Impact Drill Design & Analysis

Team 16: Compact Engineering

Steven Davidoff
Hamidou Diallo
Will Davidson

12/01/2022

1
Introduction/Background
Impact drills have a range of uses in the construction field but they are mainly used to drive large
amounts of fasteners, screws, and lag bolts. They are known for their uses in confined spaces
because of their lightweight and compact design. The compact appearance of the motor and
hammer assembly make operation easier on the users’ wrist since the center of mass is centered
with the handle. Additionally, the product is proudly labeled as 20V max which is a significant
upgrade to the older 12V models. The main difference between an impact drill and a normal drill
is that impact drills are generally smaller but have more rotational force, allowing them to drive
larger screws faster than a normal drill.
The purpose of this project is to design and analyze an impact, cordless drill. The drill will
be modeled using Siemens’ NX software and will be based on the dimensions of a real-world
impact drill, which will not be a DeWalt’s as they are pretty expensive. The team will disassemble
the impact drill to confirm the subassemblies and the components used in the impact drill.
Proficiency in geometric modeling will be demonstrated by the design and assembly of the drill,
and proficiency in finite element analysis will be demonstrated by analyzing the stresses and
displacement of the impact drill under certain conditions.

Figure 1: Dewalt stubby impact driver

Geometrical Assembly
The team will be using The Dewalt stubby as a model for the design and assembly of the
impact driver. As shown in figure 1 and 2, the Dewalt stubby impact is a visually appealing
impact drill with a lightweight and compact appearance. Figure 3 shows an exploded view of the
model and how all parts are geometrically assembled. Dewalt also has implemented a. The impact
driver has 3 main sub assemblies: the body, the nose, and the motor. The nose sub assembly mainly
consists of cylindrically shaped rings with extruded cuts of different shapes that fit on top of the
motor sub assembly as seen in Figure 2. The motor sub assembly mainly consists of the motor and
a “T” shaped shaft with rings similar to the nose sub assembly. Finally, the body sub assembly

2
mainly consists of an outer shell for holding the motor and the electronics inside and smaller pieces
used for space management inside the drill. An animation would include the shaft of the motor
turning with all the rings associated with the shaft and the motor staying in place with all the
corresponding rings.

Figure 2: Dewalt 20v Max Impact Driver Open Side View

Figure 3: Dewalt 20v Max Impact Driver Exploded View

I. Housing
The first step to modeling the housing was to find the required dimensions from another
impact driver using calipers as DeWalt’s impact drivers were too expensive for the team to acquire.
These dimensions were noted in the Figure below.

3
 Figure 4: Impact Driver Dimensions
Initially, the points from the figure above were imported in a model file, splines made from
those points, and through curves was used to create a sheet body from said splines, shown in the
figure below. However, after the midterm presentation, the team realized that doing the FEA on a
thickened sheet body wielded results that were too far off from the validation results, therefore, a
new housing was made from scratch.

Figure 5: Initial Housing

4
To restart, raster images were imported for the front view, side view, and top view for better
accuracy and to allow for more features. The front view raster images were then used to create the
chuck first, by using splines to make a sketch of the front of the chuck (the black part) and it was
then extruded to a datum plane offset from the XY plane. A bigger circle was then sketched and
extruded to a set length from Figure 4. As shown in Figure 6, the feature that goes on the chuck
was sketched on the YZ plane and then projected on the face that was just extruded. To extrude
out the sketch, the divide face was used to divide the faces into two, one of the chucks and one of
the features, which was then extruded out.

Figure 6: Chuck Extrusion

The shell for the motor was made by extruding out a bigger circle and shelling to 6 mm (smaller
values had trouble with meshing later), and like earlier, the features were drawn on the YZ plane,
projected on the face, and then divided. The divided faces of the features were then used as a curve
for the extrude cuts, as shown in Figure 7.

5
 Figure 7: Motor Shell

For the handle, spline curves were used to sketch the body, as shown in Figure 8, on a datum plane
that lies on the face of the motor shell and then was extruded out. As for the features on the handle,
they were sketched used splines, then extruded out, and the pattern feature was used for repetitive
features such as the one next the direction button and the feature near the battery holder.

Figure 8: Sketch of Handle

As for the battery features, shown in Figure 9, the bodies were sketched on the same plane as the
handle, and then extruded out as well. For all the features that were created on the right side, they
were mirrored onto the left side and the mirror geometry feature was used where the mirror features
failed.

