Lab Report 4 - Power

ENME 371 (0201)

Professor Pomplon

30 March 2022

1
I pledge on my honor that I have not given nor received any unauthorized assistance on this

assignment.

2
 Table Of Contents

I. Mechanical Characterizations 4
A. Tool Task Discussion 5
B. Torque Measurements 6
C. Avg. Mechanical Energy 10
II. Electrical Characterizations 11
A. Start-up 14
B. Steady State 33
C. Application 41
III. Comparisons and Insights 51
A. Tool Efficiency 52
B. Battery Energy 65
C. Tool Speed 73
D. Torque Profile 81
E. Motor Performance + Application Simulation 92
IV. Conclusion 105
V. Task Tracking Details 111
VI. Works Cited 112
VII. Appendix 114

3
I. Mechanical Characterizations

4
I. Mechanical Characterizations A - Discussion

● By studying the tool’s basic function through utilizing a screwdriver we can

learn what kind of motion/actuation is necessary to complete the desired task.
● Using a hand-driven torque measuring screwdriver can help us figure out how
much energy will be needed to be supplied by the motor, and we can also use
the total recorded torque required to figure out how the gears in our
transmission must be arranged in order to meet torque requirements.

5
I. Mechanical Characterizations B - Torque Measurements

Figure 1: Torque vs Screw Turns (Insertion 1)

Figure 2: Torque vs Screw Turns (Insertion 2)

6
Figure 3: Torque vs Screw Turns (Insertion 3)
I. Mechanical Characterizations B - Torque Measurements

Figure 4: Torque vs Screw Turns (Removal 1) Figure 5: Torque vs Screw Turns (Removal 2)

7
Figure 6: Torque vs Screw Turns (Removal 3)
I. Mechanical Characterizations B - Torque Measurements

Figure 7: Torque Table

8
I. Mechanical Characterizations B - Discussion

● We would expect that inserting a screw would take more torque than to
remove a screw, since breaking the material for insertion requires a little more
energy. This is evident in the data since maximum torque for insertion a screw
is greater than 30 lb-in while the maximum torque for removal is between 20
and 30 lb-in.
● It can also be noted that as we drive/remove deeper, more torque is required,
but less is required as we drive/remove at a shallower depth.

9
 C. Mechanical Energy - Insertion & Removal

Torque [in*lb] 1 in*lb = 0.113 [N*m] Mechanical

Torque [N*m] [J] = [N*m]*[rad]
Energy [J]

Figure 8: Average Mechanical Energy Required to Insert and Remove a Screw

10
Figure 9: Average Total Mechanical Energy Required to Insert and Remove a Screw
II. Electrical Characterizations

11
nScope Data Collection

Figure 10: nScope Circuit Setup Figure 11: nScope Display 12

nScope Data Collection
Voltage measurement stepped down by a factor of 4 to display in CH0

Current Probe set to 10 mV/A setting for current data collection in CH1

Two Traces taken for three applications:

1. No load Start-Up/Steady State

2. Screw Insertion/Removal
3. Drilling 7/32” hole into pine

13
A. Start-up - Data Selection Speed 1

Figure 12: Speed 1 nScope Display Figure 13: Speed 1 nScope Display
(Selected)

14
A. Start-up - Data Selection Speed 2

Figure 14: Speed 2 nScope Display Figure 15: Speed 2 nScope Display
(Selected)

15
A. Start-up - Data Processing Speed 1

How to get exact start and finish data points?

