A few years ago, I wrote a short document on methods for rapidly fabricating elements of mechanical systems entitled How to Build Your Robot Really Really Fast. It was catered towards students in MIT's 2.007 introductory design and manufacturing class for which I was a lab assistant at the time. The basic premise of the document was ways to build the structure and framework of a robot quickly using the tools available in the class, such as basic 'garage' tools like drill presses, saws, and sanders, as well as rapid prototyping and digital fabrication tools like abrasive waterjet cutters and laser cutters, weighing the tradeoffs of 'build it now' versus 'design it now and have the machine make it later'. At the time, it was a compilation of my own experiences with those tools up to that point, and so its scope was fairly limited.

However, times have changed, and so have my experiences and views on the applicability of the methods presented in the document. New ones have been tried, and old ones have been refined. With access to the aforementioned digital fabrication processes by more makers and students proceeding at a ever-expanding pace, I decided it was perhaps time to rewrite the document in a fashion that made it more generally accessible to mechanical project builders.

And because I was sick of getting questions asking about why my t-nuts are no longer flat-bottomed. If the answer interests you, then keep reading!


The underlying message will be techniques used in design for assembly. Now, strictly speaking, I use the term it in a much different context than the manufacturing industry's usage. But I believe the intents are the same: to design parts which are easy or quick to put together into the final product without complicated assembly steps. While for Sony it might have meant making all the parts of the Walkman insert and mate vertically, for hobbyists and "one-off" makers, this means trying to reduce the amount of hand-filing and fitting and drilling things in place, making "one way parts" which do not function if oriented incorrectly, etc. Common problems that many project builders run into.

So, this Instructable will be organized into several larger sections that address categories of challenges. For example, attaching parallel plates or making pinned joints. From there, there will be pages as necessary to demonstrate specific methods and parts usage techniques. I'll try to include content that spans the spectrum of tool accessibility - from simple garage tools to a full RP facility including laser cutters and waterjet cutters. On each page, I'll try to discuss a little about the recommended tools.

Periodically, in the sections, I'll link to a resource that is useful on its own. For example, I'll most likely link to Professor Alexander Slocum's Fundamentals of Design many times - it really is a treatise on the principles underlying mechanical engineering, focusing on machine and mechanism design. It's unproductive, then, for me to merely repeat his words. Other sides like roymech.co.uk are historical favorite go-tos for me, and will also be linked profusely.

The methods and examples presented will be primarily conceptual in nature, because they are generalizable to assemblies of different scales. I'll include generous amounts of finite element simulations of structures and components in order to show the concept isolated by itself. As with all of my writings, math and formal analysis is only brought up when needed to cement a concept or is critical to preventing massive systemic failure. Your mechanical engineering and manufacturing professors will likely be disappointed.


By no means is this going to be comprehensive overview of all design and assembly techniques. That's practically impossible, and I believe also counterproductive.   Part of the joy of engineering and building & making is the discovery of your own "style", the compilation of your own set of favorite techniques for approaching a problem. Inevitably, you will come up with a new custom solution to a problem. Hence, trying to list exhaustively how to mate thing A to thing B will artificially limit the search space of solutions, and make it very easy to 'pick one, copy, and paste' without understanding why a certain action is needed.

It is also not intended as a totally fresh introduction to mechanical engineering. That is, the question "what is a screw?" will not be answered. I am assuming that you have at least a passing familiarity with engineering terms like bolts, screw, axles, washers, nuts, and some knowledge of what machining processes do such as turning and milling. If you don't, well, perhaps the substantial links and resources presented will change that!

All documents of this format will inevitably be clouded by the author's style or flavor, and I make no pretensions to the contrary. The methods and parts used will be reflective of what I've done personally and what I've seen done by others in my local peer cloud, and the pictures and diagrams will probably be from my own past projects or those of my peers. It's not my intention to make sure all of these become widespread, but more information and knowledge transfer is preferable, in my opinion, to less.

