas does not exceed 15%. This ensures that the materials surfaces of A and B
are suitable for their intended purpose. Also, a shear calculation was performed to verify that the
selected diameter for the pin connecting Link 1 and Link 2 can withstand the maximum shear forces
without failure. For the base plate in calculation number 7 the force required to tear the narrowest
section was calculated, this calculation ensures that the base can withstand expected loads without
failure.

Conflicting Design considerations

All the engineering specification for this mechanism were met. The conflict design that were
encountered was most to design the base and material b of this mechanism as the base and material b
have complex shapes which cannot be easily designed.

Limitations of Engineering Specifications

The entire cost of this mechanism cannot be less than R 15000 with compromising the quality of the
material used in this mechanism. Also, the life span cannot be more than 5 year without
compromising the cost of the entire mechanism the cost have to be compromised to be more so that
the mechanism can be more life span.

Gantt Chart Insights

9
The project followed the allocated time closely, with minor deviations due to unexpected design
challenges. Early in the project, we identified design challenges these challenges raised concerns
about the mechanism's accuracy and reliability. These design issues led to delays in the project
timeline. The initial plan to complete the mechanism's design in four weeks was not achievable due to
the need for extensive redesign.

CONCLUSION
The study offers a thorough comprehension of the friction testing mechanism and the value it has in
assessing and enhancing the performance of materials in a variety of applications. The friction testing
mechanism created for this project satisfies the majority of client demands for accuracy, safety, and
durability. The testing method may need to be further automated and optimized in the future work.

REFERENCES
J. Zhang and F. a. R. Moslehy, "A model for friction," pp. 1-12, 1991.

[2] J. D. A. J. SMITH, "Review of Friction and Wear Test Methods for Advanced Ceramic Materials,"
JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY, vol. 35, 2019.

[3] R. G. A. L. ADAMS, "FRICTION MECHANISM IN AOTOMOTIVE BRAKE SYSMTEM," SAF

international journal, vol. 25, 2017.

[4] M. a. Z. J. Mao, "STUDY OF WEAR MECHANISM," 2018.

[5] A. S. a. S. Rawat, "Erosion wear studies on high concentration fly ash slurreis," pp. 114-125,
2017.

[6] J. a. P. Smith, "MECHANICAL PROPETIES AND APPLICATION OF HIGH-STRENGTH ALLOY STEEELS,"

MATERIAL SCIENCE TODAY , pp. 265-278, 2022.

[7] L. a. W. Brown, "CORROSION RESISTANCE OF ALUMINIUM ALLOYS IN AGGRESSIVE

ENVIRONMENTS," JOURNAL OF CORROSION SCIENCE, pp. 115-128, 2019.

[8] R. a. M. Wison, "THE TRIBOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF ALUMINIUM BRONZE,"

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY, pp. 45-58, 2018.

[9] A. M. &. N. T. H. Davis, "Thermal and Mechanical Properties of Cross-Linked Polyethylene,"

Polymer Engineering and Science, pp. 1765-1778., 2023.

[10] D. J. &. S. G. H. Wilson, "The Influence of Microstructure on the Corrosion Resistance of AISI
316L Stainless Steel," Corrosion Science, , pp. 789-802, 2020.

[11] D. ,. O. M. U, "Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of Locally Produced Materials," Journal

of Minerals and Materials Characterization , no. 11, pp. 1020-1026, 2012.

10
APPENDIX A

11
APPENDIX B

CALCULATIONS

[Link] diameter of link 1 to be suitable the tensile strength calculated using this diameter must not
exceed link 1 tensile strength = 723825600 N/𝑚2 [11].

Sectional area of link 1

𝐴 = 𝜋𝑟 2
30
𝐴 = 𝜋( )^2
1000
𝐴 = 0.002827m^2

𝐹
𝜎=
𝐴
80
𝜎=
0,002827
𝜎 = 28298,5497𝑁/𝑚2

Since the calculated tensile is less than 723825600 N/𝑚2 therefore the diameter is suitable.

[Link] input torque will be observed when links 1 and 2 are perpendicular. The length between
link 1 and 2 when perpendicular is 230,08mm. The input force of link 1 on link 2 is 80N.

𝑇 =𝐹×𝑑
230,08
𝑇 = 80 × 𝑚
1000

𝑇 = 18,4𝑁𝑚

So, the maximum torque between link 1 and 2 is 18,4Nm.

[Link] top surface of material b it’s a curve so the formula to calculate the area of a curve is
𝐴 = 2𝜋rh the radius of the curve is 145,99mm and the height is 288,72mm.