Figure 16: Excel Graph of Speed 1 Data 16

A. Start-up - Data Processing Speed 1

Figure 17: Excel Graph of Speed 1 17

Differences
A. Start-up - Data Processing Speed 1

Figure 18: Excel Graph of Speed 1 Zoomed 18

Differences
 A. Start-up - Data Processing Speed 1

We need a difference between

successive measurements that is
much greater in magnitude then the
others before it

Figure 19: Data Points Speed 1 19

A. Start-up - Data Processing Speed 2

Figure 20: Excel Graph of Speed 2 Data 20

A. Start-up - Data Processing Speed 2

Figure 21: Excel Graph of Speed 2 21

Differences
A. Start-up - Data Processing Speed 2

Figure 22: Excel Graph of Speed 2 Zoomed 22

Differences
A. Start-up - Data Processing Speed 2

Figure 23: Data Points Speed 2 23

 A. Start-up - Adjusting Data

Must subtract offset and

multiply by the scales
shown on slide 13

Figure 24: Offset

24
A. Start-up - Adjusting Data

Figure 25: Speed 1 Adjusted Figure 26: Speed 2 Adjusted

25
Figure 27: Speed 1 Voltage Figure 28: Speed 1 Current

26
Figure 29: Speed 2 Voltage Figure 30: Speed 2 Current

27
 A. Start-up - Power and Energy Calculations
Power Calculation

Energy Calculation - Numerical Integration

28
A. Start-up - Calculations Speed 1

Figure 31: Speed 1 Power 29

A. Start-up - Calculations Speed 1

Figure 32: Speed 1 Calculations

30
A. Start-up - Calculations Speed 2

Figure 33: Speed 2 Power 31

A. Start-up - Calculations Speed 2

Figure 34: Speed 2 Calculations

32
B. Steady State - Zero Load Condition: Speed 1

Figure 35: Zero Load Condition, Speed 1, Trace 1 Figure 36: Zero Load Condition, Speed 1, Trace 2
(Selected)

33
B. Steady State - Zero Load Condition: Adjusting Data

Data from both channels was

adjusted to account for the scope
channel offset.

Channel 0 (Voltage):

Channel 1 (Current):

Figure 37: Raw data from zero load run and scope channel offset

34
B. Steady State - Zero Load Condition

Figure 38: Voltage and Current plots after data Figure 39: Adjusted zero load condition data
adjustment. 35
B. Steady State - Zero Load Condition: Speed 1

Figure 40: Zero Load Condition, Speed 1, Trace 2; Plot of Voltage and Current during steady state.

36
B. Steady State - Zero Load Condition: Speed 1

The electrical Power needed to

keep the tool running at full speed
under no load condition is about 1
Watt for Speed 1.

Figure 41: Zero Load Condition, Speed 1, Trace 1; Table of data

during steady state (full table linked here)
37
B. Steady State - Zero Load Condition: Speed 2

Figure 42: Zero Load Condition, Speed 2, Trace 1 Figure 43: Zero Load Condition, Speed 2, Trace 2
(Selected)

38
B. Steady State - Zero Load Condition: Speed 2

Figure 44: Zero Load Condition, Speed 2, Trace 1; Plot of Voltage and Current during steady state.
39
B. Steady State - Zero Load Condition: Speed 2

The electrical Power needed to

keep the tool running at full
speed under no load condition is
about 1.4 Watts for Speed 2.

Figure 45: Zero Load Condition, Speed 2, Trace 2; Table of data

during steady state (full table linked here)
40
C. Application - Description
A 7/32 drill bit was used to drill into a
wooden block.

The operator started with the drill bit resting

on the wood and began drilling. Once the
drill bit was completely driven through the
wood, and the teeth of the chuck were
adjacent to the surface of the wood, the
drilling process was over.

Figure 46: Application Drill in Wood

41
C. Application - Data Selection (Insertion)

Figure 47: Insertion Data, Trace 1 Figure 48: Insertion Data, Trace 2
(Selected)

42
C. Application - Data Selection (Removal)

Figure 49: Removal Data, Trace 1 (Selected) Figure 50: Removal Data, Trace 2

43
C. Application - Data Selection (Application)

Figure 51: Application Data, Trace 2 Figure 52: Application Data, Trace 3

Figure 53: Application Data, Trace 1 (Selected) 44

C. Application - Voltage and Current
Voltage = -1 * (Ch0 - Offset) * 4

Current = (Ch1 - Offset) / 0.01 [V/A]