It's important to note that practicians of classic 3D subtractive machining will probably not gain much from this Instructable. In my opinion, 3D machining (e.g. milling, turning, manual or CNC) is an entire means of building on its own, since it has very high equipment capital costs and associated learning curves. 2D production techniques are still substantially easier for people to gain access to, or hire out for lesser cost than having a machine shop. So, this will not be a "how to machine" guide.

Step 1: General Lessons and Themes

Before I begin the laundry list, there are some high-level points I want to make. These are issues to keep in mind as you adapt the concepts to your own design.

Right angles and in-plane angles are really easy.

If your project is free of design constraints enough that the outer appearance does not play significantly into functionality, then you'll benefit more than if it needs to be pretty and sellable. Most of these methods are really good attaching square things to other square things. It's relatively easy to check for straightness and squareness; not so easy for making sure two parts are mating at a specific angle.

There's also a difference between in-plane angles and compound, that is out of plane and rotated, angles. Because much of this document is founded on planar structures and mechanisms (think anything you can do without lifting your hand off the table), there will be significantly more content on making those types of joints.

3D angles involve at least one frame member or structural element which has an acute angle or bevel angle cut into it. With generally 2D fabrication methods, this is much harder to achieve. There are ways of getting around this, such as approximating a 3D angle using 2D layers, but broadly speaking if there are compound angles in your design, custom legwork and 3D machining might be the only practical solution.

Speaking of constraints...

Constraining things properly is hard, but essential.

What I mean in this case is physical, mechanical constraints. All physical objects (that exist in 3 dimensions, anyway) have 6 degrees of freedom, and the goal of making a successful structure or mechanism is to eliminate all of the ones we don't want. This involves the use of pin joints, planar/face mates, and fasteners strategically such that nothing is just flopping around unsupported.

A related concept is the "structural loop", which concentrates specifically on those floppy unsupported parts. It's the path through which forces are reacted against in the device. Essentially, if your device was made of a very poorly cooked, rubbery Jello, what would move the most? And can you add elements that don't interfere with the function of the design to make it less movable?

Hopefully by the end of reading through this document you will have a better understanding of how critical constraining parts in directions which optimally load the material is to creating a device which isn't misaligned and floppy. If I can't beat it into you, then surely Fundamentals can.

No Mostly-Tightened Nuts!

One hallmark of a "newbie" build is the amount of screws that have to be tightened a very specific amount, or nuts and bolts that have to be left very slightly loose. Any deviation results in a floppy arm or slanted wheel, or just total lockup of the mechanism in question. This means your device is always teetering on the edge of being too bent and wubby to function - any unexpected loads will probably cause total disappointment.

Bolts and screws work, fundamentally, by creating compression forces between the parts they are holding together. The compression forces, commonly called preload, determine to a degree how stiff the joint is because immense friction is created at the part interface thanks to those compression forces. The basic idea is that the preload force must be overcome before the structure will even begin thinking of maybe shifting, just a tiny bit. Hence, properly designed machine structures are predictably stiff in their operating regimes. And, if your parts are otherwise constrained, or even overconstrained, excursions outside of its design load can even be tolerated without failure.