6
 Figure 9: Battery Holder Features
All of the features were united into one solid body and the final part is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10: Final Housing

II. Hammer and Gearbox

a. Assembly Process / Design Specifications

The rotational output torque delivered by the motor is transmitted through a keyed gear
(located in the center) shown in Figure 11. To provide maximum power, the motor speed must be
reduced to provide optimal torque without sacrificing angular velocity. To design the driver with
maximum performance to suit customer expectations, the driver must deliver approximately 2,500

7
RPM (revolutions per minute) at the chuck under no load. Impact drivers use high RPM motors to
maximize acceleration of the hammer producing a shock impact force on the anvil. Proper gear
reduction is needed to step the 22,000 RPM motor to 2,500 RPM. Dividing the output by the input
RPM provides a ratio of 5:42. To produce a ring gear to fit the housing, the keyed driver gear is
made as an eight-tooth gear with a fitted diameter of 5.6 mm. All gears shown in figure 11 were
produced with the GLC toolbox and have specifications of: a module of 0.75 and a face width of
4 mm for proper meshing. The outer ring gear is a 60-tooth fixed to the outer nose housing shown
in Figure 14. To produce a output RPM between 1,800 and 2,500, the gear ratio allows for an
acceptable window; the actual gear ratio used is 2:17 which made designing less strict given
minimal deviation was acceptable. Between the outer ring and the driving center gear are two 36
tooth idler gears. A pin shown in Figure 11, transfers the torque from the gears to rotate the gearbox
housing. The gearbox houses the gears as shown in Figure 12.

Figure 11: Planetary Gear Train

8
 Figure 12: Full Gearbox with Spring & Ball

The gearbox compresses the hammer using a coil spring created from the helix function
shown in Figure 13. The hammer is secured by securing the 0.50% carbon steel ball between the
two inner slots on the hammer; positioning the axle in line with the ball, the hammer is secured
against the spring and the anvil, nose, sleeve, and retaining ring is secured. The final product is
shown in Figure 14.

9
Figure 13: Full Gearbox with Spring, Hammer & Anvil

Figure 14: Full Impacting Chuck Assembly

10
 b. Functionality
Figures 11 through 14 show all parts for the impacting mechanism. Power is delivered from
the motor and transferred to the driver gear. The driver gear rotates the two idler gears in opposite
directions. The outer internal gear is fixed to the frame of the driver which causes the gears to
behave like a lever transmitting force to the two pins which causes the whole housing to rotate.
The housing rotates the entire shaft to control the impact mechanism. The shaft features a spline
channel cut into the shaft with a radius of two millimeters. A four-millimeter ball rides in the spline
channel and is compressed against the hammer via a ring channel inside the hammer. As soon as
the hammer experiences resistance against the anvil, the curvature in the channel causes the ball
to move towards the spring which pulls the hammer along as the ball is constrained axially against
the inner ring. The hammer is compressed against the spring until resistance is removed
immediately after the hammer jumps the anvil. This is best illustrated in Figure 15. The powerful
motor speeds up the hammer for nearly a 130-degree rotation until it strikes the anvil delivering
impact force. Standard hex drilling tools can be inserted into the ball locking chuck. The powerful
motor can deliver a maximum of 3800 impacts per minute driving a stubborn screw swiftly.
III. Motor & Switch
The design of the motor and switch were based off available images of replacement parts
and disassembled models. The main component (seen in figure 15) consists of the winding ribs,
the winding itself, brush pads for electrical contact, and the shaft with a splined end for connection.
Surrounding this is a type of sleeve which contains a set of magnets and keeps the motor stable
and gives it more support (figure 16). On each end of the main component sits a set of bearings
that interface with the housing to give the motor most of its support and to reduce friction (figures
17 and 18). The housing itself is here modeled as a single piece and contains the electrical leads to
power the motor, and seats for the bearings to sit in nicely, and a casing to protect the motor in
case of shock (figure 19). The main working principle of this kind of motor is that the brushes in
the housing connect to loops of wire in the main component, flowing current and creating an
electromagnetic field. This electromagnetic field is influenced by the magnet array in the sleeve
and creates a torque that spins the main component. Once it has spun through a certain angle, the
brushes temporarily break contact and dissipate the electromagnetic field before reversing it,
causing the motor to try to accelerate to a new point just ahead of it, before disconnecting again
and flipping the field, over and over to create rotational power from electricity.