Figure 54: Calculated Electrical Data

45
C. Application - Power and Electrical Energy
Power = V * I

Electrical Energy = (t2 - t1)*(P1 + P2) / 2

Figure 55: Calculated Electrical Data

46
C. Application - Power vs Time (Insertion)

Figure 56: Power plotted as a function of time (Insertion)

47
C. Application - Power vs Time (Removal)

Figure 57: Power plotted as a function of time (Removal)

48
C. Application - Power vs Time (Application)

Figure 58: Power plotted as a function of time (Application)

49
C. Application - Total Electrical Energy

Total Electrical Energy (J)

Insertion 169.83

Removal 96.46

Application 36.58

Figure _: Calculated Electrical energy for all applications

Figure 59: Calculated Electrical Data

50
III. Comparisons & Insights

51
A. Tool Efficiency

52
 A. Tool Efficiency - No Load Start-Up

We must find what the total kinetic energy is at the Start-Up of the tool and can
use results from part IIA for electrical measurements

53
 A. Tool Efficiency - Drivetrain Movement
What’s Moving?
● Planetary Gear Reduction Systems (See Slides 116):
○ Case 1 - Speed 1 where all three reductions are engaged (See slide 119)
○ Case 2 - Speed 2 First and Third Reduction engaged (See Slide 119)
● Output Shaft and Connection to Chuck
● Input Shaft and Connection to Brushless Motor (Greatest because greatest
speed, mass)
Assumptions Made
● First and second ring gears are held stationary in both cases
● No friction at interface between components
○ Input speed = output speed at each interface

54
 A. Tool Efficiency - Moment of Inertia (Gears)
● Each gear component has
uniform density
○ Found in DCD701 Technical
Documents provided (See Slide
122)
● Density Input into SolidWorks
to find MOI (See Slide 121)

Figure 60: Gear Moment of Inertia Table 55

 A. Tool Efficiency - Moment of Inertia (Chuck and Motor)
NOT Uniform Density because different materials

Two methods:

1. Bounded Moment of Inertia (Max/Min)

● Maximum - Maximum Radius in Part used for a uniform cylinder
● Minimum - Moment of Inertia = 0 kg-m^2
2. Approximated MOI with SolidWorks (See Slides 123-126)
● Known mass using scale, input mass into assembly to approximate MOI

56
A. Tool Efficiency - MOI Chuck and Motor Method 1

Figure 61: Method 1 Chuck and Motor Moment of Inertia Table

[Radii Found in Data Sheets (Slides 124+126)]

57
 A. Tool Efficiency - MOI Chuck and Motor Method 2
Components being ignored in the approximation:
● Fan Baffle (Stationary)
● Fan (Large Radius skews moment of inertia
calculation

Figure 62: Method 2 Other Components Moment of Inertia Table

(Link to Density, material and volume found in data

sheet) 58
 A. Tool Efficiency - Kinetic Energy Totals

Figure 63: Kinetic Energy Totals Both Methods

We will be using the approximation for the efficiency calculation

● Possible Large Error because of different materials, but closer to actual value than
minimum/maximum values in method 1

59
A. Tool Efficiency - Start-Up Efficiency

Figure 64: Start-Up Efficiency

60
 A. Tool Efficiency - No-load Steady State
Energy lost to different subsystems when at constant speed:
● Friction due to imperfections in the meshing of gears
● Loss on energy in motor (not ideal)
● Thermal Energy and Airflow out of the drill (See Slide 131)
● Vibratory Energy out of the drill in the form of sound
○ Estimation can’t be performed because experimental data taken in dBA (scaling for human hearing)
○ If measurement was taken in dB…

● Voltage and Current towards the LED (See Slide 131)

● Clutch system (See Slide 130)

61
A. Tool Efficiency - Energy Loss Approximation

62
 A. Tool Efficiency - Screw Insertion/Removal

Figure 65: Screw Energy Efficiency

Handheld Torque results require less energy because a 1:1 ratio

● All energy goes straight into turning screw with minimal loss
Energy losses from slide always present using drill, so more energy required
added on top of energy needed at the input of turning the screw
63
 A. Tool Efficiency - Application Prediction
Application requires more energy than screw insertion/removal

More energy means greater energy lost in all subsystems

● For example, more friction in drivetrain because bigger stress on gears so

imperfections in gears more relevant

Also, more resistance in wood because screw is thinner and hole does not need to
be uniform

64
B. Battery Energy

65
B. Battery Energy

Figure 66: Battery discharge data provided by DeWalt

66
B. Battery Energy - Power

Figure 67: Power and Energy data calculated from Battery Discharge Test Data.

