Chuck Tightening

and
Locking Mechanism
By
MICHAEL-JON REID

Good day, my name is Michael-Jon Reid.

I will be presenting my Chuck Tightening and Locking Mechanism proposal for drills,
drill presses and handheld tools.
This is an innovative way of locking a chuck in position. The collet is designed in order
to accept multiple sizes and shapes of tools.

1
Stakeholders
Customers
Machinists and engineers
The Everyday working man
Reliable supply
Value for money
Repeat business
Customer service
Shareholders
Share power growth
Dividend

Customers
Machinists and engineers - These are people that have
workshops and use tools for a living.
The Everyday working man- These are people which
don't use tools all the time but use them when they are
needed.
Reliable supply - The product going to the customer must
always be in stock
Value for money - The customer is getting a product they
need for a reasonable amount of money
Repeat business - If there is a reliable supply and the
value for money is good the customer will return
Customer service - Good customer service will get repeat
business
Shareholders
Share power growth - As the company grows and sells
more products the share price will increase.
Dividend - The payouts made to the shareholders after
their initial investment.
Stakeholders
Suppliers
Long Term business
Reliable Payments
Affordable price
Premium quality

Employees
Salary
Job security
Job satisfaction

Suppliers
Long Term business - Long term business is key to
making sure that the suppliers look out for your best
interest when supplying you with the best service and best
parts.
Reliable Payments - Ensuring that the suppliers are paid
on time will ensure constant supply of parts.
Affordable price - Look for a supplier that will give you the
best price in order for you to make a profit.
Premium quality - You must ensure that the quality of the
parts you receive meet the demand of the customer.
Employees
Salary - This is reflected on what type of job is completed
Job security - If the product design meets the demand of
the customer, the customer will continue to buy the
product and thus the employees will have security in
knowing that there jobs are safe.
Job satisfaction - When employees are interested in there
job and the product being sold.
 Research Performed
Target Audience
Materials needed
ABS Plastic for the housing [4]
Acetal Plastic for the Collet [3]
Anodised Aluminium [1][2]
Which locking system meets requirements
Simplicity / Ease of use
Strength of the chuck
Cost

Target Audience
The target audience for this product is the machinist, engineer
and the average person that needs to you tools such as drills,
drill presses and handheld tools.
These people are professionals and non-professionals but they
all require a simple tools that is of a good quality, high strength
and ease to use.
Materials needed
The materials that are need are specific to different parts of the
tool.
They need to be light in weight but very rigid and strong to stand
up to the abuse of a workshop and the stresses they will receive.
Which locking system meets requirements
The locking system has to be something that is ease to use but
must be very effective as it needs to withstand a lot of force while
being used.
This is a safety system that will ensure that tools cant be
accidentally release while in use.
Simplicity / Ease of use
Simplicity is key to any good design, if something is over
complicated people tend not to use the product as often.
By being simple and easy to use it opens doors for the everyday
 user and simplifies the machinist or engineers job.
Strength of the chuck
If the product isnt strong it may break during use and cause
injury or the customer wont return to use your specific product.
Cost
The product needs to be cost effective for both the company and
the customer.
If the product is too expensive people wont want to buy it.
If the cost of manufacturing is too expensive the company
doesnt make any money.
 POV Statement
Machinists and the average person

Types of tools

Multiple different shapes and sizes

Use on multiple Platforms

Machinists and the average person who use drills, lathes and hand tools that
can benefit from a chuck that can tighten and lock tools or other objects into
position on either a drill, drill press, lathe or hand tools.
Something that will be able to hold multiple different shapes and sizes?
Securely and effective for safety and for ease of use.
The chuck needs to be accessible on multiple platforms with little effort to
change over.
 Problem Statement
Machinists and the average person who use drills, lathes and hand tools
can benefit from a chuck that can tighten and lock tools or other objects
into position on either a drill, drill press, lathe or hand tools. Something
that will be able to hold multiple different shapes and sizes? While trying
to limit the actual change out of the chuck for the size or shape. Chucks
generally have three to four jaws (possibly more jaws) which come into
contact with the tools or other objects and this may cause the object to
move depending on the shape.

Machinists and the average person who use drills, lathes and hand tools can
benefit from a chuck that can tighten and lock tools or other objects into
position on either a drill, drill press, lathe or hand tools.
Something that will be able to hold multiple different shapes and sizes?
While trying to limit the actual change out of the chuck for the size or shape.
Chucks generally have three to four jaws (possibly more jaws) which come
into contact with the tools or other objects and this may cause the object to
move depending on the shape.
 Requirements
1. High friction coefficient for 100m or no movement.
2. Tightening force should be 6 to 10 lbs. to open and close the chuck.
3. The tool shall hold multiple sizes.
1mm to 20mm for drills, drill press' and hand tools.
20mm to 300mm for lathes.
4. The tool needs hold multiple shapes.
Round, Square, Triangle, Hexagon, Multi Splined
5. Safety locking system so that the chuck cant loosen itself while being
used.
6. The chuck needs to be self-centering.

1. High friction coefficient for 100m or no movement. No movement

ensure less wear and tear on the tools and the chuck, the tool will not
have any safety issues.
2. Tightening force should be 6 to 10 lbs. to open and close the chuck.
The chuck should hold the tools easily without having to strain the
chuck to open or close it.
3. The tool shall hold multiple sizes. More focus will be on one design that
can be modified at a later date to accommodate bigger machinery and
tools. Collet sizes will need to be dynamic in order to hold different sizes
in place.
1mm to 20mm for drills, drill press' and hand tools.20mm to
300mm for lathes.
4. The tool needs hold multiple shapes. Having a collet that holds multiple
shape will reduce the amount of additional tools needed as adaptors or
full sized machinery or tools.
Round, Square, Triangle, Hexagon, Multi Splined
5. Safety locking system so that the chuck cant loosen itself while being
used. Safety is always a priority and having a system that locks in place
so that the tools cant be removed by accident.
6. The chuck needs to be self-centering. A self-centering chuck is
common but if it hold different shape tools it needs to ensure that it is
still centered, so that the tool is accurate and less material lose.
 Criteria
1. Material wear and tear, and high impact
2. Implemented on multiple tooling platforms
3. Light weight
4. Low Cost
5. Easy to use for customer
6. Used on current tools

1. Material to withstand a lot of wear and tear from multiple tool shapes
being used on the tool. Materials used should be able to have high
impact.
2. Must be able to be implemented on multiple tooling applications such as
drill, drill press, lathes and hand tools. The chuck locking mechanism
should be able to be used on multiple platforms.
3. Light weight as not to put any extra stress on the motors.
4. Low Cost.
5. Easy to use so that the consumer can be either a machinist or the
average person that needs to use tools.
6. Can be used on current tools with slight and simple modifications.
 AHP Table
Criteria 1 Criteria 2 Criteria 3 Criteria 4 Criteria 5 Criteria 6 Total Weight

Criteria 1 1 1/4 (0.25) 1/5 (0.2) 4 4 3 15.45 0.225

Criteria 2 4 1 1/4 (0.25) 1/5 (0.2) 3 2 13.45 0.196

Criteria 3 5 4 1 3 3 3 19.333 0.281

Criteria 4 1/4 (0.25) 5 1/3 (0.333) 1 2 4 12.783 0.186

Criteria 5 1/4 (0.25) 1/3 (0.333) 1/3 (0.333) 1/2 (0.5) 1 2 4.582 0.067

Criteria 6 1/3 (0.333) 1/2 (0.5) 1/3 (0.333) 1/4 (0.25) 1/2 (0.5) 1 3.116 0.045

Total 11.166 11.416 5.449 13.95 19.5 20 68.714 1

1. Material wear and tear, and high impact

a. (vs 2) Customers look at wear and tear over multiple platforms,
because if they have one platform then they require the chuck to
take more wear and tear.
b. (vs 3) Lightweight is definitely a key factor but the chuck needs to
withstand abuse in the workshop.
c. (vs 4) If the chuck is low cost people don't need it to be as impact
friendly.
d. (vs 5) Customers will rather use something that is easy and take
care of it.
e. (vs 6) A tool that can be used on current platforms and can
withstand wear and tear is idea.
2. Implemented on multiple tooling platforms
a. (vs 1) Customers look at wear and tear over multiple platforms,
because if they have one platform then they require the chuck to
take more wear and tear.
b. (vs 3) Lightweight is more accepted over use on multiple
 a. platforms.
b. (vs 4) Customers require products to be less expensive rather
than used on multiple platforms.
c. (vs 5) Products need to be easy to use but if implemented on
multiple platforms would be more accepted.
d. (vs 6) Use on multiple platforms is easier than attaching a new
chuck to an existing tool.
2. Lightweight
a. (vs 1) Lightweight is definitely a key factor but the chuck needs to
withstand abuse in the workshop.
b. (vs 2) Lightweight is more accepted over use on multiple
platforms.
c. (vs 4) Customers will pay less even if the product is heavier.
d. (vs 5) If the product is easy to use the customer wont need to
use it as much so weight wont affect them.
e. (vs 6) Multiple platforms can use the product, which means more
usage.
3. Low Cost
a. (vs 1) If the chuck is low cost people don't need it to be as impact
friendly.
b. (vs 2) Customers require products to be less expensive rather
than used on multiple platforms.
c. (vs 3) Customers will pay less even if the product is heavier.
d. (vs 5) Low cost and easy to use are on a similar level.
e. (vs 6) Customers will pay slightly more if they can use the
product on their current equipment.
4. Easy to use for customer
a. (vs 1) Customers will rather use something that is easy and take
care of it.
b. (vs 2) Products need to be easy to use but if implemented on
multiple platforms would be more accepted.
c. (vs 3) If the product is easy to use the customer wont need to
use it as much so weight wont affect them.
d. (vs 4) Low cost and easy to use are on a similar level.
e. (vs 6) Customers want the chuck to be easy to use on what they
already have.
5. Used on current tools
a. (vs 1) A tool that can be used on current platforms and can
withstand wear and tear is idea.
b. (vs 2) Use on multiple platforms is easier than attaching a new
chuck to an existing tool.
c. (vs 3) Multiple platforms can use the product, which means more
usage.
d. (vs 4) Customers will pay slightly more if they can use the
product on their current equipment.
e. (vs 5) Customers want the chuck to be easy to use on what they
already have.
 Top Design Alternatives
Design 2: Side Roller Bearing
Jaws interlock with roller bearings
Bearings run at an angle
More force
No accidental release

Design 2: Side Roller Bearing

The roller bearings will be on the outer ring of the chuck and then on the jaws
of the chuck there will be divots to interlock with the roller bearings.
The roller bearings will run at an angle so the tighter the chuck gets the more
force is placed on the roller bearings and the divots on the jaws.
This will inturn make sure that the chuck is locked in place and the jaws don't
accidentally release.
 Top Design Alternatives
Design 3: Sliding Clip
Multiple notches
Calculated locking points
Minimal play
Simple slide action

Design 3: Sliding Clip

Using a sliding clip design, there would be multiple notches on the forward
facing chuck.
The rear part of the chuck will house the sliding clip.
By calculating the desired dimensions that the chuck would allow for, it could
then be used to calculate the exact positions that the notches would need to
be in.
By doing these calculations it will minimize play in the chuck.
Simply sliding the clip forward would hold the chuck in place.
 Top Design Alternatives
Design 4: Locking Nut
Multi splined locking nut
Additional tools for greater
friction

Design 4: Locking Nut

The locking nut will have multiple splines on the outer edge.
When the chuck is hand tightened, then using an additional tool the locking nut
will be tighten to create a greater friction between the forward and rear parts of
the chuck.
The locking nut will require an additional tool which may reduce the amount of
customers that want to use it.
 Decision Matrix

The decision matrix help to show that the best decision would be the Locking
Nut. The Locking Nut scored the highest overall and in second is the Rear
Ball Bearing. The score helps show which designs come out above the rest
but need to still be carefully considered.

The sketches of each design and description will show and explain how each
of the designs will work. By using the decision matrix, the design sketches and
the design description you will be able to decide which design takes
preference. A design can be preferred if there is a flaw or problem.

Design 4: Locking Nut wins the overall score on the decision matrix but one of
the requirements was that the chuck doesn't require any additional tools. The
sketches of the designs and descriptions will show why I think that Design 1:
Rear Ball Bearing Design would work best for this application. Design 1
doesn't require any additional tools to lock it into place. The Rear Ball Bearing
design can be used on multiple platforms and existing platforms with minimal
modification.

Design 2: Side Roller Bear would work well but might lack the force required to
place pressure on the roller bearings and the outer plate.
Design 3: May be more affected by wear and tear and could be possibly
overlooked when locking the chuck in place as it would needed to be moved
into place after tighten the chuck.

Overall the designs all have potential to improve the tightening and locking
system on a chuck used for power drills, drill presses, lathes and hand tools.
Design 1: Rear Ball Bearing meets the requirements and criteria and would
need to be the winning design. This design is simple, easy to use and no
additional tools are needed. Constant pressure is applied to the interface
plates so that locking the chuck is never overlooked.
 Final CAD Rendering
Parts of the Assembly:
Tightening Collet and Locking
Assembly
Housing
Used on:
Handheld tools
Drills
Drill presses

The Tightening Collet and Locking Assembly (Left) is displayed here to show
what is inside of the housing (Right).
The Housing has a center red ring which is the midpoint of the assembly, this
divides the front and rear of the housing. The front and the rear parts of the
housing are used in order to tighten or loosen the chuck and to lock the chuck
in place.
Used on:
Handheld tools
Drills
Drill presses
Lathes (The assembly would need to be modified for the size of a lathe.
This will also help with less tools being used.)
 How The Design Works
Three Main Parts:
1. Housing
2. Collet
3. Locking Mechanism

There are three main parts to how the chuck works.

1. Housing
a. The housing is made of two parts the front and the rear.
b. They move independently in order to tighten, loosen and lock
the chuck.
c. The housing is attached to the locking mechanism in order to
tighten and loosen the chuck.
2. Collet
a. The collet is made from Acetal Plastic .
b. This means the collet can flex but is made with a strong plastic
which can withstand wear and tear.
c. The collet has a subassembly which is part of the locking
mechanism, this is call the driver
i. The driver is used to tighten and place force on the collet,
this will make the collet open or close
ii. The driver is attached to the locking mechanism and will
ensure the collet opens and closes when the housing is
twisted in opposite directions.
3. Locking mechanism
a. The locking mechanism has three parts
i. The spring
1. The high tension spring ensures that the ball
bearing plate always locates into the locking plate.
ii. The ball bearing plate
1. There are 32 ball bearings that need to locate into
the locking plate so that the mechanism doesnt
release accidentally.
iii. The locating/locking plate
1. This is the main key to the assembly and uses 64
divot to lock the assembly in place.
 Design Solves the Problem
Design 1: Rear Ball Bearing
Two interface plates
Multiple divot location
High tension spring

Customer Value
Quality, Safety, Ease of use
Minimal Wear and Tear

Design 1: Rear Ball Bearing

The Rear Ball Bearing system uses two interface plates.

One plate has multiple divots on it and the second plate has multiple ball
bearings.
Below one of the plates there is a high tension spring, so the more the chuck is
tightened the ball bearings will find a place in the divots and the spring will
secure the two interface plates from moving.
Thus the chuck stays locked in place.

Customer Value
The customer will see that the quality, safety and easy of use of this chuck
shows when the customer is using it.
Lightweight design with the strength of the materials at a cost effective price
point.
The wear and tear will be minimal as all the materials are of a high strength.
 Design Solves the Problem
Materials
Housing will be ABS plastic.
Collet will be Acetel.
Locking assembly will be Anodised Aluminium.

Cost
Estimated cost will $40-$50 per chuck

Materials (Finish)
Housing will be ABS plastic.
ABS is inexpensive, strong, stiff plastic that holds up well to
external impacts. [4]
Collet will be Acetel.
Acetel is a high strength plastic material but can flex. [3]
Locking assembly will be Anodised Aluminium. [1][2]
The anodising gives the aluminium its strength.
The locking ring will be made of stainless steel so that it is less
likely to wear.
Aluminium is more cost effective and lightweight.

Cost
Estimated cost will $40-$50 per chuck tightening and locking
mechanism of smaller tooling machines
 Summary
Point of View Statements
Problem Statement
Requirements
Criteria
AHP
Decision Making
Designs on Fusion 360
Preparation and Presentation
Referencing

Point of View Statements

Multiple different customers can use a multiple tools of shape
and size on multiple platforms.
Problem Statement
This statement defines what the customer needs from the tool
without stating what the solution is.
Requirements
The requirements for this chuck tightening and locking
mechanism have been met.
Criteria
Not all the criteria have been met but going forward the current
chuck can be modified to close the gap on a final design which
will incorporate larger tooling platforms.
AHP
The AHP table show the differences in what the customer truly
wanted from the design.
Decision Making
The decision making table stated that the locking nut design met
the criteria best but with the use of the requirement, it was seen
that the best design would be the rear ball bearing design as it
didnt require any additional equipment or tools.
Designs on Fusion 360
 Fusion 360 opens up a whole new world with regards to how the
design was made, and how the final design came out,
Fusion 360 show what the final design will render to if it was to
be manufactured.
This gives the customer more insight.
Preparation and Presentation
I have learnt how to create a presentation which is more fact
based and more to the point.
Referencing
Referencing is valuable to the people that originally did the
research, so that they get credit.
 References
[1] Wenzel Metal Spinning Web. (2017, September 17). "Steel versus
Aluminum Weight, Strength, Cost, Malleability Comparison" [Online]
Available: <http://www.wenzelmetalspinning.com/steel-vs-aluminum.html>
[2] Metal Supermarkets IP Inc. (2014, December 15). "10 Differences
Between Aluminum And Stainless Steel" [Online] Available:
<https://www.metalsupermarkets.com/10-differences-aluminum-stainless-
steel/>

[1] Wenzel Metal Spinning Web. (2017, September 17). "Steel versus
Aluminum Weight, Strength, Cost, Malleability Comparison" [Online] Available:
<http://www.wenzelmetalspinning.com/steel-vs-aluminum.html>

[2] Metal Supermarkets IP Inc. (2014, December 15). "10 Differences Between
Aluminum And Stainless Steel" [Online] Available:
<https://www.metalsupermarkets.com/10-differences-aluminum-stainless-steel
/>
 References
[3] Pastics International TM. (2017, September 17). "Differences Between
Acetal Products" [Online] Available:
<http://www.plasticsintl.com/acetals.htm>
[4] Creative Mechanisms Blog. (2017, September 17). "Everything You
Need to Know About ABS Plastic" [Online] Available:
<https://www.creativemechanisms.com/blog/everything-you-need-to-know
-about-abs-plastic>

[3] Pastics International TM. (2017, September 17). "Differences Between

Acetal Products" [Online] Available: <http://www.plasticsintl.com/acetals.htm>

[4] Creative Mechanisms Blog. (2017, September 17). "Everything You Need
to Know About ABS Plastic" [Online] Available:
<https://www.creativemechanisms.com/blog/everything-you-need-to-know-abo
ut-abs-plastic>