11
 Figure 15: main component, with and without the winding

The main component is easily the most visually busy part in the motor. Most of the dimensions
were based around reference images of various motors. The shaft goes all the way through the
motor in this configuration, and brush contacts would be located on the left side of the impeller.
The impeller here is in a pull configuration, with cutouts to allow air to flow past it and over the
wires to improve cooling if it spins. The ribs themselves are extremely thin to allow for more wire
volume to create more power and take up much of the volume with the wire itself, approximated
roughly here as a hollow cylinder of copper. The main shaft then tapers down to the size needed
to interface with the center gear to drive the impact hammer geartrain.

Figure 16: motor sleeve

12
 Figures 17 and 18: Rear bearing (Left) and front bearing (right)

Figure 19: Motor housing and leads

The motor housing is useful for both protection and to help channel airflow. However, some motor
housings are now coming in a configuration that splits in the middle of the housing, and uses the
sleeve to fill in the gap of the housing, which has its own pros and cons. The housing seen here
has oblong holes to allow the impeller to draw in outside air and pushes it out through the front
slots to cool the whole motor assembly, which is seen in the next figures.

13
Figure 20: Full motor assembly

14
Figure 21: Color coded version of motor assembly cross section. Orange is the main component. Black is
the sleeve. Blue is the rear bearing. Green is the front bearing. White is the motor housing. Also note that
the impeller scoops up air from the oblong holes at the rear of the housing, and pulls it towards the core
of the main component and assembly.

15
 Figure 22: In-line view of the airflow channels through the wiring on the main component

The switch is a very simple component to model, as its form was the most important aspect
of it as opposed to its accuracy. A simple rectangular block was profiled, and edge blended into
shape to resemble that of the triggers found on most drills before a post slot, guide slot, and flange
were added to it to constrain its motion inside the shell (cutaway seen in figure 23). The switch
was then created afterwards, mating up to the trigger and modeled to be mounted horizontally to
allow the assembly to better fit inside the shell of the driver. This very simple switch assembly is
seen below in figure 23.

Figures 22 and 23: cutaway of the trigger (left) and the entire simplified switch assembly (right)

16
Finite Element Analysis
The main analysis to be conducted will be analyzing the reaction forces within the driver
when the bit is binding and the driver is at full power as a worst case under normal use scenario
for the gearbox of the drill, failing if components yield or break. Another supplementary analysis
of a drop test will also be performed, with possible load modifications to either location or height
to figure out the limits of the driver, with failure being analyzed based on the likelihood of the
height and location needed to break the driver. Verification may come in the form of observing
the deflection predicted by the model and ensuring it is within reason. A third analysis may also
be performed on the heat output of the motor and the ability of the driver to bleed the heat away
without causing problems either from melting the surrounding plastic or binding the motor. Most
likely, verification may come from hand calculations using the specs of the motor and natural
convection to make sure the temperatures are within a reasonable range.
I. Impact Analysis
For the drop test of the driver, a new rectangular part was created to represent the ground.
This part touched the shell of the motor and was kept as a separate solid body, as shown in Figure
24. It was assumed that if the appropriate weight was assigned to the shell, the assembly did not
need to be used in order to save computational time and to simplify the analysis.

Figure 24: Housing with slab

17
 A pre-analysis was done to determine the constraints and loads needed to validate the
results of the FEA. It was assumed that the object is in free fall, meaning that the object initial
velocity is 0 m/s, acceleration is constant and is 9.81 meters per second squared, and that the object
is falling from roughly a height of 48 in as shown in Figure 25. It was also determined that a normal
impact driver weighs about 4 kg with everything assembled with the shell being made out of ABS
and the top layer of the ground being made up of steel. These materials were assigned during the
meshing process.

Figure 25: Pre-Analysis

For the mesh of the part, a 2D mesh (CTRIA3) of 3 mm was applied on the housing
as the shell walls of the motor were too small for a 3D mesh and would throw an error when trying
to mesh. Then, a linear 3D tetrahedral mesh (CTETRA10) of 10 mm mesh was applied to the slab,
as shown in Figure 26.

