~1 1 1 f1 I ' ".5 . .w- ' U .1:..‘.-. :MOI§.. .u-u‘n .4: . . Si: “’12:; . j n... n . I: , - ~.- . ’- 9.- fivm 'N‘O‘ ' I .noq-t .o 90.. -‘ -0 Q Ma... -- l-A -.‘_, ‘ ,3: I .k‘~—.Un§ on‘.’ 0. 0-D ‘ r 1- -‘ In ~ ~. - ‘HQ-A" I 9'Huuuo upt. .o ~30-‘ ‘- 3.. '. ’6 ' sun‘. - - - ‘. .-... 4,. o‘F'VL} '“a I 3‘ tr“ . ”ohtglcou'. . . .. ‘E‘SWV' .' '1'!" J : . . _. g ‘ . -. .1“ O—g‘:fi4‘;‘°‘ ’_J r - I i: ..—~ u--- . A . ,._ v": .... A - I ,' 3.. . -. ~5¢-,~_ O..- \-,. -O ' J. ‘0 I " '_.- ‘9 - ..'(-- - o v -- - I. .. 1-1}. .wN'Ou. - O 7' 1-08. .- o .k J’.‘ ‘ ’ ' -oo. '3‘ - . I ‘. *.-l ~ ~ . - o . -.-‘ o if- I. -f"‘ I .u .n .. . .- 4 no. a. - 1). I ha. d r - . ' o; “o_ ‘ , .— u I D ‘ l .' oer o- ‘ ‘H II I --“¢.¢ . .. 2‘. ‘1} 14". r' I v - . . . .'.( n I 0‘. I' O. P ‘ ¢~ » a I . c - _. I .-~0~0‘o ‘a. o.. ¢.-'..,-.' “17",: I n- - - - - ».‘ 9 'NV' . . I ,. :4- , I .. ‘m-'-- 3., o- I .7. fr” r 1'” '..k 0 I .. .. Iv - - - o I" ,v‘l' I .f. i. . -9- . ‘v -v‘- v. .u' I 2 y - . . I " o 9 , 52' i 1;; n .J‘. ‘ ° '_"__.L ‘ 7"?‘.,‘- i 3“. -, - . A. t .— an. OJ.~~W ' '3? 7-4.:r. I a‘ o_. Y D i I‘V" fi’é -"J‘, I .0 \‘r 0" f" -, o . ' A6 - 9 I ‘, _ -0vwv- ' I. ‘J‘ '- ' . I ‘fi‘t' "; 5- 0 ‘ --9 - L— O- <0‘.* 5 A ..-‘ t.. u I 4:— .. - , p - u‘ .0“ O o s :‘»< «Cu-m I .. d 0 — y" . ‘ t 9‘ 4- I . - -. do!» H II ‘ c - . i- - ‘. . A I ..-.‘ O I - . . a. l‘ (" 'V I . ¢ v - 'H - - a ' v ' . t ‘ - 3 :0" I r» ’9' 3.1 " u“ a .la~ ‘ . 0 JV- '- ‘31. I -.!.-.-. .k . .‘..¢..... .- ,_ .x .9; I .t. '1' a; . - . ~_ 4 ‘ (.‘CI'. -. ‘ .u.' . E t. ' ‘ ' ‘ t . - 0-D o , ‘ - “ . . ' - f?.A"'tl.I-J .0 . ' .‘.L.- - 3.1!:- -‘ - -' h- '....-.'I.-oJJl‘-I'fl -' I J. .. Q.. I , , . . . ”-4 . -- - ln-r .. ~ ' . ‘v‘r u.-t.‘.»ld1-‘b ‘f’ I~ . . '- oc- .-,¢ .0. a . -04 . ”Lg ,5 v. . u “n -.,. 4!» ~ 0 c . M awful“, .- .. - O. J 1... I .1 . uh“ I 'o - . ... .- ‘c' v- .. . ...‘..p:..- ,. M4. ‘.C. .o, .'.‘}..,1,',:“ 'nvgq ‘3': ”£3.”- . ‘J 3 'T‘ L? I I... Q ’4...” - ub‘ - H -' - --~" "w w. «um. -~ .?. «a. “a. . ~ 1 g_ ‘ n. .30. _' f. "1~"-’- :‘T-J." ‘F. r441 J‘l. - " o ' .\ < 1 -t:. ”4 rec.-.“ L-.§‘...-aw . ~.‘v . mac. ... 0 a ’ Lolv’u-s o f- ‘ "b u 0' ."- -. -l.. u' f‘ a - ' '~. 'J‘- A ‘t' 4 . E.‘ n'o: I "t .A. 9 y... ' ‘ ' . -' ' {:4 I o .1 ~ . .-.I\. unp.nt.l '- 4" 1-4 ,. I ..-. , . 4‘"!- a o (1.]. ,5 g‘_- _ cite . .o.. a' .4 -n- .&.L~‘. r w.“ in I. . .J. nl-.’Q ‘ .10.... X § 0 ~ ~ " '35 . on o_ '. 1" 4. -.|- ' “.Al. ".0 t - ~ I 4 - ‘0‘! ' ." #14:. -3‘- fig: 'n---.o-.; ’ - . ,v.» ' ‘ . ‘ ;. . »-.. 1-..v. nu...vvor . .. v ' .. fi‘w. our. ... >. 3.!“ 2' I 4:0 ‘4”: r 4‘ " 7 h‘ J“. . a,“ x a '. . I 42‘“ r¢,“.}'£._.,._ “H "9“ -"‘",~"w;~--- \‘19- .nvunhu . -.. .‘ "“" 0"‘=""‘ ‘U- w-“w ' ”a run it!“ .I\ . "I n I. 9 0.4.“- u .3! .v.. ’1'. H"- g" "" ‘ ‘ r...“ . ' ""‘ I'm, . ’o- 3?" "I, h". "I" ' "59"! '~‘>' 'v O'JI'“ H 3‘ A0 II \a .:.. . u. . ‘1‘ ‘~0-.-"-' "-.l“'u £~\,-l 0‘ r ' n“ , "El. . } - _ ... Pf‘l ~.-, ._,.. a_~, .7” , ' .11: v4.3" ... ' I A I '4‘... n ' x :31: “HI?" - 6" c 1‘ y- 'l 'I “-‘I e _ .— . _ . . - ¢ P . 0' r'a‘ ‘01P]. . .. ‘. ...' gJL‘I s: tmm .s 0"- . ~ I A . , , . v‘ 9 n -- 4’». ‘ O“, ‘;:.l".'1;r‘f'lor '5‘ r": "~---o‘-'v. "‘ . A? ’l'l“ :7 ‘0‘ d 'J' 2' '19‘5- ~.- .. .- Jy’n v g I ' ’13:; '- A.’I‘.‘ 'l‘u 0:! 4". V'- umygp)” 0‘0). v,-' I " \P‘I'Jd If [14111.‘3 uW-tucn' c: '--',g_ p ‘f..';€.'-'.‘ " .4... 0 a“ - , up "a". 0-...K .- ‘1‘vr.... ,., 'U'L’ .uon unfu- -.I'Py\)'r.ri‘o r ‘l "(v ‘H‘vOOU arm 1- fi - ’ -“I'I,."."°‘: ‘0': _ 5, :D, 5“ , N] x v .1 arm»: 5‘: 4 . a 3” g” uo ~ ’9.“- I O v V. i. 43 .w “n 7 - t - .. .0, .n.|.h .1 _~ oJ4'-.-'.,.. .-‘.’.-' (7 _. . 1" :9 “u. o - o. '1' .. .u u‘ , A. ._. ' :' 'i Q o .‘ _ .. -“"‘ '£ -. ; I i' " . I ’9 .. n . .t‘w :.",; ,‘.“‘”"4. . , . :W . '° ' x'vrt _ .e. I : 34's "" ' 0 " 'a"‘I" ' 'II 5 ' f ': ’-' A! ‘ ll .‘fl1'.n.:4'~h.fll- {- . -. an!» "-ttwn'w' H4" x ”up. «Iran-uh- ‘1. 31"..." "’1: "'.-‘".""':" :‘O-{ ‘5‘! ..t-. o‘.-'- ' '6 I~,- nu (V J ‘c'u‘-‘..,v ('3‘ 'n . '9“. . .‘ I" a‘ 9 ' 0‘. I- ‘ .' .‘"',.,'~.",._:. .(1 ‘ A ’ ' "‘r Of - "'11-;er 0 ~. "’ 'V‘LOI “a.“ ;_‘4._‘.‘...1" ‘I-I , t . -d c a . . _'6£ N" ‘5’". . I 1 ._ 10.; ! ‘ H - t' ' ' ’2‘ I .4 __ j I .. I . I ‘V I" " P". "—8 ‘>n'aIO--I-.'-y-t ‘1 I '.-4 ‘ l 'l Ll" .;_ .I "l‘ 1n:'l',- n“. '1' ‘0 . ,. ‘ -‘-l " ' ' '1'!“ :‘..n‘. “\P‘l'ld q u .‘o... a». . ;*" ‘. LI'I‘.’ '5 .A‘ v . " ~‘~ 1 .' I ' 1. ' 2' ~ ‘-‘:' ~- --.- , r..". . a - - l s .- -' 0 w A ' ‘ . ‘a‘t'.<4 ‘.."I . . I 3 ' "‘ y ‘ “ - ' ‘ ' v V ' Jg'lgv.e‘ ' '3‘; ..°l..‘ '- .‘. c R t--. -- u ‘ar v,‘-“_l-Ion' ' . ' I “I '.'I ,I 4 a-.. . :5 - . ‘. O N'P',)V v -'- 7 _ 3' .I'; ' \l'J‘ b":' ‘ ' ‘ ‘ - ¢ ‘70 u: 6 . ‘3 r ‘r ~ «v 0"» ,l. ul- .. . , ‘..'_".. ' A r "”‘n;'. ' .t..."|“|‘ ' .‘ I‘t'f‘ . , - ‘.;:’.'. ..~t.':‘|."‘ ‘1'. .4...u‘ - ’I‘ I. o l- - . .. "3. . . , _- , R ‘ ' 0 fly“! 0 ’0 .. f ,- y‘o"-;g IV_4. I. J r ‘0 -_rn-6. ' . . ”A, .1. ," . o .'.'..l ',—.lvr~ '. n ‘ r1 " m ¢ 303: - t-I _ ' . ' .9 9‘ " fa :.,’J..’ h r I. ' ' b , . I I ' t ‘l‘.' " "' ° 5 q - Q . II- 3". --‘00‘ D... '4 E: .9. ( 1’ ';l I! I ’ ‘ h.“ a‘.( -’: .bu u¢ I "O; I, :‘J;i“ ' I t I: it." I I I‘."? - 1TH“; fl'jgff.’ ' .l n ' "“ Ii?" 0" ‘0 ‘M t .. ' lo I 0‘ ..-. a ' I : -. ‘~’ H _ ° '. L . I" "I. ' - I. o. . . ' wk" ' 0 t b. I A" %’ Av ‘ ' A‘" ‘ ‘ . ‘ I ‘ ’ ‘ .""- \' uh ‘ o ‘ O ‘ u I", t; "j 'IJ‘OIO "0‘. . i" .r - ’ . n -.o:t'0I-':q7:'ov \& | Q; ‘..r. n1..-,.v.._‘. . M U- . 1‘... .-.l - ‘IO- 0 I I .IUI‘ 'u0"l\'"'a"‘° "'f'I' a v I OI . hlpv' '- u «'I v )‘f : - , lax-I. . ‘. u 4 .' 5 I ‘ ’_-o" 'D I‘o-Q "n..." "'.”n' lr‘ '. ° '4 V ’ ' ‘ ' . '9 It. 0 .- '1"! I Q,l.ll’ "1 3; o n" ' r ".0: .Or . mo-< r -. a .' - v n6. u‘ .,.,. f" ‘ "‘."u. *' '0 9‘. \ w‘. ‘ .4. ........._,, ¥.....4_ , " .,_ "" ' " t "r "‘ w -' 0.. I .q‘J .. a ' "-I. . I‘O ‘ .- I o q 04' I.” ..\. ‘ .0, I ‘0 .c‘l'I-‘tl . oo‘mn. ,. ‘g " ' ' o n ......, any", , VI I ‘..u. 7". --0 V ‘9 . A. 0., a~ v'_ ”n. Iv" at"! .‘q'r.~-.-'~'-'g-----r¢.4.». ‘ " "NJ v ‘ ~ A "..l 1*.-. ‘r4 ..' '*:" ' -. . col I v .1 on. I a . ...‘ ‘ A. J_ v." ' .- ‘0‘ ..., ' v -. I. ' I '. ‘.I‘x . t':“- I . " ' f ‘0. g o_ ' . 1' .' . --_. . ... ,, .3 . . "A” . . . ,. h . l , ‘19.. f, ,\.o . . '- ,. ,4 .5” . '1‘ "‘ifv’g‘l- c I. ‘1) k3 ’ o I " I. § I '0 . - I". .12. I; I") ' ‘ 'I ‘2“ -..'..;'\ I, I "$41.?‘Y3‘3: .. . o -. ‘ ' . . '. - . . , :- ‘ ‘. ' ‘3 ‘_- . .' ’ 1— .. _ o_ .5.’ —'.' 4. -1 . ‘0‘ r_, _ ‘9 -_ ' ; .‘o. :,'. ‘o: '2‘; ,‘.,f': n - '-' ' .~'-. - ‘.- § _.._ '0 O!- _o_ g g <‘, ‘— §-. 3129 00908 '2003 P. Mil/7W@M/l/‘W/‘flfl/W/ll7/7/7t This is to certify that the thesis entitled A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS AND ERROR ESTIMATION OF PORTABLE DATA RECORDERS US. TO MEASURE PACKAGE DROP HEIGHTS presented by LINDA KAYE GRAESSER has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for HAS—TLdegree in BAMBL i M 544471 Major profe%r Date W 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution _ ,._ , _. i ”'“AF‘f s Lélzgéi‘a r 1 ° mm s Mzmwan .. i Univws i1 —_—~ PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE I «MN 99 gg‘ “N H Ti 0153 I ESL Ma‘_______] it ‘m 112000 DEM (7120033 j MSU Is An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution endrcmuna-on A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS AND ERROR ESTIMATION OE PORTABLE DATA RECORDERS USED TO MEASURE PACKAGE DROP HEIGHTS BY Linda Raye Graeaaar A THESIS Bub-ittod to Michigan stat. University in partial fulfillnont of tha roguirananta for the dagrao of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Packaging 1991 ABSTRACT A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS AND ERROR ESTIMATION OF PORTABLE DATA RECORDERS USED TO MEASURE PACKAGE DROP HEIGHTS BY Linda Kaye Graaslar This study investigated the error associated in measuring package drop heights for two commercial recorders developed by Dallas Instruments (DHR) and Instrumented Sensor Technology (EDR). Four drop heights of 18, 24, 30, and 36 inches were studied. Drops were made on bottom, edge, and corner orientations. In addition, shock measuring capabilities of the two recorders were studied. The results of the study are presented in the form of mean percent errors and corresponding variation in measuring drop height by the recorders for the various drop heights and orientations. The study concluded that the DHR predicts the drop height most accurately with the least variation, using the "zero-g" channel. Both recorders show much larger variation in predicted values (up to 30 percent) when using the acceleration-time data. The edge and corner orientation are generally underestimated by the two recorders due to the inability of the accelerometers to deduce between partial rotation on impact. Copyright by LINDA RAYE GRAESSER 1991 This is to certify that the thesis entitled A mm: ANALYSIS AND ERROR ESTIMATION OF POW DATA RECORDERS USED TO MEASURE PACKAGE DROP HEIGHTS presented by LINDAIAYEGRAESSER has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for meme mm If 5/1/71 Major pretax! Date W 0-7639 Msuauwwwwm This thesis is dedicated to Robert Frost, because it was he that said . . . . . Two roads diverged in a wood, and I- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. ACKNO'LEDGEMENTS I am sincerely grateful to my major professor, Dr. S. Paul Singh. Thanks to the Distribution Consortium at the School of Packaging for providing the financial assistance for this project. I would like to thank my other committee members for their help, Dr. Gary Burgess and Dr. George Mase. I am indebted to Amy Walburg, Janiene DeVinney, and Stephanie Keith whose friendship I value greatly. I will never forget the support and encouragement they have provided during my academic career. Thank you to all the graduate students I met this year at the School of Packaging, whose friendship and culture I gained, and learned to treasure. Finally, I feel especially thankful to my mother, Mary Jane, my brothers and sisters, and the rest of my family for their support during this year. vi TABLE OP CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 DROP HEIGHT RECORDER . . . . . . . 3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RECORDER . . . 4.0 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 SHOCK MACHINE TEST . . . . . . . . 4.2 DROP TESTER TEST . . . . . . . . . 5.0 DATA AND RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 SHOCK MACHINE RESULTS . . . . . . 5.2 DROP TESTER RESULTS . . . . . . . 6.0 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES Appendix A - Shock Table Processed Data Appendix B - Drop Tester Processed Data Appendix C - DHR & EDR Raw Data . . . . vii Page .viii . ix . 1 . 4 . 16 . 16 . 21 . 25 . 25 . 26 . 29 . 29 . 31 . 42 . 43 . 45 . 47 . 56 LIST OF TABLES Tabla 1. Mean Percent Error of Measuring Velocity Change on Shock Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Mean Drop Heights Measured, Mean Percent Error, and Standard Deviation for Bottom Drops . . . . 