Aidan Donoho – Electrical Engineering Student

Author: Aidan Donoho | Major: Electrical Engineering | Semester: Fall 2024

This research aimed to evaluate three different motors based on their cost, size, sound, speed, torque, and weight to determine their suitability for various engineering applications. By analyzing a Motor Viability Matrix, the motors were ranked by performance and overall viability, with total scores reflecting the motor’s strengths and weaknesses. Such evaluations are critical in embedded systems and robotics, where motor selection can directly influence the efficiency, durability, and cost-effectiveness of a design. Understanding motor characteristics not only aids in technical decision-making but also provides practical knowledge for engineering students and professionals.

This research topic emerged from a larger project focused on designing a tool to expand the accessibility of the trombone. The tool enhances inclusivity, utilizing synchronized and precise motorized movements to assist users. Selecting the appropriate motor for this purpose required a detailed analysis of various motor types, their capabilities, and their limitations. This need sparked the idea to evaluate and compare three distinct motor options, ensuring the tool could operate reliably under the required conditions. Throughout the process, I was fortunate to have the mentorship of Dr. Jeff Dix, whose guidance has supported my growth as a student and researcher.

Through this research, I gained a comprehensive understanding of the trade-offs involved in motor selection. Each motor presented unique advantages and limitations. The high torque motor excelled in strength, delivering 112 mN·m of torque, but its bulky 4.6-inch frame and higher cost of $25 made it unsuitable for compact or cost-sensitive designs. The medium torque motor offered a well-balanced performance with reasonable torque (78 mN·m), moderate speed (8000 RPM), and affordability at $15, making it ideal for general-purpose applications. On the other hand, the high-speed motor was fast (12,000 RPM), lightweight at just 55 g, and cost-effective at $17, but its low torque (24 mN·m) and loud operation limited its suitability for precise or demanding tasks.

One of the largest challenges was managing the parameters and ensuring an unbiased ranking process. Different applications prioritize different features, which made it difficult to weigh one parameter against another. Initially, this caused uncertainty about which motor would be best suited for the project’s requirements. To address this, I worked closely with other project members and colleagues to establish scoring criteria that reflected the specific application needs of the musical accessibility tool. These criteria were designed to fairly evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each motor while prioritizing precision, reliability, and compatibility with the project.

For the specific application of the accessibility tool, the high torque motor proved to be the most suitable choice. Despite its higher cost and larger size, its strength and stability ensured precise and reliable performance, aligning well with the project’s need for synchronized and repeatable movements.

Moving forward, I plan to apply this knowledge to aid in the design and development of a wheelchair attachment, which also relies on motorized systems. My experience with motor evaluation will be instrumental in integrating motors and control systems effectively into future projects.

This research taught me to critically analyze engineering trade-offs, such as balancing speed, torque, weight, and cost. I also learned to evaluate how these trade-offs aligned with specific application requirements. The most valuable lesson was attention to detail when working with technical data and patience, both of which will benefit me in future research and professional endeavors. This experience has equipped me with valuable technical and analytical skills, which I look forward to applying to future projects and studies.