67
 B. Battery Energy

Total Energy stored in

a fully charged battery
is approximately 69 kJ.

Figure 68: Power curve generated from Battery Discharge Data

68
 B. Battery Energy - Screw Insertion/ Removal

Data from IIC: Given 69116.32739 Joules of energy:

Insertion: 169.83 J Insertion: 406 screws

Removal: 96.46 J Removal: 995 screws

Application: 36.58 J Application: 1889 screws

Insertion & Removal : 259 screws

69
 B. Battery Energy - Benchmarking
● Benchmarking Lab - 81 screws
total (insertion & removal)

● Battery Discharge data

indicates that the user should
be able to insert & remove 259
screws before the battery
depletes

Figure 69: Benchmarking Lab presentation slide containing DEWALT Battery

Discharge Test data

70
B. Battery Energy - Application

In practice, we were only able to carry out approximately 30% of

the predicted number of insertions and removals. Based on this
information, it can be inferred that the estimation for the team’s
prediction for the number of predicted applications is very
optimistic.

71
B. Battery Energy - Reasons for Discrepancies
● “Fairly new battery” vs. old battery
○ Battery Life Cycle
○ Self Discharge
○ Deep Discharge
● Heat
● Sound
● Friction
● User
● Tool

72
C. Tool Speed

73
C. Tool Speed - DEWALT Dyno Data

Figure 70: DEWALT Dyno Data

C. Tool Speed - Determine Numerical Relationship

Figure 71: Dyno Data Application and Trendline Equation

75
C. Tool Speed - Apply Electrical Data
Calculated trendline:

RPM = -17 * (Amp) + 1549

Figure 72: Calculated Electrical Data

76
C. Tool Speed - Plot RPM vs Time (Insertion)

Figure 73: RPM vs Time (Insertion)

77
C. Tool Speed - Plot RPM vs Time (Removal)

Figure 74: RPM vs Time (Removal)

78
C. Tool Speed - Plot RPM vs Time (Application)

Figure 75: RPM vs Time (Application)

79
 C. Tool Speed - General Trends

Figure 76: RPM vs Time (Insertion) Figure 77: RPM vs Time (Removal)

Figure 78: RPM vs Time (Application)

80
D.Torque Profile

81
D. Utilizing Tool Speed Data
RPMs converted to
(t2-t1)*((speed1+speed2)/2))
Rev/sec

Trapezoidal Method

82
D. Cumulative Rotations vs Time - Insertion and Removal

Figure 79: Cumulative Rotations vs Time (Removal) Figure 80: Cumulative Rotations vs Time (Insertion)

83
D. Cumulative Rotations vs Time - Application

Figure 81: Cumulative Rotations vs Time (Application)

84
D. Electrical vs Mechanical - Number of Rotations
Figure 82: Torque vs Screw Turns
(Insertion)

Insertion Removal

Electrical 27.3 28.4

Mechanical 24 21.5

Figure _: Electrical vs Mechanical Rotations

Figure 83: Torque vs Screw Turns

(Removal) 85
 D. Electrical vs Mechanical - Number of Rotations

● Difference in starting points for

insertion
● Increased rotations for electrical
removal
● What is the impact of biting?