3. Mean Drop Heights Measured, Mean Percent Error, and Standard Deviation for Edge Drops . . . . . 4. Mean Drop Heights Measured, Mean Percent Error, and Standard Deviation for Corner Drops . . . . 5. Comparative Analysis of Recorder Features . . . viii Page 30 33 34 35 41 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Cushion and Recorder Placement in the RSC . . . . 2. Mean Percent Error and Variation for Velocity Change Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Mean Percent Error and Variation for Bottom Drops 4. Mean Percent Error and Variation for Edge Drops . 5. Mean Percent Error and Variation for Corner Drops ix Page 28 32 36 37 38 1.0 INTRODUCTION The damage to products resulting from the handling and transportation through logistical channels exceeds billions of dollars annually (Braddock et al., 1972). The shock and vibration environments encountered by packages during shipment, handling, and storage can cause severe and costly product damage. This economic waste may be decreased considerably by understanding the dynamic forces on the product that occur in distribution environments and packaging for optimum protection. Packaging engineers need detailed information about the distribution environment to determine if products require packaging protection. If protection is needed, fragility information about the product is used for designing optimum packaging. Inadequate knowledge of a distribution channel may result in either overpackaging, raising serious environmental concerns, or underpackaging, resulting in product damage or hazard. The information gathered to describe the severity of handling operations has historically been the height-of-drop. The height-of—drop or drop height refers to 1 2 the vertical distance from the ground or impact surface that the package falls under the influence of gravity. Drop height data has been collected by several methods. Examples are visual observation, camera, and instrumented packages. Instrumenting packages is considered to be the most effective technique for gathering data related to the hazards of a typical distribution cycle (Godshall and Ostrem, 1979). The main obstacle in the performance of field measurement programs has been the lack of self-contained instrumentation. The requirements for an instrument to be used for this purpose would include its ability to accurately measure drop height, nature of impact surface, drop orientation (side, top, bottom, edge, or corner), time reference to determine when impacts occurred, and an internal storage capability for unattended recording over several days. The Drop Height Recorder (Dallas Instruments, 1988) and Environmental Data Recorder (Instrumented Sensor Technology, 1987) are two recording devices that can measure the distribution environment for extended periods of time. Both units are similar in size, weight, and appearance. They use internal tri-axial accelerometers to record the acceleration-time history and determine package drop height from this. 3 The purpose of this study was to compare these two portable data recorders and their ability to accurately measure package drop heights. Specifically, this study had the following objectives: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) To measure equivalent drop heights using both the Drop Height Recorder and Environmental Data Recorder in a laboratory environment. Analyze which recorder measures drop heights with the maximum accuracy and precision. Establish relationships between recorder type, measured height, and drop orientation. Determine the accuracy of recording acceleration- time histories for the two recorders types. Examine if the recorders over or under estimate drop height, and if they record consistently within machine type. Objectively analyze the recorders and accompanying software in ease of operation. 2.0 LITERATURE REVIE' Devices which are capable of measuring and recording the package shock environment must be able to measure the impact conditions while the containers are in shipment, handling, and storage. Organizations which have been involved in the development of these devices include Wright Air Development Center, Air Force Packaging Research and Development Laboratories, Army Ballistic Missile Agency, Sandia Corporation, and the Packaging and Allied Trades Research Association (Surrey, England). Many prototype instruments were developed from these studies and used in various field measurement programs. The literature review that follows will be presented in chronological order to highlight the studies which have produced the most successful shock data recorders. The Wright Air Development Center conducted a study of the supply channels of the U.S. Air Force involving primarily Railway Express shipments (Bull and Kossack, 1960). They shipped 43 pound 19 inch cubical cleated plywood boxes instrumented with Impact-o-graph° accelerometers (Chatsworth Data Corporation) used in 4 5 conjunction with a cubical spring suspension system. The purpose of the spring suspension system was to control the input to the recording instrument such that the instrument was independent of the type of surface impacted, i.e. compressibility of the surface. The Impact-o-graph' accelerometers record peak acceleration only. The study only included routes involved in shipments from one Air Material Area to another Air Material Area via Railway Express. Some of these shipments were also made via Air Freight. The results were based on 49 trips involving 13 packages. A total of 862 drops were recorded above 3 inches and the data showed that only 5% of the packages received drops in excess of 21 inches (Bull and Kossack, 1960). Another extensive measurement program employing commercial impact recorders has been reported by Packaging Consultants Incorporated, Washington, D.C. (McAleese, 1962). In this study, thirty-three shipping containers with various shapes and weights (long 3:1:1, average 3:2:2, and tall 1:1:2; and light 60 and 90 lbs., medium 150 and 250 lbs., and heavy 500 and 1500 lbs.) were constructed and instrumented with Impact-o-graphs'. The packages were shipped by truck, ship, and air within a radius of 200 miles of Washington D.C. Laboratory tests were done to relate instrument peak acceleration to actual drop height. The wide variations in the instrument recordings made any comparisons with drop height difficult. Based upon these 6 results, it was concluded that the rough handling tests for packaged electronic equipment were too severe. The Packaging and Allied Trades Research Association (PATRA) of Surrey, England, conducted a study involving 22 pound, 17%" x 12" x 11%", corrugated fiberboard boxes (Gordon, 1963). The PATRA Drop Recorder was used in this study. This instrument consisted of an arrangement of weights pivoted about an axis perpendicular to a recording chart and arranged so that each was sensitive to shocks along one of the three sensitive axes. Three recording pens recorded drops on opposite paired faces of the container. Drops were recorded on a waxed paper chart which was driven at a constant speed. 0n impact, the paper was advanced by a shock operated driver. This separated individual shock traces and made it easier to read consecutive drops. The recorder was mounted inside a package with a 2 inch layer of polyurethane foam surrounding the recorder. The results were obtained from packages shipped via railroad in mixed goods consignments. Based on 196 trips, 1479 drops above 3 inches were recorded. Consistent with the study performed by the Wright Air Development Center, only 5% of the packages received drops in excess of 21 inches (Gordon, 1963). The Packaging and Allied Trades Research Association developed another recorder called the PATRA Journey Shock 7 Recorder (Pierce, 1963). This instrument consisted of a spring-mass system attached to a counter unit and immersed in oil. Each unit had uni-directional sensitivity and counts the number of drops above a preset height on a given face of the package. By using a number of counters, one can cover the different faces and set them to record at different heights. The drops can be estimated between the heights set for the different counters. This instrument was also packed with a two inch layer of cushioning around the recorder. The cushioning made the shock recorded by the unit relatively independent of the hardness of the surface on which the package was dropped. Thus, the response of the recorder was a function of drop height and the angle of the package on impact. The instrumented packages, each containing a recorder, had a weight of 52 pounds and measured 17" x 12" x 13". Twenty-four packages were shipped over six different routes on passenger trains and mixed good railroad shipments. The results of this study showed that the distribution system does influence the drops received by packages. The most severe handling was felt by the packages shipped by passenger train, followed by truck and mixed goods rail shipments (Pierce, 1964). Another investigation of the handling environment was conducted by the National Safe Transit Committee (The Railroad Environment, 1966). In this study, commercial impact recorders were mounted in wooden boxes and shipped as 8 ordinary products. These instruments recorded the shocks encountered during shipment by the displacement of a spring- mass system. The system was linked to recording pens which recorded the deflections on a recording paper driven by a clock mechanism. The pen deflections were recorded in zones of shock from 1 to 5 with the 5th zone representing the most severe shock. The results of this study provided information on the relative severity of the transportation and handling environment. This study did not provide quantitative data on the drop heights during handling. No relationships were given in the report between the zones-of- shock and drop height. (The Railroad Environment, 1966). One of the most sophisticated recorders of its time was the Natick Drop Recorder developed by the U.S. Army Natick Laboratories (Venetos, 1967). One of the primary goals of the recording device was to measure the important environmental conditions, such as, shock, temperature, humidity, and superimposed load experienced by containers during shipment, handling, and storage. The Natick Drop Recorder was a solid state electronic unit capable of recording unattended for a duration of six months. Impacts were sensed by a transducer consisting of a magnetic rod which rides within a rigid nylon tube. The magnet was connected at both ends to coil springs. Upon impact, the relative motion of the magnetic rod relative to coils of wire wrapped around the tube produces a voltage which is 9 proportional to the impact velocity. The recording unit can record the voltage signals from three mutually perpendicular transducers. A fourth recording channel was used to record a timing mark. This instrument was extremely useful in measurement programs of the cargo handling environment. The Natick Drop Recorder was used in a study to show the percentage of drops over an indicated drop height. The data showed good correlation with regard to drop height probability and package weight (Ostrem and Rumerman, 1967). In 1975 the U.S. Army Natick Development Center used the Natick recorder in a study involving shipments of 25 pound fiberboard boxes. The study was based on data from numerous shipments via truck, aircraft, Parcel Post, United Parcel Service, and overseas shipments aboard Navy ships. The latter shipments were made with the package positioned at the bottom center of a unitized load, using 15 packages on 80 trips. The data reported was not broad enough to characterize a particular distribution cycle (Barca, 1975). The Natick Drop Recorder was developed to provide the required instrumentation and has been used successfully in the field. However, today's knowledge of solid state electronics has advanced to the point where this instrument is now obsolete. Another successful recorder was designed by the Air Force Packaging Evaluation Agency through a contract with 10 i Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc. to develop a miniature electronic transportation environment recorder (Venetos, 1975). One of the advantages of this recorder was its smaller size (47/0'I x 5%" x 5%") and weight (six pounds). The reason for the significant reduction in size of this recorder was the use of metal oxide semi-conductor (MOS) technology circuitry combined with the use of miniature sensors. This technology yields compact circuitry with low power requirements. This recorder was one of the first to use piezoelectric accelerometers. One accelerometer was used for each axis of the recorder. The triaxial accelerometer separated the shock data by polarity for each of the three recording channels. The recorder had a measuring range from 2.5 G to 90 G and also had the ability to measure temperature and humidity. Using internal batteries, it could operate for over two weeks. One of the main advantages of this recorder was its ability to readout pre-analyzed data. The Air Force had tried to use the recorder in measurement of the shock environment experienced by a set of standardized cushion packs that were extensively used in the shipment of fragile items. In addition to the measurement of item response in terms of peak G, data was obtained on the shipping environment by placing the miniature shock recorder in a specially designed shipping container. This ”QA 11 L container provided approximately equivalent response regardless of the orientation of the container at impact. The information on drop height was used to verify the reliability of previously developed design criteria (Venetos, 1975). In 1979, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Products Laboratory compared the data from a U.S. Air Force study and a U.S. Army Natick Development study (Godshall and Osterm, 1979). The U.S. Air Force study used was the 43 pound cleated plywood boxes used in their supply channels involving primarily Railway Express shipments. The data used from the U.S. Army Natick Development Center was the study of the 25 pound fiberboard boxes used in shipments via truck, aircraft, Parcel Post, United Parcel Service, and overseas shipments aboard Navy ships. The data was plotted on log probability paper to indicate the percentage of drops over indicated drop heights. The data showed, for example, that only one package in hundred was dropped from a height greater than 58 inches for the 25 pound container, and 30 inches for the 43 pound container. Although completely different instrumentation was used to record data for each study, the data showed good correlation with regard to drop height probability and package weight. The data for drop heights was replotted to show the number of drops recorded at the 12 different heights. Once again there was good correlation between the studies showing a large number of low level drops, and very few drops at the higher levels. The Natick study also reported data on the angle of impact. The data showed that the container bottom surface received 70 percent of all the drops, and the edge and corner drops occurred from much greater heights than the flat drops. Distribution of drops were: 80 percent bottom and top surfaces combined, 12 percent front and back surfaces, and 8 percent side surfaces. Direct comparisons of the studies showed a similar trend regarding the effect of package weight and the distribution of drops, but the drop heights and probability levels are significantly different. The reason for the differences were not certain, but could be caused by a number of factors including a difference in data reduction procedures, or a difference in the sensitivity of the instrumentation, particularly for angle drops (Godshall and Osterm, 1979). The United States Dairy Association’s Agricultural Research Service and the Agricultural Engineering Department at Michigan State University developed an Instrumented Sphere (IS) data-acquisition system to dynamically measure and record impacts to agricultural products (Tennes et al., 1989). The IS was used to evaluate the impacts sustained by apples as they traveled from the applebox dumper at packing 13 W i houses through distribution to the retail stores. The IS was a large apple sized battery powered data acquisition sphere 3.5 inches in diameter and weighing 0.77 pounds. The electronic components were cast in beeswax, which becomes the outer surface of the sphere. The unit used a triaxial accelerometer to record each impact pulse and determines peak acceleration, duration, total velocity change, and exact time of impact. Each IS was able to operate unattended for several hours, collecting and storing all accelerations above a user specified trigger level. The IS had an internal clock to record the time of impact in order to identify the source of the most severe impacts. It was used to determine the typical magnitude of apple bruise damage caused by commercial packing house operations, probable causes of major bruising, and to estimate the decay likely to result from packing line bruising. The IS had been used primarily in apple handling operations, but it had been used with other fruits. Researchers have estimated that within the next two years the IS and bruise damage relationships should be worked out for most fruits. The IS system has been commercially available from Techmark, Inc. of Lansing, MI. Many packing line equipment manufacturers, dealers, and consultants have used the IS to analyze packing lines and to make modifications to reduce bruising and improve quality (Brown, 1991). 14 In 1991, Thomas Voss looked at the drop heights encountered in the United Parcel Service small parcel environment in the United States (Voss, 1991). In this study the Drop Height Recorder was used to analyze the movement of packaged goods through various United Parcel Service logistical channels. The study incorporated the effect of drops, tosses, and kicks encountered in the small parcel environment as a function of package weight and volume. Three size and weight configurations were used in this study. The container sizes were small (12" x 12" x 12"), medium (18" x 18" x 16"), and large (26" x 20" x 19") and the weight categories were light (20 pounds), medium (30 pounds), heavy (45 pounds). Seven size/weight combinations were used; the small/heavy and large/light combinations were eliminated due to the inability to meet weight restrictions needed for that size combination. Thirty-five round-trip shipments were made from Lansing, MI to Monterey, CA, five shipments for each combination. The results of the study showed that the highest drop observed was 42.1 inches for the Small size package. The size of the package had no significant effect on the drop heights. Lighter weight packages for the smaller size experienced higher drop heights. Weight did not have a significant effect on the medium and large size package drop height. Ninety-five percent of all drops occurred at 30 inches for the small/light, 26 inches for the 15 medium/heavy, 24 inches for the small/medium and medium/medium, and 18 inches for the medium/light, large/medium, and large/heavy packages. 3.0 BACKGROUND Two portable data recorders were evaluated and compared in this study. The first type of units are called a Model DHR-1 Drop Height Recorder (DHR), (serial numbers 8806-5 and 8912-4), and is manufactured by Dallas Instruments of Dallas, TX. The second type of units are called a Model 200 EDR—1 Environmental Data Recorder (EDR), (serial numbers 0035 and 0038), and is manufactured by Instrumented Sensor Technology of Lansing, MI. This chapter discusses the features and capabilities of both recorders. It also describes the internal instrumentation used in these devices. 3. o e' h Reco de The Model DHR-l Drop Height Recorder is intended for use in determining the free-fall drop heights experienced by product and packages over extended periods of time (up to 16 days). The DHR is a relatively small (6.6 inch cube) and lightweight (9.5 pounds) device whose exterior is made of shock resistant plastic, but not a complete shell. Two rechargeable nickel cadmium batteries are connected to the 16 17 unit by the wiring carrying the voltage to the central unit, and a nylon cable surrounding the unit. This arrangement makes the unit somewhat unstable, due to the ease of disassembly of the batteries from the central unit. The DHR has an internal programmable clock that provides the time and date of event occurrence. The clock has sixty—four user specified alarms which activate and de- activate the DHR's operation. This recorder has a piezoelectric triaxial accelerometer that can withstand acceleration up to 125 g’s with a frequency response from 2 Hz. to 1000 Hz. The DHR is not equipped for external accelerometers. The recording capacity of the DHR is dependent upon the duration and sample rate selected by the user. For example, 200 events at 50 ms durations corresponds to a 10 kHz sampling rate. The DHR also allows the user to specify the type of memory: full/stop (when the memory is filled, it stops recording), wrap (will overwrite the oldest data in memory), and maximum (once the memory is filled, it compares new peak values to the lowest event in the summary data memory, and replaces it if the new value is greater). The recorder has an LCD display that permits the user to review the time, date, battery condition, number of events recorded, and other operating parameters to ensure that the proper data is being obtained while in the field (Dallas Instruments, Inc., 1988). 