18
 Figure 26: Mesh Conditions
As for the actual FEA, the boundary conditions used, as shown in the Figure below, consist
of a surface-to-surface contact (under simulation object type) to represent the housing and the
ground touching. Then, a fixed constraint was applied to the bottom of the slab and the surface of
the housing touching the slab. Finally, a gravity load was applied to all the bodies and an
acceleration load was applied to the housing to simulate it falling. The input acceleration used was
𝑚
326.05 𝑠2 found during the pre-analysis.

Figure 27: Mesh constraints and loads

19
The initial mesh size yielded the two solutions shown in the Figures below.

Figure 28.1: Von Mises Stress Analysis for mesh of 3mm

Figure 28.2: Displacement for mesh of 3 mm

20
 The same processes were also done for mesh sizes of 4, 6, 7, 7.5, 7.75 and 8 mm. A mesh
convergence plot, shown in Figures 29 and 30, is used and from the displacement, seems that the
mesh converges near 2.8E-4 MPa for the Von Mises Element Nodal Stress. While this is not perfect
as it would be expected for the Von Mises Stress mesh convergence to converge with a difference
of less than or equal to 1 %, this simulation converges with a difference of 2.1% between the 7
mm mesh size and the 8 mm mesh size. On the other side, the displacement seems to converge at
6.3E-6 mm with a 4.47 % error between the 6 mm and the 7 mm mesh size. This could be due to
small errors at certain mesh sizes when the shell of the motor is concerned or the thickness of the
component that holds the battery as that’s where the maximum displacement occurs, especially
since that’s the area that hits the ground first. As seen from the magnitude of the displacement and
stress values, it is safe to say that this driver would last a long time if its only dropped within a
height of 0 to 4 foot, which is normally the height at which it will be held depending on the height
of the person holding it.

Figure 29: Displacement Mesh Convergence plot

Figure 30: Von Mises Mesh Convergence Plot.

21
 As for the validation of the results, conservation of Energy was used to determine the final
velocity of the housing assuming it fell with a starting velocity of 0 and that it fell off 48 inches
away from the ground. The initial kinetic energy was set to 0 because the housing is not moving
initially, as the velocity is 0. The final potential energy is equal to 0 because the housing is still
fully moving and has not stopped at all. The final velocity was found to be 4.89 m/s by solving
both sides of the equation, as shown in Figure 31. Next, the force produced from the drop can be
calculated using the formula 𝐹∆𝑡 = ∆𝑝 = 𝑚∆𝑉, and the acceleration from F=ma, where F is the
force calculated earlier and m is the mass of the housing. Finally, the stress can be calculated by
dividing the force by the surface area where the housing touches the ground, which was found to
be 2.78E-4 MPa.

Figure 31: Validation Calculations

From the results, it seems that the best mesh size for the Von Mises Stress is the 6 mm with
an error of 0.931 % when compared to the theoretical value found in Figure 30. All the errors were
computed for their corresponding mesh sizes and were tabulated in Table 1.
Table 1: % Error for Stress from theoretical

22
II. Gearbox Analysis
i. FEA Computer Simulation
The anvil and hammer produce the impact and long-term fatigue of these parts can lead to
damage and failure. It is best to perform an FEA analysis to determine if the part can withstand
the force induced by the hammer. Figure 32 shows the initial mesh of two millimeters and the load
provided by the edge of the hammer when it strikes. A total of six fixed constraints were applied
to the walls of the hex shaped chuck to simulate the resisting force of the object being driven.
Figure 33 shows the simulation and Von Mises stress as a maximum of 9406.92 MPa. Increasing
the mesh elements by reducing the element size to 0.5 mm- shown in Figure 34, caused the mesh
to converge to a maximum Von Misses stress of 2.10E4 MPa. The simulation is shown in Figure
35.

23
 Figure 32: Anvil with 2 millimeter applied mesh, Axis Distributed Load

Figure 33: Completed Anvil Simulation, 2 millimeter mesh, Distributed Load

24
 Figure 34: Anvil with 0.5 millimeter applied mesh, Axis Distributed Load

Figure 35: Completed Anvil Simulation, 0.5-millimeter mesh, Axis Distributed Load

One observation that must be noted is that the force distribution causes different effects than
expected. The load applied along the axis appeared to have greater effects on that direct region as
shown in figure 35; the load caused the anvil to form a crease. With minimal load distributed to

25
the center of the anvil, the simulation was run distributing the load across the whole fin of the anvil
as seen in Figures 36-40.

Figure 36: Anvil with two millimeter applied mesh, Surface Distributed Load

Figure 37: Anvil with 0.5-millimeter mesh Distributed Load Results

26
Figure 38: Anvil with two-millimeter mesh Distributed Load Results

Figure 39: Anvil with four-millimeter mesh Distributed Load Results

27
 Figure 40: Anvil with six-millimeter mesh Distributed Load Results

.
Figure 40: Anvil with eight-millimeter mesh Distributed Load Results

28
 Figure 41: Mesh Convergence Plot

It is evident when the mesh size approaches eight millimeters, the Von-Misses stress converges
to about 271 Mpa. The best way to verify this result and claim, it is best to perform a standard
stress calculation. The shear force and tensile, compressive loading forces will be analyzed to
verify the maximum stress is consistent with computer simulation.

ii. Validation of Results

To verify the computer simulation is consistent with theory, further analysis is applied. The anvil
contains two fins attached to the hex axle – a cylinder. This is shown in Figure 36 where the load
is applied across the whole fin. The simulation proved that the area of most interest is the anvil's
connection to the fins as other regions show minimal to no stress. By observation, the anvil fins
will undergo shear and tensile stresses. Given the anvil fins are symmetric and attach with the same
diameter, hertzian stress calculations can be eliminated. Noticing the anvil fin will shear as it
rotates along the same axis of rotation as the hex shaft, the shear stress is computed using the force
applied and the area of the fin contact to the hex shaft. In other words, the area is treated as if it
were a rectangle but uses arc length and depth of the fin. The tensile stress is computed differently.

29
Figure 42 shows that the force distribution varies from 0 lbs. at the neutral axis to 1,800 lbs. at the
opposite end. All calculations performed are shown in Figure 42.

30
31
32
 Figure 42: Theoretical Validation of Anvil FEA

Working with a difficult surface, it was best to make assumptions despite knowing the results
wouldn’t be as exact. The difficulty involved not only translating the force to the region of the
anvil, but also differentiating the stresses between normal stress with shear along the curvature of
the shaft. Using the force applied despite a pressure gradient spanning along the anvil fins to shaft
connections, it is best to say the results supported the simulation results with a six-millimeter mesh
size.
III. Thermal Analysis
The thermal analysis was based on a couple of worst-case scenarios, with the motor being stuck at
max power draw in a hot environment while completely stalled with no airflow through the
impeller. This would route all the heat generated through the sleeve and into the motor housing.
However, if the motor housing heats up too fast, it may soften and damage the plastic casing
surrounding the impact driver and render it useless. For the max power draw of the motor, DeWalt
seems to indicate on their site a peak power of 300 watts. No airflow through the impeller means
the motor would be depending on natural convection and thermal mass to not hit too high of a
temperature until it shuts off. The time to shutoff was figured to be around 30 seconds, as anything
beyond this would seem beyond unreasonable, especially with the sound created by a stalled
impact. In the current setup, the sleeve would take the heat flux of the motor, and pass it through
to the mousing itself, who’s surface comes close to the plastic casing. This plastic casing tends to
be made of polypropylene, which starts to rely at around 130°C, which will be our maximum
allowable temperature. The dimensions of the motor housing were plugged into a natural

33
convection equation to approximate the convection coefficient of the housing, using an initial
guess at the average surface temp of 100°C and ambient temperature of a warm day at 30°C to get
6.8 W/m2K, seen in Figure 43 below.

Figure 43: Calculation of convection coefficient

From here, the assembly was boiled down to the two critical components, being the sleeve and the
housing. The sleeve was simplified by removing the magnet extrusions and was set as a generic
iron to characterize its thermal behavior. The housing was left intact because its shaped cutouts
had an initially unknown effect on the spread of heat, so were left in, and was set as an aluminum
alloy, as most motor casings use aluminum for its excellent ability at getting rid of heat. These two
were then joined together and a mesh created, constrained by a heat flux of .13263 W/mm2K
(300W from motor divided by 2261.9mm2 area of the inside face of the sleeve), and a convection
constraint on the outside of the housing of 6.8 W/m2K. The initial mesh was set at 2mm, as it
captured the details of the motor extremely well and was still relatively fast to run, before being
scaled down to a mesh size of .6mm. .5mm would’ve been preferred, but the mesh exceeded the

34
node limit and was unable to run. The final mesh can be seen below, omitting the symbols denoting
convection for visual clarity.