𝐴 = 2𝜋𝑟ℎ
145,99 288,72
𝐴 = 2𝜋 × ×
1000 1000
𝐴 = 0,264𝑚2

4. The surfaces in contact between material a and b is a rectangle and a curve. The area of the curved
surface of material b is 0,264𝑚2 the one calculated above in number 3 and the area of material a the
rectangle in contact with the curve is 0,231𝑚2 .

12
 |𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 1−𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 2|
Formular for percentage difference in areas = 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 1+𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 2 × 100
( )
2

|0,264−0,231|
= 0,264+0,231 × 100
( )
2

= 13,33%

The percentage difference in areas does not exceed 15% as it is 13,33%.

[Link] diameter of the pin to be appropriate the shear must be not exceed 2× 108 N/𝑚2 when
calculated using this diameter of the pin [11]. The selected diameter for pin connecting link 1 and 2 is
25mm and the force is 80N the safety factor is 6.
𝜏 4𝐹
6
= 2𝜋𝐷2

𝜏 4×80
6
= 25
2𝜋×
1000

𝜏
= 2037,18
6
𝜏 = 2037,18 × 6

𝜏 = 12223,08𝑁/𝑚2

Since the calculated shear is less than 2× 108 N/𝑚2 then the diameter of the pin is appropriate.

6. The following calculated lower limit and upper limit for the pin and the bearing is for the joint
between part A and link 3. For which the pin has a diameter of 25 mm and the bearing has a diameter
of 50 mm.

For the pin use clearance fit for a diameter of 25 mm

H8 f7

+33

Upper limit Lower limit

58 + 0,033 = 58,033 58 + 0 =58

For the bearing use interference fit for a diameter of 50mm

H7 p6

+30

Upper limit lower limit

50 + 0,003 = 50,003 50+ 0 = 50

13
[Link] force required to the solid plate can be calculated using the tensile, width and the thickness of
the plate or base. The tensile of the base is 723825600 N/𝑚2 , width of the base is 150mm and the
thickness is 3mm.

𝐹 =𝜎×𝑤×𝑡
150 3
𝐹 = 723825600 × 1000 × 1000

𝐹 = 325721,52N

14
 40
850

200

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:7 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 1

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: BASE
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 20

R50
50

240
100
100
40

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0,25 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:4 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 2

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: PART 1
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 110
100

100

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:2 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 3

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: PART 2
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 75
90
100

290

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0.3 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:4 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 4

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: PART 3
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 ITEM NO. PART NUMBER QTY.

1 Part 2 1

2 Part 3 1

3 Base 1

4 Part 1 1

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0,25 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:1 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 5

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: SUBASSEMBYL
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0,25 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:1 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 6

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: SUBASSEMBLY
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 100 ,83
57

60
830

UNLESS OTHERWISE 16
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0,25 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:7 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 7

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: LINK 1
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 273,09

13,09 20

27
3,
43

66

169,09
136,09

103,09
20

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0,25 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:4 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 8

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: LINK 2
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 300
3

150

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:3 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 9

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: MATERIAL A
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 20

R1
45
,9
9

R137,45

288,71
12

8,70

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:3 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 10

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: MATERIAL B
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055843@[Link],AC,ZA
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 25
100

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0,33 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 3 SCALE: 1:1 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMDE 11

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: PIN
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
50

65
32,50
300

20

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0,25 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:3 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 12

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: LINK 3
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.
 ITEM NO. PART NUMBER QTY.

1 Base 1

2 Link 1 1

3 Link 2 1

4 Link 3 1
10 2
5 Material A 1

6 Material B 1

8 7 Part 2 1

8 Part 3 1

9 Part 1 1

10 BS 6267 RBB - 4760 - 38,DE,NC,38_68 2

2
11 JIS B 1512-2 - 4CD25 - 16,SI,NC,16 8

12 Pin 3

7 4

12

1 9

11 6

UNLESS OTHERWISE
STATED GENERAL
TOLERANCES : 0,25 mm
ANGLES :

MAT.: No. REQ.: 1 SCALE: 1:7 UNITS: mm PROJECT: ASSIGNMENT No.:

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL
DATE CHECKED STUDENT NAME: BUHLEBEMVELO GUMEDE 13

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING PROJECT SUPERVISOR STUDENT No.: 223055483

TITLE: ASSEMBLY
WORKSHOP TECHNICIAN E-MAIL: 223055483@[Link]
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
TECHNICAL OFFICER TEL. No.:
SOLIDWORKS Educational Product. For Instructional Use Only.