DESIGN DECISIONS
Drafting machines used various linkages to keep the head level, from gantries to virtual 4-bars. I chose a parallel 4-bar for its aesthetics, historical character, and the challenge of calculating its range of motion. Another key decision was balancing historical accuracy with modern advancements: I used updated materials and manufacturing methods but kept the manual spirit by making the machine completely operational even without power.
CALCULATION
THE RANGE OF MOTION MODEL
The main challenge with utilizing a parallel 4-bar is that the machine has a specific and limited range of motion. Using SolidWorks’s in-sketch relations, I was able to build a virtual simulation in which by changing the dimensions of a driving sketch, I could determine the maximum range the machine was able to reach. Using this model, I determined the optimum range of motion necessary for the machine to reach every part of the 3x4’ A0 drafting board.
DRAFTING HEAD LAYOUT
For the drafting head, the key dimensions revolved around the size of the knob and the size of the angle indicator for legibility. The main goals were to make it as small and light as durability and function allowed. I used an ergonomics manual, and after comparing it with a historical drafting machine that I encountered later on in the process, I was pretty spot on!
CAD BEST PRACTICES
CREATION 1 - HEAD
ANATOMY
Stationary Plate
Spindle
Locking Mechanism
COTS
Solenoid + Attachments
DRAFTING HEAD OPERATION
Both buttons are located in the optimal position for depression with the thumb. Red button unlocks free rotation while the blue button snaps into 15 degree increments and can be toggled by pressing in and down to keep depressed. Rulers can be changed by unscrewing from the bottom.
CREATION 2 - ARM
COUNTERWEIGHTING
The counterweight’s position and weight can both be adjusted by moving the weight or changing the number of metal plates in the stack respectively.
CONCLUSION