18 The DHR is designed as an event triggered, four channel data recorder. It stores digitized waveforms of selected shock events on three channels, including pre-trigger data. The fourth channel is used for storing the "zero G" summation signal. Auxiliary data, such as, temperature, battery voltage, time, and date, is recorded in random access memory (RAM) along with the signal data. The DHR calculates a "true" drop height and an "equivalent" drop height. The DHR stores a composite signal consisting of the summation of the three acceleration signals of a triaxial accelerometer during free-fall (a "zero G" signal) as pre-trigger event data. It also stores the full time history of all three post-trigger acceleration signals in a solid state memory. To calculate the "true" drop height, the triaxial accelerometer data is processed by a high gain amplifier that is used to sense a change to a zero-G state (a free- fall condition). The data is summed and the signal is processed as a separate fourth channel. It is digitized and stored in RAM for later analysis. Since the time from the onset of the zero-G state of the recorder to the time of impact is known, the free-fall distance is calculated using the free-fall equation: 2 h = 9t (3-2) 19 where: g = acceleration due to gravity (386.4 inches/second) measured time of free-fall (seconds) n ll hz== zero-g drop height (inches) To calculate the "equivalent" drop height, the same triaxial output is also processed by a low gain circuit, digitized, and saved in RAM as the impact acceleration-time history. The three digitized waveforms represent the shocks in three perpendicular directions and may be vector summed to produce a resultant acceleration-time history and the orientation of the device at the moment of impact. The areas under the three acceleration-time curves are calculated to determine the velocity changes for the three directions. Once the velocity changes are known, the equivalent drop heights for each axis is calculated using the following equation: - Av 2. 1 (3'3) 12 — <—) — 1+e 2g where: 4V = velocity change for each channel (inches/second) e = coefficient of restitution acceleration due to gravity IQ ll 20 (386.4 inches/secondfi h = equivalent drop height (inches) Once equivalent drop heights are calculated for each of the three axes, the free-fall vertical drop height is calculated by adding the individual drop heights: Heighttotal = 12x + by + h, ‘3'“ The DHR does not use the coefficient of restitution directly, but uses a user specified correction factor when calculating equivalent drop height. These factors may be changed by the user to make the calculated equivalent drop heights as nearly equal to actual known drop heights (or the zero-G drop heights if a free-fall drop is made) as possible. The factors vary inversely with the value of the equivalent drop height calculated, that is, a larger factor will yield a smaller equivalent drop height. The DHR integrates the area under the waveform for each channel and multiplies it by the individual channel correction factors, which take into account the coefficient of restitution. In this study, reports were generated with the standard correction factor (the factor calibrated for use of the recorder with the foam cushioning shipped surrounding the unit), then regenerated with the correct correction factor calculated from the data recorded (Dallas Instruments, Inc., 21 1988). 312__Enxirennental_22ta_3222rder The Model EDR-1 Data Recorder is a portable, self- contained digital recorder and sensor. It contains three internal tri-axially mounted piezoresistive accelerometers which can withstand accelerations up to 200 g's. Instrumented Sensor Technology uses piezoresistive accelerometers because these accelerometers, in general, respond better to constant acceleration and offer more accurate response characteristics at lower frequencies. The unit does, however, have the internal electronics to support the use of either piezoresistive or piezoelectric type accelerometers. The housing of the EDR is made of highly durable polyurethane resin material. The EDR does not have a LCD display to display the instrument’s condition in the field. In a low battery condition, the EDR will not respond when trying to change modes; it puts itself into its "hibernation" mode. Also the EDR does not have the alarming capability to activate at preset times. It does allow the user to input one start time delay, and one stop time delay to start and stop when needed. The EDR has a recording battery capacity up to one month without recharging. The sampling rate for this 22 recorder is similar to the DHR. The higher g-level, short duration events, would require a higher sample frequency than would be used for lower level, longer duration events. The EDR also allows the user to specify the type of memory: full/stop (when the memory is filled, it stops recording), and overwrite (uses a formula based on the slope of the acceleration-time history to compare new peak values to the lowest event in the summary data memory, and replaces it if the new value is greater). The EDR has been designed as a self-contained shock recorder so that it can be mounted to a vehicle, container, or other structure. Its small size (5% inch cube) and relatively low mass (8 pounds), enables the EDR to be shipped within a package or container, or even installed into larger pieces of equipment. The unit also has application as a shock recorder for external single-axis accelerometers. The unit accommodates four external channel inputs for using up to three remotely mounted piezoelectric accelerometers and a temperature sensor. The three accelerometer channels record simultaneously, and may be used to measure the distribution of shocks over different locations on a structure, or one shock in three different axes at a single location (Instrumented Sensor Technology, Inc., 1987). The EDR senses accelerations resulting from drops and 23 impacts. The triaxial acceleration waveforms are sensed and recorded in the unit. The recorded waveforms are processed using digital sampling techniques (Which is a process of converting analog waveforms into a series of discretely quantized time samples. It determines the effective resolution of the resulting digital samples and sample frequency) available in the EDR software program for deriving package drop height information on each recorded event. The EDR records and stores acceleration waveform data only when certain pre—set acceleration waveform criteria are met. It records an acceleration event when any one or more of the three selected accelerometer input channels exceed a user specified preset G "trigger" level (positive or negative). Once a shock waveform is generated from a free falling object impacting a surface, the peak acceleration is determined. The peak acceleration.(A5) is the largest sampled g—value (positive or negative) on the shock waveform. The time at which the shock waveform reaches its peak acceleration is also recorded and denoted as “SJ. The total velocity change is divided into two quantities, the area under the curve up to the point “Hf is ‘V{, the impact velocity, and the area under the curve from ”Hf is ‘V/, the rebound velocity. Velocity changes measured from shock waveforms can be 24 used to compute drop height. The EDR calculates drop height from the change in velocity (AV) in each direction. The individual velocity changes are used to determine the resultant velocity change using the following equation: (3-6) ==JAVf-+AV§-bAV§ A VResul tan 1: The resultant velocity is then used to calculate the equivalent drop height using the coefficient of restitution (e), determined by the ratio of ‘V/ toi‘VJ. The height is calculated by the following equation: (3'7) A vResul tan t: ) 11+e 2"g ( .Héight = The EDR has an acceptable range of ‘e' between of 0.3 to 0.75. If the calculated value is out of this range, the EDR asterisks the value to notify the user that a default value of 0.5 has been used. 4.0 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN In order to achieve the objectives of this study, tests were designed to accurately and consistently obtain drop data. The analysis consists of comparing the DHR with the EDR in their ability to precisely and accurately measure equivalent drop heights. Two units of each model were used in this study. A programmable shock machine system and free-fall drop tester were used to generate the shock pulses to the DHR and EDR. All testing was performed at standard laboratory conditions of 25° C and 50% relative humidity. 4. hock c 'n es The purpose of this test was to determine the capabilities of the two recorders to accurately measure shock pulses. A MTS 846 Shock Test System was used in this study. The velocity change was measured using the two recorders against a known shock input. The shock input was measured using a MTS 466 Waveform Analyzer. All drops were made on the gas programmers to produce a shock pulse with a square waveform. The gas pressure was set at 250 psi due to 25 26 the DHR's inability to withstand high acceleration levels. The bare recorders were bolted down to the center of the platen of the shock table with a wooden fixture. The shock table was dropped from 6", 12" 18", and 24" in replicates of six. All drops were made on the bottom surface of the recorder. All data was uploaded from the recorders and imported into Lotus's Symphony spreadsheets. All of the processed data is listed in Appendix A. The raw data is listed in Appendix C. 4.2 ro Test Te t The Lansmont model PDT 56E Precision Drop Tester was used for all free-fall drops. This machine is equipped with a drop leaf pneumatic actuation system. The high velocity pneumatic system accelerates the drop leaf vertically downward at a force greater than gravity. The packaged recorders are dropped on a 46" x 36", 0.5" thick steel plate which is mounted on a concrete base in accordance with ASTM D775. The recorders were packaged in zoo-pound C-flute corrugated regular slotted containers (RSCs) with an inch of Ethafoam 220° cushioning (Dow Chemical Company) surrounding the recorder on all six faces. Due to the different sizes of the recorders, containers were constructed to allow only 27 the recorder and one inch of cushioning. Figure 1 shows a diagram of the units and cushioning material inside the RSC. The recorders were dropped by orientation from four heights. They were dropped on the bottom, edge, and corner, from 18", 24", 30", and 36". The drops made on the bottom face, the recorders were dropped on the bottom of the container. The edge drops were at the front-bottom edge. The corner drops were at the right—back-bottom corner. This was done in replicates of six. A new container was used for each orientation and then dropped from the four heights. At least one minute between each cycle of drops was allowed for the cushions to recover. The data was uploaded from the recorders after each orientation of drops at all four heights. After the data was uploaded it was then imported into Lotus's Symphony spreadsheets. All of the processed data is listed in Appendix B. The raw data is listed in Appendix C. W DER: 6.6" cube (recorder) 8.6" cube (inside RSC) EDR: 5.5" cube (recorder) 7.5" cube (inside RSC) The DHR or thO EDR 1" of Cushioning Figure 1: Cushion and Recorder Placement in the RSC (top view) 28 5.0 DATA AND RESULTS All of the data was analyzed and the mean percent error determined. The results for the two tests performed are presented in the chapter. All of the DHR1 and DHR2 drop height values are computed using the acceleration-time data for the Dallas Instrument Recorder. The DHRlz and DHR2z drop height values are computed using the zero-g channel data for the Dallas Instruments Recorder. The EDRl and EDR2 drop height values are computed using the acceleration-time data for the Instrumented Sensor Technology Recorder. 