-
-
Skip navigation
(Access key: S).
Contact information.
Current methods of prosthetic ear attachment have significant trade offs. A securely attached prosthesis requires metal fastening pieces to protrude from the mastoid bone, causing both potential hygiene problems and a disconcerting conspicuous appearance when the prosthesis is detached. Additionally, the force required to attach the prosthesis often causes wearing of the attachment’s color. Conversely, a far more discrete attachment, utilizing an embedded magnetic attachment, lacks the stability necessary for everyday use. Our goal is to create a new method of attachment that combines the benefits of both approaches. The device should be highly reliable with little potential for accidental removal, while still easy to clean, MRI compatible, easy to both attach and detach without a large amount of force on the prosthesis itself, and discrete in appearance when the prosthesis is detached.
Semester completed. Additional project work to ensue during summer.
| Week | Reporting Period Beginning | Activities |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | January 26 | Team assembled and began project research |
| 2 | February 2 | initial meeting with client and problem definition |
| 3 | February 9 | Created team PDS and timeline. Began research on locking mechanisms. |
| 4 | February 16 | Recieved simulator model for Greg. Met with Wendy Crone to discuss NiTi as material in for heat responsive lock. |
| 5 | February 23 | Ruled out NiTi as viable option. continued brainstorming. Scheduled meeting with Frank Fronzcack to discuss designs. |
| 6 | March 2 | Met with Frank to discuss design ideas. Began prelimary drawings of initial designs, |
| 7 | March 9 | Completed solid works designs of three different ideas. Began Midsemester presentation. |
| 8 | March 16 | Preformed Midsemester presentation. Met with Mitch Tyler and Paul Victory to discuss force testing on current ear affixment methods. |
| 9 | March 23 | Preformed initial force tests on current mechanisms. Began design of a new attachment method, utilizing a screwlike lock. Purchased "supermagnets" for testing. |
| 10 | March 30 | Used three point bending machine to test force limits on bar-clip resistance to sheer force, Met with professor Gruben to discuss additional design ideas. |
| 11 | April 6 | spring break |
| 12 | April 13 | Final design chosen. Contacted manufacturers to determine timeline for production. |
| 13 | April 20 | Began final solidworks drawings of design |
| 14 | April 27 | Completed solidworks drawings. Begain meetings with professional mill in ECB basement to discuss prototype production. Redesigning will be necessary. |
| 15 | May 4 | Fine tuned design for production viabillity. Completed final presentation. Awaiting completion of prototype from machine shop. |
 |
final paper (May 25 2007, 32 kb) |
 |
Final Poster (May 25 2007, 3399 kb) |
|
midsemester presentation (May 25 2007, 867 kb) |
|
PDS (May 25 2007, 31 kb) |
