Department of Mechanicalengineering Indian Institute of Technology Ropar RUPNAGAR-140001, INDIA

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICALENGINEERING
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROPAR
RUPNAGAR-140001, INDIA
IIT Ropar
DESIGN LABORATORY-I (ME205) REPORT
For
Experiment 6: Cam analysis
Submitted by
Piyush Kushwaha (2020MEB1299)

Supervised by
Dr. Satwinder J. Singh/ Dr. Manish Agarwal/ Dr. Dhiraj K. Mahajan
Extended Second Semester, 2021-2022

Video shared on: 19-03-2022
Report Submitted on: 31-03-2022
Contents:
• Introduction
• Software used
• Objectives
• Theory
• Procedure
• Results and observations
• Calculations
• Discussions
• Conclusions
Introduction:
We did CAM analysis with various types of cams and followers under various
loading circumstances in this experiment. CAM and follower mechanisms are
employed in a variety of applications, such as IC engines. For use in real-world
machinery, a thorough examination of the limiting speeds for each combination of
the CAM and follower is required.
Software used:
o GL112 Cam Analysis apparatus
o Tangent and circular cam
o Tappet
o Roller and flat edge follower
o Circular discs for interchangeable mass
Objective:
o To calculate the limiting speed for the experimental sets
o Observe the experimental results and compare them with their theoretical
counterparts.
o Observe the elevation curve and infer upon them
Theory:
Typically, a cam and follower system translates one type of motion into another. The
CAM and the follower are two parts that are in contact with each other. The CAM is
the driver, and the CAM drives the follower. The cam can rotate or reciprocate, and
the follower can move in one of three ways: translating, oscillating, or spinning. As
long as the CAM's rotational speed is less than the limiting speed, the configuration
is stable. If the CAM and follower exceed the restriction speed, the CAM and
follower may lose touch, causing jerks and the follower to bounce. Weights have
been placed on the arrangement, and the weights have caused modifications in the
limiting speed.. Limiting speed varies with the stiffness of the spring used too.
There are various types of CAMS. We deal with 2 types
1) The limiting speed of a tangent CAM is given by:
And,
m: total mass, m = m1(mass of the load) + m2(mass of the tappet) + m3(mass of the
follower)
c: stiffness constant of the spring
s0: initial compression of the spring.
2) Limiting speed for a circular arc cam:
Where ,
𝑏2 sin 𝛹𝑚𝑎𝑥
−1
𝛹 𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 = sin ( )
𝑟1 − 𝑟2
m = m1(mass of load) + m2(mass of tappet) + m3(mass of the follower)
c: stiffness constant
s0: initial compression of the spring.

Procedure:
o The equipment is turned off and disassembled. To begin, we'll look at the tangent
CAM.
o Fit the tangent CAM into the slot, then the roller follower into the slot for the
follower.
o Fit the soft spring first, then run the experiment in the no-mass condition at
150rpm and 250rpm. Replace the mass and repeat the experiment for 150rpm
and 250rpm speeds.
o Replacing the soft spring with a hard spring, repeat the steps above.
o Replacing the roller follower with a flat follower, repeat the steps above.
Tangent cam:
Set
Spring Mass (m1) (kg) Cam Follower RPM
No.
1 soft 0 Tangent roller 150
2 soft 0 Tangent roller 250
3 soft 0.8 Tangent roller 150
4 soft 0.8 Tangent roller 250
5 hard 0 Tangent roller 150
6 hard 0 Tangent roller 250
7 hard 0.8 Tangent roller 150
8 hard 0.8 Tangent roller 250
9 soft 0 Tangent flat 150

10 soft 0 Tangent flat 250
11 soft 0.8 Tangent flat 150
12 soft 0.8 Tangent flat 250
13 hard 0 Tangent flat 150
14 hard 0 Tangent flat 250
15 hard 0.8 Tangent flat 150
16 hard 0.8 Tangent flat 250
Circular arc cam:
Set No.
Spring Mass (m1) (kg) Cam Follower RPM
17 hard 0.8 Arc cam roller 150
21 hard 0 Arc cam roller 150
22 hard 0 Arc cam roller 250
23 soft 0.8 Arc cam roller 250
27 soft 0 Arc cam roller 250
28 soft 0 Arc cam roller 150

Results and observations:
o Set 1:
o Set 2:
o Set 3:
o Set 4:
o Set 5:
o Set 6:
o Set 7:
o Set 8:
o Set 9:
o Set 10:
o Set 11:
o Set 12:
o Set 13:
o Set 14:
o Set 15:
o Set 16:
o Set 17:
o Set 18:
o Set 19:
o Set 20:
o Set 21:
o Set 22:
o Set 23:
o Set 24:
o Set 25:
o Set 26:
o Set 27:
o Set 28:
Calculations:
o Data for mass and other components:
Spring Rigidty Pre-Compression

Hard 5026 N/m 8 mm
Soft 613 N/m 10mm
Mass of components
Tappet weight 0.53 kg
Flat follower weight 0.093 kg
Roller weight 0.02 kg
o Data for the tangent CAM:
Limiting speed in rpm:
o Data for the circular arc CAM:
Limiting speed in rpm:
𝑏2 sin 𝛹𝑚𝑎𝑥
−1
𝛹 𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 = sin ( )
𝑟1 − 𝑟2
Total Limiting Speed Limiting
Set Follower Spring m1 rpm
mass (rad/sec) rpm
Tangent CAM, 𝛹 𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 69.99
1 Roller Soft 0 0.55 150 24.23 231.47
2 Roller Soft 0 0.55 250 24.23 231.47
3 Roller Soft 0.8 1.35 150 15.47 147.74
4 Roller Soft 0.8 1.35 250 15.47 147.74
5 Roller Hard 0 0.55 150 53.27 508.74
6 Roller Hard 0 0.55 250 53.27 508.74
7 Roller Hard 0.8 1.35 150 34 324.72
8 Roller Hard 0.8 1.35 250 34 324.72
Flat-
9 Soft 0 0.623 150 22.77 217.48
faced
Flat-
10 Soft 0 0.623 250 22.77 217.48
faced
Flat-
11 Soft 0.8 1.423 150 15.06 143.9
faced
Flat-
12 Soft 0.8 1.423 250 15.06 143.9
faced
Flat-
13 Hard 0 0.623 150 50.05 478
faced
Flat-
14 Hard 0 0.623 250 50.05 478
faced
Flat-
15 Hard 0.8 1.423 150 33.11 316.28
faced
Flat-
16 Hard 0.8 1.423 250 33.11 316.28
faced
Circular Arc CAM, 𝛹 𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 19.08
17 Roller Hard 0.8 1.35 150 39.55 377.75
18 Roller Hard 0.8 1.35 250 39.95 377.75
19 Roller Hard 0.4 0.95 250 47.15 450.31
20 Roller Hard 0.4 0.95 150 47.15 450.31
21 Roller Hard 0 0.55 150 61.97 591.83
22 Roller Hard 0 0.55 250 61.97 591.83
23 Roller Soft 0.8 1.35 250 14.92 142.56
24 Roller Soft 0.8 1.35 150 14.92 142.56
25 Roller Soft 0.4 0.95 150 17.79 169.95
26 Roller Soft 0.4 0.95 250 17.79 169.95
27 Roller Soft 0 0.55 250 23.38 223.36
28 Roller Soft 0 0.55 150 23.38 223.36

Discussions:
Set 1:
There are no leaps in the graph.
Rotational speed: the applied speed is lower than the limiting speed.
There was no contact lost.
Match the theoretical graph: the theoretical graph is matched.
The arrangement's suitability is satisfactory.
Set 2:
Jumps in the graph: start with a leap.
Rotational speed: the applied speed exceeds the limitation speed.
Contact loss: At first, there is some contact loss.
Match the theoretical graph: the theoretical graph is matched.
Because of the leap in the graph, the layout is unsuitable.
Set 3: Jumps in the graph: minor leap in the beginning
Rotational speed is reduced by the applied load, and the speed is just below the
limitation speed.
Theoretical graph match: almost identical to the theoretical graph.
The arrangement's suitability is questionable due to the minor jump at the start.
Set 4:
In the graph, there are no jumps.
Rotational speed: the applied speed exceeds the limitation speed.
Theoretical graph: does not correspond to the theoretical graph.
The configuration is not acceptable since the applied speed exceeds the limiting
speed.
o Set 5:
Jumps in the graph: no jumps.
Speed of rotation: applied speed is less than the limiting speed.
Contact loss: no contact loss.
Match with theoretical graph: matches the theoretical graph. Double curve is
due to shaking in the equipment.
Suitability of the arrangement: suitable.
o Set 6:
Match with theoretical graph: matches the theoretical graph. There is a bend in
the graph at the descent.
Suitability of the arrangement: may not be suitable due to the bend in the graph.
Set 7:
Jumps in the graph: start with a high jump.
Because of the high leap at the start, this graph does not match the theoretical
graph.
Because of the leap in the graph, the layout may not be ideal.
Set 8:
There are no jumps in the graph.
Match the theoretical graph: the theoretical graph is matched. At the bottom of
the drop, there is a bend.
The arrangement's suitability: because to the bend, it may not be suitable.
o Set 9:
Match with theoretical graph: matches the theoretical graph.
o Set 10:
Speed of rotation: applied speed is more than the limiting speed.
Match with theoretical graph: does not match the theoretical graph.
Suitability of the arrangement: not suitable as applied speed is more than the
limiting speed.
o Set 11:
Jumps in the graph: negligible jump.
Speed of rotation: applied speed is almost equal to the limiting speed and
applied load decreases the limiting speed.
Match with theoretical graph: matches the theoretical graph. Bend at the end.
Suitability of the arrangement: not suitable.
o Set 12:
Jumps in the graph: high jump at the start.
Contact loss: there is contact loss.
Match with theoretical graph: high jump at the start of the graph, sharp bend at
the end, matches the theoretical curve.
o Set 13:
Speed of rotation: applied speed is much less than the limiting speed. Soft
spring is replaced with the hard spring which increases the limiting speed.
Match with theoretical graph: matches the theoretical graph
Set 14: There are no jumps in the graph.
Match with theoretical graph: the theoretical graph is matched with a minor
disturbance at the end.
Suitability of the arrangement: due to the irregularities in the curve towards the
end, it may not be suitable.
Set 15: There are no jumps in the graph.
Rotational speed: when the applied speed is less than the limiting speed, the
limiting speed is reduced.
Match with theoretical graph: the theoretical graph is matched with bends at the
beginning and end.
The arrangement's suitability: it may be appropriate..
o Set 16:
Jumps in the graph: there is a jump in the start.
Match with theoretical graph: high jump at the start and disturbance at the end
which does not match the theoretical curve.
Set 17:
Graph jumps: none
Rotational speed: the applied rotational speed is lower than the limiting
rotational speed.
There has been no loss of contact.
Matches the theoretical graph.
Arrangement suitability: good.
Set 18: Graph jumps: none
Rotational speed: the applied rotational speed is lower than the limiting
rotational speed.
There has been no loss of contact.
Matches the theoretical graph.
Arrangement suitability: good.
Set 19: Graph jumps: start with a little jump.
The load applied is smaller than the load applied in set 18, so the limiting speed
drops and the applied speed falls below the limiting speed.
There has been a loss of contact.
Almost same to theoretical graph
o Set 20:
o Set 21:
o Set 22:
Jumps in the graph: small jump at the start.
Match with theoretical graph: almost matches the theoretical graph.
Suitability of the arrangement: may not be suitable due to the jump at the start.
o Set 23:
Suitability of the arrangement: not suitable due to the jump at the start.
o Set 24:
Jumps in the graph: small jumps.
Speed of rotation: applied speed is almost equal to the limiting speed.
Match with theoretical graph: matches the theoretical graph with slight
disturbances.
Suitability of the arrangement: may be suitable.
o Set 25:
Jumps in the graph: small jump.
Contact loss: there is contact loss due to the small jump.
Suitability of the arrangement: may be suitable.
o Set 26:
Suitability of the arrangement: is not suitable as the applied speed is more than
the limiting speed.
o Set 27:
Jumps in the graph: jump at the start.
o Set 28:
The arrangement is only suitable if the elevation curve has no leaps and the CAM
rotates at a slower speed than the limiting speed, as we can see from the previous
setups. There may be leaps in the elevation curve if the CAM's rotation speed
exceeds the limiting speed at which the follower loses contact with the CAM, and if
the equipment is worn out. The elevation curve mimics the theoretical curve when
the CAM's rotational speed is less than the limiting speed.
Conclusion:
In this experiment, we learnt about the many configurations of a CAM and follower,
as well as the characteristics that make an arrangement suitable. The theoretical
restriction speeds for each arrangement were determined and used in the analysis
of the stability and suitability of the configurations..

Department of Mechanicalengineering Indian Institute of Technology Ropar RUPNAGAR-140001, INDIA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Department of Mechanicalengineering Indian Institute of Technology Ropar RUPNAGAR-140001, INDIA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICALENGINEERING

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROPAR

DESIGN LABORATORY-I (ME205) REPORT

Experiment 6: Cam analysis

Piyush Kushwaha (2020MEB1299)

Extended Second Semester, 2021-2022

1) The limiting speed of a tangent CAM is given by:

c: stiffness constant of the spring

s0: initial compression of the spring.

2) Limiting speed for a circular arc cam:

m = m1(mass of load) + m2(mass of tappet) + m3(mass of the follower)

s0: initial compression of the spring.

1 soft 0 Tangent roller 150

2 soft 0 Tangent roller 250

3 soft 0.8 Tangent roller 150

4 soft 0.8 Tangent roller 250

5 hard 0 Tangent roller 150

6 hard 0 Tangent roller 250

7 hard 0.8 Tangent roller 150

8 hard 0.8 Tangent roller 250

9 soft 0 Tangent flat 150

11 soft 0.8 Tangent flat 150

12 soft 0.8 Tangent flat 250

13 hard 0 Tangent flat 150

14 hard 0 Tangent flat 250

15 hard 0.8 Tangent flat 150

16 hard 0.8 Tangent flat 250

Circular arc cam:

17 hard 0.8 Arc cam roller 150

18 hard 0.8 Arc cam roller 250

19 hard 0.4 Arc cam roller 250

20 hard 0.4 Arc cam roller 150

21 hard 0 Arc cam roller 150

22 hard 0 Arc cam roller 250

23 soft 0.8 Arc cam roller 250

24 soft 0.8 Arc cam roller 150

25 soft 0.4 Arc cam roller 150

26 soft 0.4 Arc cam roller 250

27 soft 0 Arc cam roller 250

28 soft 0 Arc cam roller 150

o Data for mass and other components:

Spring Rigidty Pre-Compression

o Data for the tangent CAM:

Limiting speed in rpm:

o Data for the circular arc CAM:

Limiting speed in rpm:

Tangent CAM, 𝛹 𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 69.99

1 Roller Soft 0 0.55 150 24.23 231.47

2 Roller Soft 0 0.55 250 24.23 231.47

3 Roller Soft 0.8 1.35 150 15.47 147.74

4 Roller Soft 0.8 1.35 250 15.47 147.74

5 Roller Hard 0 0.55 150 53.27 508.74

6 Roller Hard 0 0.55 250 53.27 508.74

7 Roller Hard 0.8 1.35 150 34 324.72

8 Roller Hard 0.8 1.35 250 34 324.72

Circular Arc CAM, 𝛹 𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 19.08

17 Roller Hard 0.8 1.35 150 39.55 377.75

18 Roller Hard 0.8 1.35 250 39.95 377.75

19 Roller Hard 0.4 0.95 250 47.15 450.31

20 Roller Hard 0.4 0.95 150 47.15 450.31

21 Roller Hard 0 0.55 150 61.97 591.83

22 Roller Hard 0 0.55 250 61.97 591.83