5. oc b e esults Table 1 shows the velocity changes measured by the recorders represented in mean percent error. The measuring system in all four recorders uniformly measures the velocity change from a known shock input. The EDR's record much more consistently than the DHR's not only by recorder, but also within machine type. The EDR's measure velocity change with an accuracy of about 1%. Overall, a mean percent error of about ten percent, for all recorders, is generally acceptable. An explanation for the much lower value measured by the DHR2 at 24 inches could be due to cushion 29 30 lel. 1 Mean Percent Error of Measuring Velocity Change on Shock Table Mean Velocity Change .321§h£_ __DEEI__ __nnsz__ __BDBL__ __BDRE__ 6" 126.5 123.8 119.3 116.7 $3.1 $4.8 $2.1 $2.1 12" 188.5 181.5 170.3 169.0 $10.7 $8.8 $1.7 $1.2 18" 227.0 214.2 210.3 209.7 $3.1 $30.5 $1.9 $0.5 24" 267.8 191.0 245.7 246.2 $9.4 $27.0 $1.5 $1.1 Mean Percent Error 6" 10.1 5.2 0.4 1.1 $1.4 $4.2 $1.3 $1.0 12" 10.3 5.8 0.1 1.4 $5.4 $4.3 $1.3 $0.5 18" 8e]. 0e9 -0e9 1e? $1.4 $2.3 $0.6 $0.9 2". 8e4 -22e7 -0e7 1e7 $3.9 $10.9 $0.8 $1.1 31 failure. Figure 2 describes the mean percent error and the corresponding variation for all the recorders evaluated. 5.2 Drop Tester Results Tables 2, 3, and 4 represent the mean drop height and mean percent error values of the bottom, edge, and corner orientations, respectively, using the drop tester. Figures 3, 4, and 5 describe the mean percent error for the two types of recorders and the corresponding variation for the four drop heights evaluated. The variations represented in these Figures were determined using pooled standard deviation values for the two recorders of each type that were compared. Individual standard deviation values for each recorder type are listed in Tables 2, 3, and 4. The most accurate device should have a mean percent error closest to zero with no variation. From these figures it is evident that the drop heights computed by the "zero-g" channel of the DHR (DHR2) is the most accurate method to measure package drop height. All the mean percent errors for the DHR2 are the closest to zero with very small variation. The bottom orientation is most accurate, followed by edge and corner. The mean percent errors for the drop height computed using the acceleration data by the DHR (DHR) and the EDR Mean Percent Error (%) 3O eon-m seen 20- T T 10- f i 1 .t ? 0-——-§---§---§---i--- ‘ 9 -10.. —20- ‘30 0 1'2 118 214 Height(lnches) Figure 2: Mean Percent Error and Variation for Velocity Change Measurement 32 33 Table 2 Mean Drop Heights Measured, Percent Error, and Standard Deviation for Bottom Drops Mean Drop Height 221922 .2221. .2222. 22311. 22312. .2231. .2232. 18" 17.0 17.0 17.6 17.5 20.8 20.7 $1.6 $1.7 $0.3 $0.3 $1.2 $0.7 24" 21.9 25.1 23.2 23.4 28.7 27.8 $2.2 $1.4 $0.3 $0.1 $1.4 $2.1 30" 30.1 32.4 29.7 29.8 35.0 33.8 $2.8 $3.7 $0.6 $0.3 $1.5 $1.3 36" 37.9 40.9 35.6 35.4 42.2 40.5 $1.6 $2.5 $0.5 $0.2 $1.5 $4.3 MOID P.rc.nt Error 18" “5.6 “5.7 “2.1 “3.0 15.7 14.8 $9.0 $9.6 $1.6 $1.7 $6.7 $4.1 2". -8e7 4e7 -3e5 -2e4 19e4 16e0 $9.0 $5.7 $1.1 $0.5 $5.7 $8.8 30" 0.2 8.1 “1.0 “0.8 16.7 12.8 $9.4 12.3 $2.2 $0.9 $5.1 $4.5 36" 5.3 13.5 “1.2 “1.7 17.1 12.5 $4.4 $7.0 $1.5 $0.7 $4.1 $11.9 Table 34 3 Mean Drop Heights Measured, Percent Error, and Standard Deviation for Edge Drops Mean Drop Height E21922 .2221. .2222. 18" 14.7 12.4 $1.3 $2.3 24" 22.7 20.7 $0.7 $0.5 30" 26.4 25.6 $2.7 +1.3 36" 32.0 33.0 $2.2 $2.4 Mean Percent Error 18" -18.1 -31.3 $7.3 $12.8 24" -5.5 -13.9 +3.1 $1.9 30" -12.1 -14.6 $8.9 +4.2 36" -11.2 -8.4 6.0 $6.8 DHRI; QERZE 17.6 16.3 $0.1 $0.3 23.6 22.2 $0.1 $0.2 28.6 28.4 $0.2 $0.4 34.4 34.4 $0.3 $0.1 -2.2 -9.3 $0.6 $1.9 -1.9 -7.6 $0.5 $0.7 -4.7 -5.4 $0.8 $1.4 -4.4 -4.5 $0.7 $0.4 EDBI $1.4 EDR; 15.3 $0.7 23.8 $2.2 30.8 $2.0 40.5 $4.3 H- ‘00 H" GM 0000 0% \OH $3. 35 Table 4 Mean Drop Heights Measured, Percent Error, and Standard Deviation for Corner Drops Mean Drop Height 211921 .2221. .2221. 22211. .2222!. .2221. .2222. 18" 12.8 13.9 17.5 16.8 16.7 18.0 $1.6 $1.8 $0.6 $0.7 $2.7 $1.3 24" 19.7 20.4 23.1 23.5 21.8 23.2 $1.1 $1.7 $0.2 $0.4 $1.8 $1.7 30" 25.1 27.7 29.1 29.6 28.7 25.8 $1.9 $1.2 $0.3 $0.4 $2.1 $2.3 36" 28.0 33.6 34.9 35.5 36.5 32.2 $1.4 $0.9 $0.6 $0.4 $3.7 $3.8 MORE PIECODE Error 18" -28.8 ~22.6 -2.6 -6.5 -7.4 0.0 $9.2 $9.7 $3.5 $3.8 $14.9 $7.2 24" -18.1 -15.1 -3.6 -2.2 -9.0 -3.5 $4.6 $7.2 $0.9 $1.8 $7.4 $7.0 30" -16.2 -7.8 -3.0 -1.4 -4.4 -4.4 $6.3 $3.9 $1.1 $1.2 $7.1 $7.1 36" -22.2 -6.8 -3.7 -1.5 1.4 -10.6 $3.8 $2.6 $1.7 $1.0 $10.2 $10.6 Mean Percent Error (%) ODHR IDHRZ AEDR 30 - 20- f A i 10- i “---;---i--—r---r--- # .L _40 l l I 18 f4 30 36 Height(lnches) Figure 3: Mean Percent Error and Variation for Bottom Drops 36 Mean Percent Error (%) ODHR IDHRZ AEDR 30r- 20 T 10 I H". -40 ‘ 18 214 30 36 Height(lnches) Figure 4: Mean Percent Error and Variation for Edge Drops 37 Mean Percent Error (%) ODHR IDHRz AEDR 30' 10' I .s O 1 r _40 l l l 1 8 24 30 Height (Inches) 36 Figure 5: Mean Percent Error and Variation for Corner Drops 38 39 (EDR) are significantly larger and have a much larger RP variation associated to it. The DHR values are generally underestimated except for some bottom drops at 30 and 36 inches. The EDR values are overestimated for bottom drops. The edge and corner drops are generally underestimated by the EDR. Both the DHR and EDR show very large variation, up to 30 percent, of the mean percent errors measured for various drop heights and orientations. These figures provide a means to determine mean percent error and associated variation for drop height values measured by the two recorders for various orientations. Tables 3 and 4 show the data for edge and corner drops. These values are all underestimated. On impact, the kinetic energy acquired during the free fall is converted partially into rebound and rotation. The triaxial accelerometers cannot sense rotation, so, in effect they cannot deduce how much of the free fall energy has been converted into rotation, and how much into translation. They automatically assume that the shock pulse corresponds to pure up and down movement (translation). They will therefore underestimate the drop height. An inherent problem with the recorders is how they 40 factor in the coefficient of restitution. The DHR allows the user to use correction factors to manipulate the data towards the actual values. The unit is now calibrated and ready to be shipped into the distribution environment. The EDR uses a much simpler method, but not always correct. The EDR allows an acceptable range for the coefficient to lie, and if it falls outside that range, the unit uses a default coefficient factor of 0.5. It asterisks the event on the impact summary report to notify the user of the coefficient used. Another problem with the EDR is its inability to distinguish between a drop and an impact to the package from a material handling equipment or another package. It converts the measured shock pulse into a drop height value even though the package did not fall freely. The DHR can distinguish between a drop and an impact due to the zero-g channel. Table 5 shows a comparative analysis of the recorders of selected features and capabilities. coucsoa madmaxclwuu n cm>fluo use: munmwms most usuac>wavm mane on 0605 sowumcuonflntuaow ouwhzum>o can moum\aasm uncum\mouu H amazon o.w when none m.m HOHOEOHOHGOOM HMflNMflHH H sm>fiuc was“ pmamz Hmccmno mlouou munmflon mono usuac>wsvm mane as msofiufipcoo Scammwp GOA Hafiwxcz can .moum\HH5h .mcuz powuwowmm news as amazon m.m maso nos“ 8.8 IIIlumuummMMImmmflwmlmdelll censuses Hecuooem uo awakuIflfl e>wususmaoo «m av OHOCB magma umumfiouwamoo< 0HM3HMOm HO Twp msoflucasuaco Dawson noun muss sumacmm uQORHHocoo camauucH memo: whoamz wannad passes QNHW CONCLUSIONS The following conclusions were made in this study: 1. The DHR measures the drop height most accurately and with the least variation using the "zero-g" channel. 2. Both the DHR and EDR show large mean percent errors and associated variation (up to 30 percent) for drop heights measured using the acceleration- time data. 3. The drop heights for bottom orientation are most accurately measured followed by edge and corner which are generally underestimated. 4. The EDR can measure shock pulses more accurately than the DHR. 5. The advantages and disadvantages of each recorder are described in this study. 42 LIST OF REFERENCES Barca, F.D., Acquisition of Dgop Heighg Data During Package‘i Hgndiipg Qpegapions, Report N. 75-108-AMEL. June, 1975. Braddock, Dunn, and McDonald, Inc., An Economic Model of j/ Cargg Loss, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA, 1972. ' Brown. G.K.. MW, 4 Presented at the New England Fruit Meetings, 2 Sturbridge, MA, January, 1991. Bull K- W and Kossack C F-. W Tga apspprtapion Qonditipns, WADD Tech Report No. 60- 4, February, 1960. Dallas Instruments, InC-. W W. Dallas, TX. August, 1988. ./ Godshall, W.D. and Osterm, Fred E., Afl_A§§§§§E§D§_Q£_Lh§ ,/~ Common Carrier Shipping Epvironment, General Technical Report FPL 22, Forest Products Laboratory, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Madison, WI, 81979, pp. 3-10. Gordon, G. A., a a e an 1 u ' s 50- 1; Proceedings of the PATRA Packaging Conference, Oxford, England, September 15-20, 1963. Instrumented Sensor Technology, Qse; ngzating Manuai for v me ta Re or d -1 w 8 Sofpwaze Ppogzam, Lansing, MI, December, 1987. McAleese, J., tud Tes es ce u es or 1 Pagkaged and Pagked Electropig Egpipment, Bureau of " Ships, Contract No. NObs-84109 Final Report Packaging Consultants Inc., Washington, D. C., April, 1962. Ostrem, Fred B. and Rumerman M.L., Tgapsportatiop and ./ ndlin - hoc d V b 10 esi n C ‘ a ua ,’ Contract NAS-8-11451, Final Report MR 1262-2, General American Research Division, N 67-39312, April, 1967. 43 44 "J Pierce. c.w., Trials_f2r_Establ1shin9.3ealistie_£askage_le§t Sgpagpiaa, Proceedings of the PATRA Packaging Conference, Oxford, England, September 15-20, 1963, 2 pp. 269-81. \p‘Th- '-_. -.- E v r-n - - ‘ 'd- . .’..e . ; -.aflx ‘" Eepappnei, Technical Research Department, New York Central Railroad Co., 1966. Tennes, G.R., Zapp, H. R., Marshall, D.E., and Armstrong, P. R., gguising Impact Data Acgpiaitiop ang Analyaia ip ’{ / e ackin h Ipatrumenpeg Sphezaa(1§), ASAE Paper No. 88-6032, June 1988, pp. 1- 4. Eeasurenent_Qf_§hinning_Enxir2nments. The Shock and Vibration Bulletin 36, Part 6, February, 1967, pp. 173-181. ‘< Venetos, M.A., Development ang Appiigapipp gt a Mipiapuze '-co oer A -_ ze _o 1e.s-_:ue . re .n‘o-_ .t'o nv' m . The Shock and Vibration Bulletin 46, Part 1, October, 1975, pp. 55-56. Voss, Thomas M.. Dr2a_Heighta_Enecuntered_in.the_nnited C 1 Se V C Hal -. V Ora-1 w1 9‘ U1 ‘- Statea, Thesis for M. S. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 1991. //’ Venetos, M-A-. Dexel22ment_2f_a_2el221:2.Sheck_aecerder_fer \\ APPENDICES DHR1 Average DHR2 Average EDR1 Average EDR2 Average ._22__ 22_IIHE 2_EIIQI _122_ 122_IINQ 2.22222 121.0 110.2 9.8 165.0 168.0 -1.8 125.0 114.0 9.6 191.0 169.6 12.6 126.0 115.5 9.1 192.0 171.3 12.1 128.0 113.2 13.1 194.0 171.8 12.9 128.0 117.9 8.6 192.0 169.8 13.1 131.0 118.7 10.4 197.0 174.1 13.2 126.5 114.9 10.1 188.5 170.8 10.3 123.0 113.3 8.6 162.0 168.3 '3.7 128.0 116.2 9.9 186.0 170.6 9.0 118.0 117.5 0.4 184.0 170.8 7.7 120.0 118.6 1.2 186.0 171.9 8.2 122.0 120.3 1.4 185.0 173.6 6.6 132.0 120.6 9.5 186.0 174.2 6.8 123.8 117.8 5.2 181.5 171.6 5.8 116.0 116.5 -0.4 167.0 166.8 0.1 118.0 116.6 1.2 170.0 168.0 1.2 120.0 117.3 2.3 172.0 170.0 1.2 119.0 117.5 1.3 172.0 169.8 1.3 120.0 122.1 -1.7 170.0 171.4 -0.8 123.0 123.0 0.0 171.0 175.2 -2.4 119.3 118.8 0.4 170.3 170.2 0.1 113.0 113.9 -0.8 167.0 165.6 0.8 116.0 113.3 2.4 169.0 166.5 1.4 116.0 114.9 1.0 171.0 166.5 2.7 117.0 115.8 1.0 169.0 166.9 1.3 119.0 116.9 1.8 169.0 167.3 1.0 119.0 117.5 1.3 169.0 167.2 1.1 116.7 115.4 1.1 169.0 166.7 1.4 45 APPENDIX A Shock Table Data - Velocity Change (in/sec) DHR1 Average DHR2 Average EDRI Average EDR2 Average 1!" 225.0 223.0 232.0 225.0 230.0 227.0 227.0 146.0 230.0 225.0 228.0 228.0 228.0 214.2 207.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 212.0 213.0 210.3 209.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 209.0 210.0 209.7 46 APPENDIX A (cont'd) 122_IIN! &_21222 _212_ 208.8 7.8 272.0 210.6 5.9 272.0 210.5 10.2 247.0 209.6 7.3 273.0 209.9 9.6 273.0 210.5 7.8 270.0 210.0 8.1 267.8 211.6 -31.0 172.0 213.4 7.8 182.0 213.2 5.5 251.0 209.5 8.8 179.0 212.8 7.1 180.0 213.4 6.8 182.0 212.3 0.9 191.0 210.4 -1.6 244.0 210.4 -0.2 246.0 210.4 -0.2 248.0 211.6 -0.8 247.0 214.6 -1.2 245.0 216.3 -1.5 244.0 212.3 -0.9 245.7 209.0 0.0 247.0 205.3 2.3 245.0 210.4 2.5 245.0 205.2 2.3 248.0 207.2 0.9 246.0 205.6 2.1 246.0 206.2 1.7 246.2 212_True 3.5rrer 246.0 10.6 245.9 10.6 247.6 -0.2 247.6 10.3 243.1 10.0 246.7 9.4 247.0 9.4 246.9 -30.3 247.5 -26.5 247.5 1.4 247.5 -27.7 247.2 -27.2 246.4 -26.1 247.2 -22.7 245.5 -0.6 247.8 -0.7 246.8 0.5 247.4 -0.2 250.7 -2.3 246.7 -1.1 247.5 -0.7 239.2 3.3 245.1 -0.0 241.1 1.6 241.6 2.6 242.6 1.4 243.2 1.2 242.1 1.7 47 APPENDIX B Drop Tester Data - Drop Height 2119111111211 _.zp_.T 9 ___§_1 " 3.3m: __2__4" urLor Bottom DHR1 14.5 -19.4 21.3 -11.2 17.3 -3.9 21.9 -8.8 16.6 -7.8 24.7 2.9 15.7 -12.8 24.7 2.9 19.2 6.7 19.8 -17.5 18.7 3.9 19.1 -20.4 Average 17.0 -5.6 21.9 -8.7 DHRIs 17.7 -1.7 23.0 -4.2 17.4 -3.3 22.8 -5.0 17.3 -3.9 23.5 -2.1 17.4 -3.3 23.5 -2.1 18.1 0.6 23.1 -3.7 17.8 -1.1 23.0 -4.2 Average 17.6 -2.1 23.2 -3.5 DHR2 16.6 -7.8 26.5 10.4 16.2 -10.0 27.2 13.3 18.3 1.7 24.2 0.8 14e6 -18e6 23a]. -3e7 16.1 -10.6 24.8 3.3 20.0 11.1 24.9 3.7 Average 17.0 -5.7 25.1 4.7 DHR2s 17.7 -1.7 23.5 -2.1 17.5 -2.8 23.6 -1.7 17.7 -1.7 23.4 -2.5 17.0 -5.6 23.4 -2.5 17.1 -5.0 23.5 -2.1 17.8 -1.1 23.2 -3.3 Average 17.5 -3.0 23.4 -2.4 48 APPENDIX B (cont’d) Wmimim Bottom EDRl 20.0 11.1 31.0 29.2 20.0 11.1 28.0 16.7 22.0 22.2 28.0 16.7 20.0 11.1 30.0 25.0 23.0 27.8 28.0 16.7 20.0 11.1 27.0 12.5 Average 20.8 15.7 28.7 19.4 EDR2 21.0 16.7 24.0 0.0 22.0 22.2 29.0 20.8 20.0 11.1 30.0 25.0 20.0 11.1 29.0 20.8 20.0 11.1 29.0 20.8 21.0 16.7 26.0 8.3 Average 20.7 14.8 27.8 16.0 Orieatatioa _Typa_ 30" Er ag" 3 Ergor Bottom DHR1 32.4 8.0 39.8 10.6 _31.6 5.3 38.8 7.8 30.7 2.3 37.4 3.9 29.3 -2.3 36.7 1.9 24.2 -19.3 39.4 9.4 32.2 7.3 35.3 -1.9 Average 30.1 0.2 37.9 5.3 DHR1: 31.0 3.3 36.7 1.9 29.8 -0.7 35.4 -l.7 29.4 -2.0 35.2 -2.2 29.4 -2.0 35.2 -2.2 28.9 -3.7 35.2 -2.2 29.7 -1.0 35.7 -0.8 Average 29.7 -1.0 35.6 -1.2 49 APPENDIX B (COnt’d) 22122122122 .1122. ..122_ 2.22222. ._2£2_ 3.22222 Bottom DHR2 29.9 -0.3 42.4 ,17.8 35.2 17.3 44.0 22.2 36.6 22.0 43.0 19.4 35.7 19.0 40.0 11.1 26.3 -12.3 39.1 8.6 30.9 3.0 36.7 1.9 Average 32.4 8.1 40.9 13.5 DHRZI 29.2 -0.3 35.4 -1.7 29.8 -0.7 35.4 -1.7 29.8 -0.7 35.5 -l.4 29.8 -0.7 35.7 -0.8 29.8 -0.7 35.5 -1.4 30.1 0.3 34.9 -3.1 Average 29.8 -0.8 35.4 -1.7 EDRi 34.0 13.3 42.0 16.7 37.0 23.3 41.0 13.9 33.0 10.0 45.0 25.0 35.0 16.7 41.0 13.9 37.0 23.3 41.0 13.9 34.0 13.3 43.0 19.4 Average 35.0 16.7 42.2 17.1 EDR2 32.0 6.7 46.0 27.8 32.0 6.7 41.0 13.9 35.0 16.7 37.0 2.8 35.0 16.7 35.0 -2.8 35.0 16.7 46.0 27.8 34.0 13.3 38.0 5.6 Average 33.8 12.8 40.5 12.5 50 APPENDIX B (cont’d) 9119322191; _m_o __;§_." 3.23.2: _L" 3.51m: Edge Dual 12.2 -32.2 22.1 -7.9 14.0 -22.2 22.1 -7.9 14.8 -17.8 22.4 -6.7 15.7 -12.8 22.2 -7.5 16.0 -11.1 23.2 -3.3 15.7 -1208 2401 004 Average 14.7 -18.1 22.7 -5.5 D3318 17.4 -3.3 23.4 -2.5 1705 -208 2306 -107 17.7 -1.7 23.5 -2.1 17.6 -2.2 23.5 -2.1 17.7 —1.7 23.8 -0.8 17.7 -1.7 23.5 -2.1 Average 17.6 -2.2 23.6 -1.9 D322 12.9 -28.3 20.1 -16.2 14.2 -21.1 20.3 -15.4 14.2 -21.1 20.3 -15.4 1405 -1904 2104 -1008 9.0 -50.0 21.0 -12.5 9.4 -47.8 20.9 -12.9 Average 12.4 -31.3 20.7 -13.9 DHR2: 16.2 -10.0 22.0 -8.3 16.1 -10.6 22.4 -6.7 16.0 —11.1 22.3 -7.1 16.5 -8.3 22.2 -7.5 17.0 -5.6 21.9 -8.8 16.2 -10.0 22.2 -7.5 Average 16.3 -9.3 22.2 -7.6 inontgtiog Edge 50 APPENDIX B .2122_ 1mm Average DHR1! Average DHR2 Average DHR2: Average 18" 12.2 14.0 14.8 15.7 16.0 15.7 14.7 17.4 17.5 17.7 17.6 17.7 17.7 17.6 12.9 14.2 14.2 14.5 9.0 9.4 12.4 16.2 16.1 16.0 16.5 17.0 16.2 16.3 (cont'd) 3 Brrgr -32.2 -22.2 -17.8 -12.8 -11.1 -12.8 -18.1 -3.3 -2.8 -1.7 -2.2 -1.7 -1.7 -2.2 -28.3 -21.1 -21.1 -19.4 -50.0 -47.8 -31.3 -10.0 -10.6 -11.1 -8.3 -5.6 -10.0 2". 22.1 22.1 22.4 22.2 23.2 24.1 22.7 23.4 23.6 23.5 23.5 23.8 23.5 23.6 20.1 20.3 20.3 21.4 21.0 20.9 20.7 22.0 22.4 22.3 22.2 21.9 22.2 22.2 3 EEIOI -7.9 -7.9 -6.7 -7.5 -3.3 0.4 -5.5 -2.5 -1.7 -2.1 -2.1 -O.8 -2.1 -1.9 -16.2 -15.4 -15.4 -10.8 -12.5 -12.9 -13.9 -8.3 -6.7 -7.1 -7.5 -8.8 -7.5 51 APPENDIX B (cont’d) WMAWAW Edge EDR1 15.0 -16.7 24.0 0.0 18e0 0.0 23e0 -4e2 18.0 0.0 25.0 4.2 18.0 0.0 22.0 -8.3 15e0 -16e7 23e0 -4e2 16.0 -11.1 24.0 0.0 Average 16.7 -7.4 23.5 -2.1 EDRZ 15.0 -16.7 20.0 -16.7 16.0 -11e1 24.0 0.0 14.0 -22e2 22.0 -8e3 16.0 -11.1 25.0 4.2 16.0 -11.1 26.0 8.3 15.0 -16.7 26.0 8.3 Average 15.3 -14.8 23.8 -0.7 211133512; .112; _19L 3.3m _JQL 3.11:9; Edge D381 21.3 -29.0 35.0 -2.8 28.1 -6.3 30.4 -15.6 29.6 -1.3 34.3 -4.7 25.6 -14.7 32.7 -9.2 25.8 -14.0 30.4 -15.6 27.9 -7.0 29.1 -19.2 Average 26.4 -12.1 32.0 -11.2 28.5 -5.0 34.7 -3.6 28e9 -3e7 34e7 -3e6 28.9 -3.7 34.2 -5.0 28.2 -6.0 34.5 -4.2 28.5 -5.0 34.0 -5.6 Average 28.6 -4.7 34.4 -4.4 52 APPENDIX D (cont'd) mug; .mL _§__0" 3.51m: .25; 2.22:2: Edge DER: 27.5 -8.3 33.8 -6.1 25.6 -14.7 30.5 -15.3 23.5 -21.7 36.2 0.6 26.6 -11.3 33.6 -6.7 25.7 -14.3 34.7 -3.6 24.8 -17.3 29.1 -19.2 Average 25.6 ~14.6 33.0 -8.4 9332: 28.0 —6.7 34.5 —4.2 27.9 -7.0 34.5 -4.2 28.8 -4.0 34.5 -4.2 28.6 -4.7 34.2 -5.0 28.9 -3.7 34.4 -4.4 28.0 -6.7 34.2 -5.0 Average 28.4 -5.4 34.4 -4.5 EDR1 32.0 6.7 40.0 11.1 27.0 -10.0 40.0 11.1 33.0 10.0 42.0 16.7 27.0 -10.0 39.0 8.3 34.0 13.3 41.0 13.9 26.0 -13.3 40.0 11.1 Average 29.8 -0.6 40.3 12.0 sun: 28.0 -6.7 38.0 5.6 30.0 0.0 41.0 13.9 32.0 6.7 41.0 13.9 32.0 6.7 38.0 5.6 29.0 -3.3 41.0 13.9 34.0 13.3 41.0 13.9 Average 30.8 2.8 40.0 11.1 52 APPENDIX B (cont'd) .2.29_§__220 1 1: t1 .2122. _lL." Lung: _3j__" um Edge DHRZ 27.5 -8.3 33.8 -6.1 25.6 -14.7 30.5 -15.3 23e5 -21e7 36e2 Oe6 26.6 -11.3 33.6 -6.7 25.7 ~14.3 34.7 -3.6 24e8 -17e3 29e1 -19e2 Average 25.6 -14.6 33.0 -8.4 D332: 28.0 -6.7 34.5 -4.2 27.9 -7.0 34.5 —4.2 28.8 -4.0 34.5 -4.2 28.6 -4.7 34.2 -5.0 28.9 -3.7 34.4 -4.4 28.0 -6.7 34.2 -5.0 Average 28.4 -5.4 34.4 -4.5 EDR1 32.0 6.7 40.0 11.1 27.0 -10.0 40.0 11.1 33.0 10.0 42.0 16.7 27.0 -10.0 39.0 8.3 34.0 13.3 41.0 13.9 26.0 -13.3 40.0 11.1 Average 29.8 -0.6 40.3 12.0 EDnz 28.0 -6.7 38.0 5.6 30.0 0.0 41.0 13.9 32.0 6.7 41.0 13.9 32.0 6.7 38.0 5.6 29.0 -3.3 41.0 13.9 34.0 13.3 41.0 13.9 Average 30.8 2.8 40.0 11.1 Origngggiog Edge 52 APPENDIX D .2122. ..222_ DERZ Average DERZE Average EDR1 Average EDR2 Average 27.5 25.6 23.5 26.6 25.7 24.8 25.6 28.0 27.9 28.8 28.6 28.9 28.0 28.4 32.0 27.0 33.0 27.0 34.0 26.0 29.8 (cont'd) & EIEOI -8.3 -14.7 -21.7 -11.3 -14.3 -17.3 -14.6 -6.7 -7.0 -4.0 -4.7 -3.7 -6.7 as" 33.8 30.5 36.2 33.6 34.7 29.1 33.0 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.2 34.4 34.2 34.4 40.0 40.0 42.0 39.0 41.0 40.0 40.3 38.0 41.0 41.0 38.0 41.0 41.0 40.0 3.22222 -6.1 -15.3 0.6 -6.7 -3.6 -19.2 -8.4 -4.2 -4.2 -4.2 -5.0 -4.4 -5.0 11.1 11.1 16.7 8.3 13.9 11.1 12.0 53 APPENDIX B (cont'd) WMLLMJLW corner DERl 11.9 -33.9 20.2 -15.8 10e3 -42e8 19e4 -19e2 11.7 -35.0 19.5 -18.8 14.4 -20.0 17.9 -25.4 13.6 -24.4 21.6 -10.0 15.0 -16.7 19.4 -19.2 Average 12.8 -28.8 19.7 -18.1 DHR1: 18.8 4.4 23.2 -3.3 17.3 -3.9 23.1 -3.7 17e8 -1e1 22e8 -5eo 17.4 -3.3 23.5 -2.1 16.9 -6.1 23.5 -2.1 17.0 -5.6 23.1 -3.7 Average 17.5 -2.6 23.1 -3.6 DHR2 11.9 -33.9 21.0 -12.5 11.6 -35.6 20.6 -14.2 13.4 -25.6 22.3 -7.1 15.3 -15.0 16.8 -30.0 16.2 -10.0 20.3 ~15.4 15.2 -15.6 21.3 -15.1 Average 13.9 -22.6 20.4 -15.1 DERZ: 17.8 -1.1 24.0 0.0 17.1 -5.0 23.8 -0.8 16.9 -5.0 23.5 -2.1 15.9 -11.7 22.7 -5.4 16.0 -11.1 23.6 -1.7 17.3 -3.9 23.2 -3.3 Average 16.8 -6.5 23.5 -2.2 54 APPENDIX D (oont'd) 2119352312; .1129. ._1§_" km ._3_._4" 3.3321; Corner EDRl 13.0 -27.8 24.0 0.0 15.0 -16.7 20.0 -16.7 15.0 -16.7 19.0 -20.8 19.0 5.6 22.0 -8.3 21.0 16.7 23.0 -4.2 17.0 -5.6 23.0 -4.2 Average 16.7 -7.4 21.8 -9.0 EDRZ 16.0 -11.1 25.0 4.2 19.0 5.6 25.0 4.2 20.0 11.1 23.0 -4.2 17.0 -5.6 23.0 -4.2 18.0 0.0 20.0 -16.7 18.0 0.0 23.0 -4.2 Average 18.0 0.0 23.2 -3.5 grientgtion gzne 30" $_Ergg; 36" 3 Error Corner DER1 24.5 -18.3 29.0 -19.4 26.7 -11.0 30.2 -16.1 28.1 -6.3 27.4 -23.9 23.4 -22.0 26.8 -25.6 25.5 -15.0 28.4 -21.1 22.6 -24.7 26.2 -27.2 Average 25.1 -16.2 28.0 -22.2 DHR12 28.8 -4.0 34.4 -4.4 28.9 -3.7 35.5 -1.4 29.1 -3.0 34.2 -5.0 29.8 -0.7 34.5 -4.2 28.9 -3.7 35.9 -0.3 29.1 -3.0 34.9 -3.1 Average 29.1 -3.0 34.9 -3.1 91mm COEDOI 55 APPENDIX B .1122. ..§22_ D332 Average DERZE Average EDRI Average EDR2 Average 28.5 27.9 29.4 26.0 26.4 27.7 27.7 29.4 29.5 29.5 29.7 30.3 29.1 29.6 32.0 26.0 28.0 27.0 31.0 28.0 28.7 24.0 27.0 28.0 24.0 29.0 23.0 25.8 (oont'd) 3 Error -5.0 -7.0 -2.0 -13.3 -12.0 -7.7 -7.8 -2.0 -1.7 -1.7 -1.0 1.0 -3.0 -10.0 3.3 -20.0 -10.0 -6.7 -20.0 -3.3 -23.3 -13e9 gill 32.8 32.5 34.7 35.0 33.2 33.2 33.6 36.2 35.2 35.4 35.5 35.0 35.4 35.5 32.0 32.0 39.0 40.0 35.0 41.0 36.5 27.0 36.0 36.0 27.0 33.0 34.0 32.2 rror -8.9 -9.7 -3.6 -2.8 -7.8 -7.8 -6.8 0.6 -2.2 -1.7 -1.4 -2.8 -1.7 -11.1 -11.1 8.3 11.1 -2.8 13.9 56 APPENDIX 0 Shock Table Date - DERI Peek G'e _2, Y a V2.. 1.109 2.419 60.990 61.048 2.218 2.419 59.881 59.940 2.218 2.419 59.881 59.940 2.218 3.629 58.772 58.895 2.218 3.629 58.772 58.785 2.218 3.629 59.881 59.893 4.436 2.419 60.990 61.002 2.218 3.629 60.990 60.990 3.327 3.629 59.881 59.930 3.327 3.629 59.881 59.893 -2.218 3.629 60.990 61.002 3.327 3.629 59.881 59.930 2.218 3.629 59.881 60.001 6.653 3.629 60.990 61.038 5.545 2.419 63.208 63.229 2.218 3.629 60.990 61.038 2.218 -2.419 60.990 61.002 2.218 3.629 60.990 61.002 2.218 3.629 64.317 64.326 -3.327 3.629 63.208 63.218 -3.327 4.839 60.990 61.002 3.327 3.629 63.208 63.247 3.327 3.629 63.208 63.218 -3.327 3.629 63.208 63.218 dVe1(1n/eeo) .2. .1. .2. Oldhdh'OFJP‘NCJGJh<3C>Ordhih4N!Uh3HtJP‘O OOONOHHOHOUUHHHHHOHHHOOO 121 125 126 128 128 131 165 191 192 194 192 197 225 223 232 225 230 227 272 272 247 273 273 270 .12 121 125 126 128 128 131 165 191 192 194 192 197 225 223 232 225 230 227 272 272 247 273 273 270 DOB. Drop 2222 2221 12.1 13.0 13.2 13.6 13.6 14.2 22.5 30.3 30.7 31.2 30.7 32.0 41.9 41.2 44.6 42.0 43.8 42.5 61.3 61.3 50.5 61.5 61.7 60.5 APPENDIX C (oont'd) 57 Shook Table Data - DER: Peak G'e ..2 Y a V2__ -3.232 -2.965 61.781 61.852 -2.155 -2.965 62.865 62.896 -2.155 3.953 58.529 58.604 -2.155 3.953 65.032 65.062 -2.155 4.941 59.613 59.660 -2.155 -3.953 62.865 62.934 -2.155 -3.953 62.865 62.934 -3.232 -3.953 69.368 69.431 -3.232 -3.953 59.613 59.652 -3.232 -3.953 68.284 68.348 -2.155 -3.953 67.200 67.216 -2.155 -3.953 63.948 64.070 -4.310 -3.953 61.781 61.907 -3.232 -4.941 70.452 70.488 -2.155 -4.941 62.865 63.058 -3.232 -4.941 70.452 70.479 -3.232 4.941 60.697 60.743 —3.232 -4.941 71.535 71.597 -4.310 -4.941 66.116 66.301 -4.310 -4.941 72.619 72.680 -4.310 —4.941 69.368 69.489 -4.310 -4.941 72.619 72.688 -4.310 -5.929 66.116 66.125 -4.310 —4.941 70.452 70.488 dVe1(1n/eeo) .2. .1. .1. -1 -1 123 -2 -1 128 -3 -1 118 -2 O 120 -2 -2 122 -2 -3 132 -2 -4 161 -2 -4 186 -4 -4 184 -2 -3 186 -2 -3 185 -3 -4 186 -24 -3 144 -4 -2 230 -3 -3 225 -2 -2 228 -4 -5 228 -1 -5 228 -26 -2 170 -26 -5 180 -5 -6 251 -27 -5 177 -26 -5 178 -28 -2 179 .12 123 128 118 120 122 132 162 186 184 186 185 186 146 230 225 228 228 228 172 182 251 179 180 182 DOE. Drop E Ht‘h‘ .besmcnaamcnaam mxoa>w4>uaprac>m p b 14.7 14.7 22.2 21.3 20.8 21.8 21.3 20.5 28.5 26.9 26.7 26.9 26.7 26.6 12.6 13.5 11.6 11.9 12.2 14.3 21.6 28.5 27.9 28.7 28.4 28.5 17.7 43.7 42.0 43.1 43.1 42.9 24.4 27.6 52.0 26.5 26.8 27.3 58 APPENDIX c (oont'd) Shook Table Data - EDR1 Velocity Changee Peak __3.._¥____Z__B_.8222L2222.EL._2_ 0 0 112 122 41 8 0.55 0 0 115 124 41 10 0.39 0 0 116 125 41 11 0.33 1 0 118 125 41 11 0.35 1 0 120 126 41 11 0.38 1 1 119 128 41 11 0.44 1 1 120 129 41 11 0.41 1 0 123 131 41 10 0.50 0 1 167 181 45 21 0.43 0 1 170 182 45 21 0.44 0 1 172 182 45 18 0.55 1 -1 172 182 45 21 0.44 0 -1 170 185 45 25 0.34 0 -1 171 185 45 22 0.42 1 0 174 184 46 23 0.39 -1 1 207 223 47 33 0.40 1 0 210 224 49 25 0.62 1 0 210 226 49 32 0.44 1 0 210 225 48 23 0.68 -1 0 212 227 48 26 0.60 0 0 213 228 48 28 0.55 -1 0 244 263 50 39 0.53 0 -1 246 263 49 31 0.70 0 1 248 261 49 31 0.68 0 0 247 260 48 36 0.55 -1 -1 245 259 50 34 0.61 0 1 244 263 49 36 0.58 59 APPENDIX c (oont'd) Shook Table Data - EDR: Velocity Changea Peak __3_ __Y._ _.3__ _B_ _A2_2L° 2222.234. ._2__. 0 0 113 118 38 8 0.52 0 0 116 121 37 11 0.32 0 0 116 122 37 11 0.35 0 0 117 123 37 9 0.45 1 0 119 124 38 10 0.40 0 0 119 124 38 9 0.45 0 0 167 179 42 23 0.35 1 0 169 183 42 25 0.32 0 0 171 185 43 23 0.38 1 0 169 184 40 23 0.37 0 0 169 183 42 20 0.47 1 0 169 183 42 20 0.48 0 0 209 227 48 35 0.39 0 0 210 229 47 29 0.52 0 -1 210 230 46 29 0.53 0 0 210 229 49 28 0.55 0 0 209 228 48 28 0.55 0 -1 210 229 48 39 0.32 0 0 247 264 49 36 0.58 1 -1 245 263 52 49 0.36 0 0 245 263 49 30 0.73 0 0 245 263 48 49 0.35 0 0 248 264 47 35 0.61 0 0 246 264 51 38 0.55 0 0 246 264 46 53 0.30 60 APPENDIX C (oont'd) Drop Teeter Data - DERI - Bottom Drope Peak 8's 2.. Y a V2._ -24.396 -2.419 54.337 59.574 ~7.762 26.614 90.931 92.820 ~16.634 22.985 80.950 82.986 -22.178 13.307 63.208 65.751 -18.851 ~21.775 85.386 90.113 16.634 ~22.985 94.257 95.508 25.505 -7.258 80.950 85.089 22.178 ~19.356 85.386 89.799 21.069 27.258 113.109 113.466 9.980 10.887 116.436 116.884 7.762 30.243 76.515 79.893 11.089 27.824 67.644 69.219 -18.851 -7.258 116.436 116.651 ~7.762 ~37.501 112.000 115.750 -33.267 ~6.049 103.129 105.493 —16.634 27.824 107.564 111.000 ~25.505 14.517 58.772 63.633 -29.941 ~16.936 104.238 109.767 15.525 -19.356 138.614 138.973 18.851 7.258 139.723 140.350 29.941 ~6.049 138.614 138.821 29.941 16.936 134.178 136.009 18.851 10.887 139.723 140.256 23.287 33.872 113.109 115.657 ~32.158 25.404 105.347 110.840 dVel(in/eeo) .2. .2_._2. ~39 0 169 ~7 41 185 ~20 43 179 ~38 23 175 ~27 ~30 195 18 ~25 195 48 ~14 204 38 ~35 207 16 11 225 7 15 226 1 61 193 10 60 189 ~20 ~0 258 ~10 ~60 249 ~53 ~7 247 ~17 48 241 ~63 22 214 ~45 ~25 253 15 ~11 287 16 11 283 23 0 278 32 26 273 15 16 285 31 62 256 ~55 38 262 .12 173 189 185 181 200 197 210 213 226 226 203 199 259 256 252 246 224 259 287 284 279 276 286 266 270 D.E. Drop 1222 2221 17.7 17.4 17.3 17.4 18.1 17.8 23.0 22.8 23.5 23.5 23.1 23.0 31.0 29.8 29.4 29.4 28.9 29.7 36.7 35.4 35.2 35.2 35.2 35.0 35.7 14.5 17.3 16.6 15.7 19.2 18.7 21.3 21.9 24.7 24.7 19.8 19.1 32.4 31.6 30.7 29.3 24.2 32.2 39.8 38.8 37.4 36.7 39.4 34.0 35.3 61 APPENDIX c (oont'd) Drop Teeter Data - D222 - Bottom Dropa Peak 6': x.. Y z .12.. 26.936 6.918 84.542 86.780 7.542 29.647 74.787 76.509 7.542 22.729 99.716 102.552 -9.394 5.929 42.271 46.035 19.394 10.871 53.110 54.515 -10.774 -33.600 85.626 89.502 ~4.310 ~37.553 96.465 103.539 ~10.774 ~31.624 100.800 105.913 24.781 —19.765 76.955 80.869 31.246 ~5.929 84.542 90.180 11.852 34.588 97.548 99.530 ~29.091 11.859 68.284 71.396 ~10.774 ~35.576 92.129 99.346 21.549 19.765 107.303 110.171 35.556 14.824 99.716 106.201 ~10.774 ~23.718 119.226 119.747 -8.620 -21.741 125.729 126.117 ~10.774 ~33.600 121.394 124.805 25.859 ~16.800 70.452 75.978 ~31.246 15.812 104.052 106.315 ~17.239 ~14.824 135.484 135.814 4.310 ~34.588 135.484 139.358 14.007 ~36.565 128.981 134.010 24.781 ~29.647 117.058 122.014 ~31.246 19.765 132.232 134.135 ~33.401 18.776 109.471 111.949 dVel(1n/eeo) .2. .1. .2. 30 3 181 14 47 175 11 22 191 ~60 4 162 ~44 19 175 ~13 ~48 196 ~7 ~65 223 ~17 ~47 230 52 ~37 213 65 ~6 207 17 46 219 ~62 14 205 ~22 ~61 231 33 20 222 61 11 239 ~13 ~24 266 ~12 ~20 272 ~23 ~51 264 72 ~20 219 ~47 22 245 ~17 ~13 293 4 ~50 295 16 ~54 291 48 ~49 277 ~36 24 279 ~50 33 267 .12 184 182 193 173 181 202 232 235 222 217 225 215 240 225 247 268 273 270 231 251 294 299 296 285 282 273 D.E. Drop 2222 2221 17.7 17.5 17.7 17.0 17.1 17.8 23.5 23.6 23.4 23.4 23.5 23.2 23.6 23.5 29.2 29.8 29.8 29.8 29.8 30.0 35.4 35.4 35.5 35.7 35.5 34.9 16.6 16.2 18.3 14.6 16.1 20.0 26.5 27.2 24.2 23.1 24.8 22.7 28.3 24.9 29.9 35.2 36.6 35.7 26.3 30.9 42.4 44.0 43.2 40.0 39.1 36.7 62 APPENDIX C (oont'd) Drop Teeter Data - D221 - Edge Drope Peak G'e dVel(1n/aeo) D.E. Drop 4 Y Z VL..L.1__3..1212222221 ~7.762 ~26.614 29.941 37.899 ~19 ~106 117 159 17.4 12.2 ~8.871 ~27.824 34.376 44.058 ~25 ~103 134 170 17.5 14.0 ~12.198 ~26.614 32.158 42.675 ~36 ~103 137 175 17.7 14.8 ~14.416 ~30.243 37.703 49.590 ~35 ~108 141 181 17.6 15.7 ~7.762 ~36.292 46.574 59.552 ~20 ~110 144 182 17.7 16.0 ~12.198 ~25.404 38.812 47.964 ~40 ~88 152 180 17.7 15.7 3.327 ~32.662 41.030 49.586 0 ~109 147 183 18.0 16.2 ~15.525 ~32.662 54.337 65.271 ~36 ~98 179 208 23.4 20.8 ~11.089 ~44.760 52.119 68.306 ~26 ~134 165 214 23.6 22.1 ~12.198 ~48.389 54.337 72.624 ~32 ~l35 164 214 23.8 22.1 6.653 ~37.501 46.574 57.155 13 ~126 175 216 23.5 22.4 ~16.634 ~32.662 51.010 61.916 ~42 ~112 178 215 23.5 22.2 ~5.545 ~45.969 58.772 70.376 ~7 ~134 173 219 23.8 23.2 ~4.436 ~47.179 58.772 74.615 ~4 ~138 176 224 23.5 24.1 17.743 ~37.501 27.723 47.707 71 ~l48 112 199 28.6 19.0 18.851 ~52.018 34.376 62.302 69 ~166 109 210 28.5 21.3 2.218 ~54.437 58.772 77.690 ~2 ~171 170 241 28.9 28.1 ~3.327 ~55.647 72.079 88.187 ~3 ~151 197 248 29.5 29.6 18.851 ~32.662 63.208 71.770 53 ~100 201 231 28.9 25.6 19.960 ~45.969 53.228 72.813 66 ~142 170 231 28.2 25.8 14.416 ~56.857 64.317 84.721 42 ~158 177 241 28.5 27.9 17.743 ~71.374 82.059 105.638 40 ~17? 199 269 34.4 35.0 ~21.069 ~61.696 54.337 83.878 ~49 ~186 161 251 33.9 30.4 6.653 ~75.003 77.624 107.945 13 ~188 189 267 34.7 34.3 33.267 ~39.921 65.426 79.788 82 ~118 198 245 34.7 28.9 31.050 ~56.857 83.168 101.691 60 ~149 205 261 34.2 32.7 ~15.525 ~71.374 41.030 81.130 ~34 ~221 114 251 34.5 30.4 31.050 ~66.535 55.446 87.989 71 ~179 152 245 34.0 29.1 63 APPENDIX C (oont’d) Drop Tester Date ~ DHRZ - Edge Drope Peek 6'9 137 Y 3 V: -15.084 18.776 20.594 31.113 -15.084 21.741 24.929 34.788 -12.929 23.718 31.432 40.309 -12.929 28.659 30.348 43.391 -7.542 21.741 39.019 41.414 -6.465 21.741 41.187 44.916 -4.310 22.729 39.019 44.681 ~24.781 30.635 32.516 51.087 -22.626 25.694 42.271 54.396 -30.168 29.647 36.852 55.080 -4.310 -33.600 43.355 52.071 ~25.859 32.612 36.852 55.590 -30.168 28.659 46.606 60.526 —11.852 34.588 44.439 56.498 ~34.478 46.447 33.600 66.347 -7.542 42.494 52.026 65.942 18.316 36.565 44.439 59.799 -15.084 43.482 52.026 67.198 -33.401 42.494 56.361 77.635 —30.168 32.612 49.858 64.511 -21.549 -27.671 42.271 53.494 ~30.168 64.235 72.619 98.873 -24.781 26.682 71.535 79.047 -11.852 66.212 61.781 91.197 -46.330 71.153 79.123 109.258 ~34.478 69.176 83.458 105.697 -31.246 27.671 66.116 75.546 ~53.872 55.341 79.123 103.272 dVe1(1n/eeo) D.n. Drop Liilfilflhlfl! ~58 101 113 162 16.2 12.9 ~56 105 121 170 16.1 14.2 ~49 99 129 170 16.0 14.2 ~50 118 115 172 15.7 14.5 ~2 57 107 121 16.5 7.2 ~17 58 121 136 17.0 9.0 ~11 68 120 138 16.2 9.4 ~84 126 134 202 22.0 20.1 ~70 109 156 203 22.4 20.3 ~104 112 134 203 22.3 20.3 ~12 ~118 155 195 22.2 18.6 ~96 134 127 208 21.9 21.4 ~97 112 144 206 22.2 21.0 ~50 121 159 206 22.8 20.9 ~125 165 114 237 28.0 27.5 ~28 144 175 228 27.9 25.6 36 139 166 219 28.8 23.5 ~48 145 175 233 28.8 26.6 ~94 137 158 229 28.6 25.7 ~95 115 169 225 28.9 24.8 ~83 ~102 162 209 28.0 21.4 ~66 178 181 262 34.5 33.8 ~63 85 226 249 34.5 30.5 ~42 215 160 272 34.5 36.2 ~92 178 169 262 34.5 33.6 ~69 177 186 266 34.2 34.7 ~84 97 207 244 34.4 29.7 ~120 139 150 237 34.2 27.7 63 APPENDIX C (oont'd) Drop Teeter Dete - DHR2 - Edge Drope Peek 0'3 x I z .18.. -15.084 18.776 20.594 31.113 -15.084 21.741 24.929 34.788 -12.929 23.718 31.432 40.309 ~12.929 28.659 30.348 43.391 ~7.542 21.741 39.019 41.414 -6.465 21.741 41.187 44.916 -4.310 22.729 39.019 44.681 ~24.781 30.635 32.516 51.087 ~22.626 25.694 42.271 54.396 -30.168 29.647 36.852 55.080 -4.310 -33.600 43.355 52.071 ~25.859 32.612 36.852 55.590 ~30.168 28.659 46.606 60.526 -11.852 34.588 44.439 56.498 -34.478 46.447 33.600 66.347 -7.542 42.494 52.026 65.942 18.316 36.565 44.439 59.799 -15.084 43.482 52.026 67.198 ~33.401 42.494 56.361 77.635 -30.168 32.612 49.858 64.511 -21.549 ~27.671 42.271 53.494 -3o.168 64.235 72.619 98.873 -24.781 26.682 71.535 79.047 -11.852 66.212 61.781 91.197 —46.330 71.153 79.123 109.258 -34.478 69.176 83.458 105.697 ~31.246 27.671 66.116 75.546 -53.872 55.341 79.123 103.272 dVe1(1n/seo) D.n. Drop .1. .1. .2. .1! 1223 £32! ~58 101 113 162 16.2 12.9 ~56 105 121 170 16.1 14.2 ~49 99 129 170 16.0 14.2 ~50 118 115 172 15.7 14.5 ~2 57 107 121 16.5 7.2 ~17 58 121 136 17.0 9.0 ~11 68 120 138 16.2 9.4 ~84 126 134 202 22.0 20.1 ~70 109 156 203 22.4 20.3 ~104 112 134 203 22.3 20.3 ~12 ~118 155 195 22.2 18.6 ~96 134 127 208 21.9 21.4 ~97 112 144 206 22.2 21.0 ~50 121 159 206 22.8 20.9 ~125 165 114 237 28.0 27.5 ~28 144 175 228 27.9 25.6 36 139 166 219 28.8 23.5 ~48 145 175 233 28.8 26.6 ~94 137 158 229 28.6 25.7 ~95 115 169 225 28.9 24.8 ~83 ~102 162 209 28.0 21.4 ~66 178 181 262 34.5 33.8 ~63 85 226 249 34.5 30.5 ~42 215 160 272 34.5 36.2 ~92 178 169 262 34.5 33.6 ~69 177 186 266 34.2 34.7 ~84 97 207 244 34.4 29.7 ~120 139 150 237 34.2 27.7 64 APPENDIX C (oont'd) Drop Teeter Dete - DHR1 - Corner Drope Peek 6': I Y z vg 29.941 -33.872 ~7.762 44.976 19.960 -15.726 21.069 33.010 27.723 ~13.307 25.505 39.952 32.158 -3.629 33.267 46.285 23.287 ~18.146 24.396 37.033 33.267 ~18.146 29.941 47.854 41.030 -30.243 37.703 63.400 37.703 -37.501 33.267 60.491 45.465 -31.453 12.198 55.951 36.594 ~38.711 23.287 58.137 45.465 -21.775 41.030 63.217 15.525 -32.662 36.594 51.449 36.594 ~45.969 31.050 65.261 58.772 -14.517 47.683 76.643 43.248 -43.550 60.990 83.400 63.208 —33.872 73.188 94.836 63.208 ~44.760 36.594 81.382 42.139 -58.067 34.376 75.731 37.703 ~36.292 63.208 78.381 80.950 ~50.808 51.010 95.817 77.624 ~48.389 87.604 113.354 47.683 -32.662 76.515 94.352 56.554 ~56.857 63.208 92.858 80.950 -54.437 67.644 109.941 82.059 -50.808 72.079 115.312 45.465 ~61.696 63.208 90.330 45.465 -61.696 63.208 92.833 dVe1(1n/seo) n.n. Drop .3. .1. .1. .25 132! I!!! 97 ~122 ~20 157 18.8 11.9 95 ~72 85 146 17.3 10.3 116 ~46 93 156 17.8 11.7 123 0 121 173 17.4 14.4 95 ~87 108 168 16.9 13.6 124 ~64 109 177 17.0 15.0 136 ~100 116 205 21.9 20.2 126 ~119 100 200 23.2 19.4 166 ~108 34 201 23.1 19.5 119 ~136 67 192 22.8 17.9 143 ~75 137 212 23.1 21.6 60 ~123 147 201 23.5 19.4 107 ~131 76 186 23.1 16.6 175 ~45 134 225 28.8 24.5 130 ~126 150 235 28.9 26.7 155 ~90 162 241 27.9 28.1 165 ~117 89 220 29.1 23.4 106 ~146 80 198 29.8 18.9 105 ~115 169 230 28.9 25.5 150 ~119 100 216 29.1 22.6 158 ~108 153 245 34.4 29.0 122 ~84 201 250 35.5 30.2 133 ~144 135 238 34.2 27.4 156 ~134 115 236 33.9 26.8 160 ~125 133 243 34.5 28.4 97 ~165 133 233 35.9 26.1 101 ~168 126 233 34.9 26.2 65 APPENDIX C (oont’d) Drop Teeter Dete - DER: - Corner Drope Peek G'e dVe1(1n/eeo) D.n. Drop J I Z VL. .Liifinfihm ~29.091 11.859 16.258 29.339 ~144 23 54 156 17.8 11.9 ~18.316 18.776 24.929 36.187 ~86 73 104 154 17.1 11.6 ~18.316 18.776 18.426 31.452 ~98 98 89 165 16.9 13.4 ~23.704 24.706 29.265 43.416 ~104 94 106 176 15.9 15.3 ~24.781 22.729 28.181 42.178 ~103 89 120 182 16.0 16.2 ~30.168 13.835 31.432 45.711 ~120 49 119 176 17.3 15.2 ~36.633 25.694 42.271 61.555 ~129 88 135 206 24.0 21.0 ~39.865 34.588 36.852 64.371 ~129 112 112 205 23.8 20.6 ~31.246 37.553 36.852 60.591 ~109 137 121 213 23.5 22.3 ~21.549 ~28.659 24.929 43.671 ~101 ~121 97 185 22.7 16.8 ~39.865 41.506 33.600 64.563 ~132 129 86 203 23.6 20.3 ~17.239 28.659 37.935 48.251 ~79 116 154 208 23.2 21.3 ~52.795 39.529 53.110 82.061 ~144 105 132 222 31.2 24.3 ~52.795 57.318 68.284 102.530 ~143 139 136 241 29.4 28.5 ~61.414 49.412 65.032 98.439 ~141 117 128 224 29.5 24.6 ~49.562 61.271 66.116 100.862 ~134 148 129 238 29.5 27.9 ~53.872 56.329 72.619 105.272 ~137 134 152 245 29.7 29.4 ~59.259 27.671 55.277 84.249 ~154 76 153 230 30.3 26.0 ~51.717 34.588 59.613 85.020 ~134 94 164 232 28.3 26.4 ~15.084 40.518 53.110 67.664 ~51 145 181 238 29.1 27.7 ~51.717 56.329 65.032 99.291 ~121 154 169 258 36.2 32.8 ~67.879 62.259 76.955 118.304 ~160 144 141 257 35.2 32.8 ~64.646 72.141 78.039 118.666 ~150 164 146 266 36.9 34.7 ~21.549 53.365 69.368 89.416 ~71 163 199 267 35.4 35.0 ~65.724 10.871 44.439 79.559 ~191 30 134 235 35.5 27.1 ~70.034 62.259 75.871 117.236 ~150 135 164 260 35.0 33.2 ~71.111 72.141 32.516 106.388 ~168 193 46 260 35.4 33.2 ~46.330 54.353 69.368 93.029 ~108 141 170 246 34.7 29.7 9 10 53 61 13 ~60 2 ~63 36 ~68 52 ~29 65 ~56 89 43 74 ~12 ~72 ~93 ~89 ~81 ~79 ~74 ~61 66 APPENDIX c (cont'd) Drop Teeter Dete ~ DDR1 ~ Bottom Drope Velocity Changes 25 43 25 22 ~60 ~13 ~67 13 ~29 1 32 51 26 64 3 ~56 29 95 45 48 ~13 ~25 ~59 83 87 185 186 177 169 177 179 209 213 221 213 206 216 235 227 216 240 232 220 233 236 261 266 242 231 246 195 200 197 193 197 201 231 235 238 236 233 236 259 257 245 264 259 251 262 274 291 294 289 270 284 Peek ..§_. __1_. .__1__ ..B._ .AQEQL. 2:22.35. 75 76 62 56 65 63 82 81 89 82 83 83 94 77 80 93 90 84 85 80 104 110 100 80 97 20 20 22 20 23 20 31 28 28 30 28 27 34 37 33 35 37 34 42 41 45 41 41 43 41 0.59 0.62 0.50 0.54 0.49 0.61 0.50 0.59 0.62 0.54 0.60 0.63 0.59 0.53 0.53 0.59 0.53 0.55 0.45 0.54 0.56 0.65 0.62 0.48 0.60 67 APPENDIX C (oont'd) Drop Teeter Dete - BDR: - Bottom Drope Velocity Chengee Peek _z_._x__z._.3__39_911_2r.22_n;.._2_ 44 14 169 186 74 21 0.47 30 ~44 172 190 62 22 0.45 23 ~39 179 195 73 20 0.58 ~23 ~22 187 198 81 20 0.58 ~29 ~38 183 199 76 20 0.59 ~28 ~14 189 200 81 21 0.58 5 ~28 211 228 96 24 0.67 ~61 ~20 205 226 81 29 0.50 ~47 ~50 203 228 70 30 0.50 ~29 16 213 231 92 29 0.55 ~66 ~30 201 226 73 29 0.52 ~58 5 15 61 31 2 0.74 ~30 29 218 230 89 26 0.61 ~43 ~28 244 260 104 32 0.64 56 45 224 248 86 32 0.58 ~50 ~61 224 253 81 35 0.54 80 28 214 243 80 35 0.49 15 ~79 227 254 86 35 0.55 26 ~74 228 255 85 34 0.58 23 ~92 245 280 89 46 0.48 ~12 70 250 276 103 41 0.55 ~14 32 273 286 118 37 0.70 91 33 236 269 87 35 0.64 71 ~40 260 287 105 46 0.53 85 ~10 30 108 36 6 0.55 ~102 ~24 235 274 91 38 0.60 ~113 ~119 ~122 ~126 ~116 ~120 ~158 ~136 ~154 ~138 ~132 ~135 ~161 ~174 ~161 ~163 ~172 ~151 ~136 ~173 ~96 ~174 ~175 ~183 ~173 ~176 ~20 Drop Teeter Dete - EDRI - Edge Drope 68 APPENDIX c (cont’d) Velocity Chengee _!__ _.1._ __Z.._ __B_.L££_9_LD£2P_!5_-_L_ ~3 ~11 ~3 ~4 ~22 ~16 7 24 8 ~19 ~10 2 10 8 3 11 8 58 ~9 29 ~15 31 6 30 11 48 15 115 121 134 135 142 144 140 166 151 171 175 175 184 168 189 191 180 180 230 209 32 206 215 193 215 197 ~144 161 171 181 185 186 189 212 217 217 221 220 222 245 242 249 252 250 245 270 274 106 273 278 269 277 271 149 Peek 39 39 50 54 53 57 60 68 70 68 70 73 86 81 92 95 96 79 99 117 33 121 122 142 124 153 36 15 18 18 18 15 16 24 23 25 22 23 24 32 27 33 27 34 26 35 40 5 40 42 39 41 40 11 0.49 0.47 0.54 0.55 0.72 0.72 0.54 0.63 0.55 0.70 0.66 0.63 0.55 0.69 0.55 0.74 0.55 0.72 0.65 0.55 0.70 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.58 ~109 7 ~114 ~100 ~117 ~119 ~141 ~132 ~132 ~146 113 ~134 ~134 ~164 ~134 ~149 ~160 ~143 ~166 ~149 ~162 ~191 ~172 ~173 ~184 Drop Teeter Dete - EDRZ - Edge Drope 69 APPENDIX c (cont'd) Velocity Chengee _L. _L. _L. LMMA. -—1 -7 -2o -54 -22 -29 --35 ~56 ~26 -37 6 -31 -44 37 ~96 -33 -73 11 -7 -14 -31 -29 15 19 21 120 76 128 128 137 133 148 155 165 155 ~10 169 167 156 164 188 169 198 188 220 218 193 199 212 205 163 79 174 174 182 183 209 213 214 217 120 219 219 232 234 243 246 246 252 266 275 277 264 276 277 PICK 50 31 53 48 58 53 59 61 66 69 42 71 67 64 69 88 101 82 94 102 106 140 109 118 138 15 3 16 14 16 16 20 24 22 25 6 26 26 28 30 32 32 29 34 38 41 41 38 41 41 0.53 0.56 0.59 0.67 0.63 0.64 0.68 0.55 0.63 0.55 0.71 0.55 0.55 0.59 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.64 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 70 APPENDIX C (cont'd) Drop Teeter Dete - EDRI - Corner Drope Velocity Chengee Peek ..X.. ..!.. ..1... ..1L.. .AQQQl. 2:22.35. ..2.. 62 131 98 97 109 105 104 100 11 124 104 115 97 78 111 140 115 82 117 86 102 136 149 140 149 ~116 ~112 ~92 ~110 ~142 ~109 ~127 ~129 ~119 ~90 ~116 ~142 ~117 ~147 ~101 ~115 ~145 ~149 ~201 ~119 ~99 ~155 ~143 ~117 ~154 115 37 127 116 83 141 94 88 164 129 126 140 158 148 138 125 127 136 57 176 158 145 150 146 144 175 178 185 188 197 209 191 190 204 205 207 244 221 230 215 224 238 230 244 245 243 270 273 254 276 47 49 51 64 75 87 102 113 52 101 148 209 128 150 190 173 202 189 107 167 217 262 272 256 275 13 15 15 19 21 24 20 19 22 23 23 32 26 28 25 27 31 28 32 32 32 39 40 35 41 0.72 0.68 0.70 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 70 APPENDIX c (cont'd) Drop Teeter Dete - EDRI - corner Drope Velocity Chengee Peek 3 I z 3 Agcg; Drop gt, g 62 ~116 115 175 47 13 0.72 131 ~112 37 178 49 15 0.68 98 ~92 127 185 51 15 0.70 97 ~110 116 188 64 19 0.55 109 ~142 83 197 75 21 0.55 105 ~109 141 209 87 24 0.55 104 ~127 94 191 102 20 0.55 100 ~129 88 190 113 19 0.55 11 ~119 164 204 52 22 0.56 124 ~90 129 205 101 23 0.55 104 ~116 126 207 148 23 0.55 115 ~142 140 244 209 32 0.55 97 ~117 158 221 128 26 0.55 78 ~147 148 230 150 28 0.55 111 ~101 138 215 190 25 0.55 140 ~115 125 224 173 27 0.55 115 ~145 127 238 202 31 0.55 82 ~149 136 230 189 28 0.55 117 ~201 57 244 107 32 0.55 86 ~119 176 245 167 32 0.55 102 ~99 158 243 217 32 0.55 136 ~155 145 270 262 39 0.55 149 ~143 150 273 272 40 0.55 140 ~117 146 254 256 35 0.55 149 ~154 144 276 275 41 0.55 105 93 91 101 43 111 93 27 146 91 182 132 107 38 113 146 147 147 154 125 89 151 71 APPENDIX C (cont'd) Drop Teeter Dete ~ EDRZ - Corner Drope ~73 ~109 ~114 ~122 ~141 ~142 ~151 ~143 ~131 ~142 ~59 ~147 ~149 ~190 ~127 ~108 ~124 ~156 ~145 ~163 ~153 ~119 Velocity Chengee ..!.. ..§.. 125 122 122 106 146 114 102 163 56 118 87 100 131 113 157 95 104 135 133 85 166 145 179 188 191 192 208 215 206 219 205 208 213 224 228 225 233 206 225 259 260 225 246 251 Peek Accel 41 54 54 52 49 76 69 61 59 101 67 126 158 75 144 98 170 238 241 153 187 216 Drop fit. 16 19 20 17 25 25 23 23 20 23 24 27 28 24 29 23 27 36 36 27 33 34 0.59 0.55 0.55 0.67 0.49 0.55 0.55 0.64 0.63 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.66 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 HICHIGRN STATE UNIV. LIBRRRIES 31293009082003