My mission is to deter you from creating such abominations by hammering it in from the beginning that all your fasteners have to be tight. A large part of this document will be dedicated specifically to how to constrain rotating members and pin joints as a result.
Yet another incredibly informative and well written instructable, nice job! Love the FEA’s and especially enjoyed your notes on set screws. My goto sources are always McMaster and ServoCity. Similar to your RoyMech site I’ve used http://www.gizmology.net/ for reference many times.
I knew I was forgetting something! Gizmology has been added to the end - I may sprinkle relevant links in the middle too.
http://web.mit.edu/2.75/fundamentals/FUNdaMENTALS.html is the correct link now, it's a great resourc, especially for offline use. THANK YOU FOR THIS INSTRUCTABLE!
<a href="http://web.mit.edu/2.75/fundamentals/FUNdaMENTALS.html" rel="nofollow">http://web.mit.edu/2.75/fundamentals/FUNdaMENTALS.html</a>&nbsp;whoops.&nbsp;
nice one
Re using one part to template tthe other, &quot;dimpling&quot; -- mention transfer punches here?
Probably worth it. I was definitely in &quot;slummin' high school&quot; mode then, when we didn't have a set of center punches much less transfer punches! I'll look to adding it in.
Wow that was incredibly comprehensive! Are there still robot combat competitions going on?
Hell yeah. Primarily small weight classes and these days grassroots-level and builder run. The big event is RoboGames: http://robogames.net/index.php and Combots: http://combots.net/, and on the east coast, NERC: http://www.nerc.us/ <br> <br>Various other local clubs and organizations exist also. A current listing of events is on buildersdb: http://buildersdb.com/
This might be my new favourite Instructable. Great info!
Thanks for sharing that. <br>One suggestion to add for using set screws in transmitting torque on shafts (only works if the shaft and hub are the same material and ends flush) is to use the set screw as a key - drill and thread the keyway parallel to shaft on the joint between the shaft and hub.
Wow, that is some invaluable mechanical design info. I thoroughly enjoyed the read and I feel like I just took an engineering class, an incredibly fun one. Seriously, amazing detail, thanks a bunch! <br> <br>Simply out of pure curiosity, why weren't taped holes used over T-slots more often? I'm guessing that it didn't fit the 2D fab theme of the class? <br> <br>PS: Working in that shop must have been like a dream come true, I'm olive green with envy :)
Purely as a matter of convenience. The t-nutted holes are not nearly as strong as a properly drilled and tapped hole due to the number of inside square edges. It's a matter of recognizing when the structural loads in the device can be borne by material-on-material interference (the slots and tabs) and then having the fasteners (t-slots) only be there to keep it all together. There are far more instances when drilling and tapping is stronger than using t-nuts.
Excellent! Thank you! <br> <br>Suggestion for an addition: how do you align parallel guide rails on which bushings will slide? Also, how do you keep things sliding freely when temperatures change? <br>Specifically, in my 3D printer project I have an aluminum carriage supported by 4 bronze bushings that slide on guide rails. The print-bed is bolted to the carriage and is heated. As the print bed heats up, it expands, applying force to the bolts that stand it off the carriage, which in turn bend the carriage, which in turn misaligns the bushings.
The design you describe is a classic &quot;overconstrained slide&quot;. It's very sensitive to change in the center distance (gap) between the two rails regardless of what you do to the bushings. <br> <br>Generally you have only 3 bushings - two on one axis to constrain it against planar motion (up/down, left/right) and against tilting/pitching, which are two rotations. And one on the other to make sure it does not pivot on the first axis (rolling). The result is only one motion possible (along the rail). Four bushings adds another constraint which is technically unnecessary, and for it to not impede the motion of the slide, they all have to act perfectly in line and on the same axes. Any misalignment of the rails or of the bushings, then would seize up the slide, as you've noticed. <br> <br>The solution is usually to use 3 bushings - two on one rail, one on the other, and also 'float' the 3rd bushing on a mount which is compliant to misalignment in the center distance. For small applications it's sufficient to just use one of those rubber-mounted self-aligning bushings. <br> <br>In addition, your issue seems to involve flexing of the entire carriage structure which can bind up the two-bushing side too, unless they are also self-aligning. Short of isolating the hot build bed from the carriage, perhaps one or more of the bushings on the two-bushing rail should be also flexible types. It's less rigorous machine design but also a practical solution.
Sup everyone, <br> <br>Feel free to chat amongst thyselves and ask questions. Interesting discussions could very well get folded into the document for everyone to reference.
Well done.
That was great! Now can you come over and help me build my Spencer Aircar?

About This Instructable




Bio: lol robots
More by teamtestbot:How to Build your Everything Really Really Fast Chibikart: Rapid-Prototyping a Subminiature Electric Go-Kart Using Digital Fabrication and Hobby Components The New and Improved Brushless Electric Scooter Power System Guide 
Add instructable to: