Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM68433
Volume:
10 |
10 |
Oct 2026
Pages:
1-7
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Dr. Subhash University

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Dr. Subhash University

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Dr. Subhash University

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Dr. Subhash University

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Dr. Subhash University
Many mechanical hammering machines are driven by crank or eccentric mechanisms, which give the hammer a near-sinusoidal stroke that spends as long going down as coming up. This paper examines a cam-driven alternative in which a single-lobe disc cam with a roller follower gives the hammer a cycloidal downstroke over only 99° of cam rota-tion and a 180° return. A 1 HP, 1440 rpm motor and a three-stage V-belt reduction (14.06:1) set the camshaft at 102.4 rpm, so each blow takes 0.586 s and the descent lasts 161 ms. For a 97.8 mm follower stroke and a 99.7 mm hammer stroke, cycloidal kinematics give a peak hammer velocity of 1.24 m/s, a peak acceleration of 24.1 m/s² and 1.53 J of kinetic energy for a 2 kg hammer. At the same stroke and shaft speed this is 3.3 times the energy of a symmetric cycloidal profile and 5.4 times that of simple harmonic motion, but the peak lever load rises from 34 N to 68 N and the pressure angle reaches about 34°. All results are analytical; no impact measurements are reported.
KEYWORDS
This paper worked a cam-driven mechanical hammer through from motor to hammer by calculation. A 1 HP, 1440 rpm motor and a three-stage V-belt reduction of 14.06:1 give a camshaft speed of 102.4 rpm, one blow every 0.586 s. A cycloidal cam that assigns 99° to the downstroke, 15° to a dwell, 180° to the return and 66° to a second dwell produces a peak hammer velocity of 1.24 m/s and 1.53 J of kinetic energy for a 2 kg hammer, with a peak acceleration of 24.1 m/s2 and a peak lever load of 67.9 N. Compared with a symmetric cycloidal motion at the same stroke and speed, the energy is 3.3 times greater for a lever load 2.0 times greater and compared with simple harmonic motion it is 5.4 times greater. Reaching the same energy by adding mass would need a 6.6 kg hammer and a 113 N peak load. Materials and fabrication for the prototype cost INR 13,040. The results come with limits that should be stated plainly. Nothing has been measured, so the energy, velocity and loads are ideal values from a rigid-body calculation. The 1.53 J is the kinetic energy at mid-stroke and is delivered in full only if the work surface is placed there or the hammer can separate from the lever. The cam-driven peak velocity is below that of a free drop through the same stroke, so the advantage is over symmetric drives at the same speed. The pressure angle of about 34° exceeds the usual 30° limit; with the present 110 mm base circle, meeting it would need a descent angle of about 115° and would cost roughly a quarter of the energy. The spring preload, the shaft and bearing sizes and the contact stress in the cam have not been calculated here. Several steps would turn these calculations into tested results: instrumented measurement of hammer velocity and impact force on the prototype; a dynamic simulation of the cam, follower, lever and hammer that includes the compliance of the leaf spring; finite element checks of the frame, lever and shafts; a larger base circle or another adjustment to bring the pressure angle under 30°; and a comparison of other motion laws at the same 99° allocation. An adjustable stroke, speed control and guarding for the belts and cam would also be needed before any production use.
[1] A. A. M. S. Al Aamri, S. Mudassir, M. V. Kulkarni, A. Hipolito and A. A. S. AlAwaid, “Modelling and fabrication of power hammer machine,” EPRA Int. J. Multidiscip. Res., 2023. [2] R. L. Norton, Design of Machinery: An Introduction to the Synthesis and Analysis of Mechanisms and Machines, 6th ed. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill Education, 2020. [3] M. J. Rider, Design and Analysis of Mechanisms: A Planar Approach. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2015. [4] H. Qiu, C.-J. Lin, Z.-Y. Li, H. Ozaki, J. Wang and Y. Yue, “A universal optimal approach to cam curve design and its applications,” Mech. Mach. Theory, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 669–692, 2005. [5] T. T. N. Nguyen, S. Kurtenbach, M. Hüsing and B. Corves, “A general framework for motion design of the follower in cam mechanisms by using non-uniform rational B-spline,” Mech. Mach. Theory, vol. 137, pp. 374–385, 2019. [6] M. Mandal and T. K. Naskar, “Introduction of control points in splines for synthesis of optimized cam motion program,” Mech. Mach. Theory, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 255–271, 2009. [7] G. Gatti and D. Mundo, “On the direct control of follower vibrations in cam–follower mechanisms,” Mech. Mach. Theory, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 23–35, 2010. [8] H. D. Desai and V. K. Patel, “Computer aided kinematic and dynamic analysis of cam and follower,” in Proc. World Congr. Eng. (WCE), vol. II, London, U.K., 2010, pp. 1246–1250. [9] L.-I. Wu, W.-T. Chang and C.-H. Liu, “The design of varying-velocity translating cam mechanisms,” Mech. Mach. Theory, vol. 42, pp. 352–364, 2007. [10] A. H. de Freitas Avelar and L. F. Soares, “Nomograms for maximum pressure angles in radial cams with follower eccentricity for cycloidal and harmonic motion curves,” Acta Sci. Technol., vol. 45, e57823, 2023, doi: 10.4025/actascitechnol.v45i1.57823.
Publication Date
10/28/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
2
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
10
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...