Insertion Removal

Electrical 27.3 28.4

Mechanical 24 21.5

Figure 84: Manual Screw Insertion Figure 85: Electrical Screw Insertion

86
D. Torque vs Rotations - Numerical Relationship

Figure 86: Dyno Data Application and Trendline Equation

87
D. Torque vs Rotations - Apply Electrical Data
Note initial negative
torque values

Calculated trendline:

Torque = (Amp - 4.3)/1.58

Figure 87: Calculated Electrical Data 88

D. Torque vs Rotations - Insertion & Removal

Figure 88: Torque vs Rotation Graph for Insertion Figure 89: Torque vs Rotation Graph for Removal

89
D. Torque vs Rotations - Comparison

90
 D. Torque vs Rotations - Application

● Dyno Data speed conversion

necessary
● How does this compare with
previous torque profiles?

Figure 90: Torque vs Rotation Graph for Application

91
E. Motor Performance & Application
Simulation

92
 E. Motor Output Conversions:
RPM (Tool) Inlb (Tool) RPM (motor) Inlb (motor)
1467 0.34 28437.23054 0.01753968268
1458 0.46 28262.769 0.02373015892
1403 2.33 27196.61517 0.1201984137
1342 4.65 26014.15364 0.2398809543
1285 6.9 24909.23057 0.3559523838
1231 9.1
⍵tool ÷ rSpeed Ratio(2) = ⍵motor 23862.46135 0.4694444482
1177 11.19 22815.69213 0.5772619094
1123 13.31 21768.9229 0.6866269896
1070 15.35 20741.5383 0.7918650857
1015 17.28 r = 0.051587302 19675.38446 0.8914285786
965 19.53 18706.1537 1.007500008
911 21.58 17659.38447 1.113253977
858 23.62 16631.99987 1.218492073
806 25.52
𝞽tool ✕ rSpeed Ratio(2) = 15623.99988 1.316507947
754 27.37 14615.99988 1.411944456
702 29.18
𝞽motor 13607.99989 1.505317472
650 30.83 12599.9999 1.590436521
596 32.24 11553.23068 1.663174616
544 33.37 10545.23068 1.721468268
373 34.02 Figure 91: Dyno Data Figure 92: Converted Dyno Data 7230.461481 1.755000014 93
 E. Simulating Insertion/Removal, Speed 2 to Speed 1

Figure 93: Torque vs RPM Speed 1 Figure 94: Torque vs W-in Speed 1

● The above graphs display the relationship between RPM and Torque, and W in and Torque, based
off of the dyno data that was converted from Speed 2 to Speed 1.
● Using the line-of-best fit equations, we can simulate the RPMs and Input Wattage required for the
insertion/removal of a screw at Speed 1.
94
 E. Data Use Discussion
● In this section, we will simulate the
insertion/removal/application times, energies, and
efficiencies, in the opposite speeds the tasks were
performed.
● When following through with our simulation calculations,
we have the choice of basing our simulations off of the
torque data taken with the torque measuring
Figure 95: Hand Torque Measurer
screwdriver, or basing them off of the torque profile
calculated from the electrically recorded data.
● We decided to use the torque profile calculated from the
electrically collected data due to the following reasons:
○ There is much more information to work with when using the electrically
collected data
○ The electrically collected data eliminates irregularities caused by
human error with the screwdriver, such as inconsistent half rotations
completed by the user, and difficulty reading/recording information from
the torque meter on the screw driver

95
Figure 96: Application in Action
 E. Insertion Time Simulation
.
Rotation profile Torque profile RPMs are divided by 60
remains the same remains the same to get RPS
𝝉 = RPM*-0.0471 + 196
regardless of speed regardless of speed

Time is calculated by
Note: For all following formula, derived
simulation from the trapezoidal
calculations, the integration method:
absolute value
of the output
torque is used,
since negative Speed 1 Insertion Time:
torques indicate
a directional 4.269498526s
change, and our
dyno data graphs
only account for
positive values.