Figure 44: Final Mesh

The following figures visually show the temperature distributions across a variety of mesh sizes,
with a table summarizing the information at the end.

35
Figures 45, 46, and 47: Node size of 2mm (top left), 1mm (top right) and .6mm (bottom).
Temperatures in *C above ambient.

36
 Figure 48: Summary of all runs. Temperatures in *C above ambient.

Mesh analysis across these runs can now be performed to make sure the solution converges on a
point, and this point can be analyzed. The analysis is seen in the following figure.

Figure 44: Mesh convergence graph

Between all the runs, the max temperature at the surface seems to be settling around 102.4°C above
ambient, and the internal max temperature seems to be settling around 111.5°C above ambient.
Adjusted for a 30°C room, and the distribution on the surface appears to be around 100°C, meaning
our guess for the Convection coefficient is relatively sound. However, our max surface temp of
132.4°C on a warm day is past the melting point of polypropylene, and well past softening it. This
may be an issue if no stall or over-temperature sensors are put into the driver itself to protect itself
in case of a prolonged high-power stall. Circuitry to prevent these cases would not be too hard to
add on to the boards present already within the driver. In fact, most drills and drivers have overload
protection to prevent against this very scenario from happening, and we’ve shown it in fact could,
and probably has happened, especially if it were to be a particularly hot day.
Validation was done by evaluating the energy being put into and taken out of the system by hand
and comparing that to the energy left in the system as calculated by the software to ensure the

37
energy being put into the model was not higher than it should be. If these numbers are off by a
significant margin, the model may be putting more heat into the system than it should have, and
giving us artificially inflated temperature values.

𝐻𝑖𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑡 = ∆𝐸𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙

 
𝑇𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙
𝑄𝐴𝑖𝑛 Δ𝑡  −  ℎ𝐴𝑜𝑢𝑡 ( ) Δ𝑡 = ∑ 𝑀𝑐Δ𝑇
2

𝑇𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙
𝑄𝐴𝑖𝑛 Δ𝑡 − ℎ𝐴𝑜𝑢𝑡 ( ) Δ𝑡 = (𝜌𝑉𝑐Δ𝑇)𝑠𝑙𝑒𝑒𝑣𝑒 + (𝜌𝑉𝑐Δ𝑇)𝑐𝑎 sin 𝑔
2

𝑊
(. 13263 ) (2261.9467𝑚𝑚2 )(30𝑠)
𝑚𝑚2
2
𝑊 2
1𝑚 82.4927°𝑐
− (6.8 2 ) (7323.65𝑚𝑚 ⋅ ( ) )( ) (30𝑠)
𝑚 𝐾 1000𝑚𝑚 2
𝐾𝑔 𝐽
= ((7.469 ⋅ 10−6 3
) (15833.622𝑚𝑚3 ) (447 ) (92.084°𝑐))
𝑚𝑚 𝐾𝑔𝐾
𝐾𝑔 𝐽
+ ((2.711 ⋅ 10−6 3
) (24149.328𝑚𝑚3 ) (896 ) (69.393°𝑐))
𝑚𝑚 𝐾𝑔𝐾

8940.4367𝐽 ≈ 8938.4650𝐽

Q, h, ∆t, were all defined parameters defined in previous parts of the simulation. V’s and A’s
were all measured from the model in NX. ρ and c were defined by the materials chosen in NX,
and T was measured by taking the average temperatures of nodes in groups or on surfaces based
on what the temp was for. In the convection part of the equation, Tout was divided by 2 for an
approximation of the average external temperature over the entire time period, and only nodes on
the outer diameter of the casing were considered. With this, we can conclude that the energy
present in the model to get the nodal temperatures in the solution are far from unreasonable for
this case.

38
References
I. Dewalt 20-volt Max Variable Speed Cordless Impact Driver (1-battery ... (n.d.).
Retrieved November 29, 2022, from https://www.lowes.com/pd/DEWALT-20-Volt-
Max-Variable-Speed-Cordless-Impact-Driver-1-Battery/1000136219
II. Pencil sketches - impact driver. Coroflot. (n.d.). Retrieved December 1, 2022, from
https://www.coroflot.com/bobbyarmstrong/Pencil-Sketches-Impact-Driver

39