96
 E. Insertion Energy Simulation
Adding up all energies
per step yields total
input energy:
545.1111051 Joules

To calculate W-in from the Calculating energy per

torque profile, we must use step for W-out utilizes the
the formula we derived from same formula used to find
the converted dyno data W-in.
line-of-best:
W-out speed 1 insertion:
𝝉 = Wattage*0.0323 - 26.2
283.3761943 Joules

Efficiency:

𝜂 = 51.98503418%

97
 E. Removal Time Simulation
. RPMs are divided by 60
Rotation profile Torque profile
𝝉 = RPM*-0.0471 + 196 to get RPS
remains the same remains the same
regardless of speed regardless of speed

Time is calculated by
following formula, derived
from the trapezoidal
integration method:

Speed 1 removal time:

4.327136907s

98
 E. Removal Energy Simulation
Adding up all energies
per step yields total
input energy:
494.8247346 Joules

To calculate W-in from the Calculating energy per

torque profile, we must use step for W-out utilizes the
the formula we derived from same formula used to find
the converted dyno data W-in.
line-of-best:
W-out Speed 1 removal:
𝝉 = Wattage*0.0323 - 26.2
208.5190115 Joules

Efficiency:

𝜂 = 42.13997339%

99
 E. Speed 1 vs Speed 2 Comparison (Insertion/Removal)
Speed 1 (Simulated) Speed 2 (Actual)

Insertion: Insertion:
● Time (s): 4.269498526 ● Time (s): 1.59438
● Electrical Energy Required (J): 545.1111051 ● Electrical Energy Required (J): 169.834
● Efficiency (𝜂): 51.98503418% ● Efficiency (𝜂): 66.342%

Removal: Removal:
● Time (s): 4.327136907 ● Time (s): 1.46062
● Electrical Energy Required (J): 494.8247346 ● Electrical Energy Required (J): 96.46
● Efficiency (𝜂): 42.13997339% ● Efficiency (𝜂): 57.0314%

Discussion:
● Using speed 2 requires less energy to insert/remove screws, and does so more efficiently. This is
due to the fact that when utilizing speed 1, we are demanding more torque from the motor and thus,
more power.
● When wanting to remove or insert a large number of screws, it is more feasible to use speed 2, since
100
you save on time, energy, and efficiency, but lose the torque provided by speed 1.
 E. Simulating Application From Speed 1 to Speed 2

Figure 97: Torque vs RPM Speed 2 Figure 98: Torque vs W-in Speed 2

● For our application, we bored a hole with a twist drill bit, that went all the way to the drill teeth.
● The above graphs display the relationship between RPM and Torque, and W in and Torque, based
off of the dyno data that was recorded in Speed 2.
● Using the line-of-best fit equations, we can simulate the RPMs and Input Wattage required for the
insertion/removal of a screw at Speed 2.
101
 E. Application Time Simulation
.
Rotation profile Torque profile RPMs are divided by 60
𝝉 = RPM*-0.0373 + 55.1
remains the same remains the same to get RPS
regardless of speed regardless of speed

Time is calculated by
following formula, derived
from the trapezoidal
integration method:

Speed 1 application time:

1.335868965s

102
 E. Removal Energy Simulation
Adding up all energies
per step yields total
input energy:
281.4346793 Joules

To calculate W-in from the Calculating energy per

torque profile, we must use step for W-out utilizes the
the formula we derived from same formula used to find
the converted dyno data W-in.
line-of-best:
W-out speed 1 application:
𝝉 = Wattage*0.0909 - 7.37
234.9876584 Joules

Efficiency:

𝜂 = 83.49634062%

103
 E. Speed 1 vs Speed 2 Comparison (Application)
Speed 1 (Actual) Speed 2 (Simulated)

Application: Application:
● Time (s): 2.98188 ● Time (s): 1.335868965
● Electrical Energy Required (J): 386.8206627 ● Electrical Energy Required (J): 281.4346793
● Efficiency (𝜂): 9.5465786% ● Efficiency (𝜂): 83.49634062%

Discussion & Final User Advice:

● Using speed 2 once again requires less energy, time, and is much more efficient when drilling a hole
than speed1.
● Users wishing to utilize this tool in a manner that requires quick screw insertion/removal or when
creating holes through weaker material ought to use this tool in the higher speed setting, since you
spend less energy, time, and utilize a higher efficiency. When using this tool in a scenario that
requires more torque however, it is more optimal to use this tool in its lower speed setting, since you
apply more torque at the expense of more energy.

104
 Conclusion - Tool Efficiency
No-Load Data:
● Based on comparisons between electrical experimental data and calculation
theory, we can conclude that energy is lost to many subsystems in the drill
making it inefficient
Torque Data:
● Handheld screwdrivers are more energy efficient but the human energy
needed to insert/remove a screw makes the drill a lot more useful
The application will be less efficient than screw insertion/removal because of the
increased torque and energy output of the drill.

105
 Conclusion - Battery Energy

Based on the previous experience gained during the Benchmarking Lab, it can be
concluded that the electrical energy stored in the battery is not all converted into a
mechanical energy during drill use.

However, due to no knowledge on the charge/discharge cycles of the battery used

during the Benchmarking Lab, it cannot be concluded how the battery condition
affected the data.

106
 Conclusion - Tool Speed
From the Electrical Data, it can be concluded that the trends in RPM vs Time vary
depending on the application

Insertion: The RPM starts very high, and decreases as the screw feels more
resistance as it drives into the wood.

Removal: The RPM starts relatively low, and increases as the resistance
decreases as the screw is removed from the wood.

Application: The RPM seems to jump up and down during the drilling process,
presumably by the repeated differing resistances caused by the wood being drilled
away.

107
 Conclusion - Torque Profile
We can observe key differences, such as biting and seating torque, when
comparing the electrical and mechanical torque profiles. We also are able to
understand why there were discrepancies in the number of rotations between the
electrical and mechanical data.

We can analyze the torque profile for our application and understand that that
sudden increasing and decreasing is potentially due to the small screw wobbling
during insertion. Also mentioned previously, could potentially be due to varying
resistances.

108
 Conclusion - Motor Performance + Application Simulation
We can conclude that using speed 2 is faster, more efficient, and costs less
energy. This is visible across insertion, removal, and our application.

When a user desires more speed and wants to insert/remove as much screws as
possible, it is most optimal to operate in speed 2.

Operating in speed 1 allows for greater torque, at the expense of a smaller speed.

109
 Conclusion - What we Learned & Additional Questions
What we learned:
After performing several types of Application Energy Analysis, many mechanical and electronic
qualities of the DCD701 have been analyzed through experimental and theoretical means. The drill’s
efficiency during various stages of operation, total energy stored in the battery, rotational speed vs
time, torque profile during each screw rotation for various applications, motor performance curves, as
well as simulated applications at different speeds have all been analyzed.

Questions:
How much of an impact do confounding variables have on the data collection process?

Would our collected experimental data be different had the ADALM been used instead of the nScope?

Why does the provided dyno data seem to have an extreme outlier in one row?
110
Task Tracking Details

111
 Works Cited
Aaron, et al. “The Complete Cordless Tools Battery Guide.” Essential Home and Garden, 17 Feb. 2022,
https://www.essentialhomeandgarden.com/cordless-tools-battery-guide/.

112
 A6

Nicole Michael Isakov Klaudia Eric Michos Jared Scheffler

DiGiambattista Karabanowska

20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

100%
113
Appendix

114
Appendix - Dyno Data Speed 1

115
Appendix - Planetary Gear Reductions

116
Appendix - Gear Train

117
Appendix - Gear Train

118
Appendix - Speed 1 and 2

Speed 1
Speed 2 119
Appendix - Gear Ratio Calculations

120
Appendix - Gear Moment of Inertia

121
Appendix - Gear Technical Document Example

122
Appendix - Chuck Moment of Inertia

123
Appendix - Chuck Technical Document

124
Appendix - Motor Moment of Inertia

125
Appendix - Motor Technical Document

126
Appendix - Gear Train Speed and Important Raddii

127
Appendix - Gear Train Kinetic Energy

128
Appendix - Motor and Chuck Kinetic Energy Calculations

129
Appendix - Clutch Ball Bearing Energy Loss

130
Appendix - Other Energy Losses

131