Periodontal Measurement Test System

P13061 Project Review

Team P13061

Ray Boronczyk (ME), Evan Lammertse (ME), Sam Remp (EE), Yokai Ro (EE), Ryan Shaw (ME), Kristi Weaver (ME)

Problem Statement

Periodontal disease affects over 50% of adults worldwide and is the leading cause of tooth loss.

The current method for performing the sulcus depth measurement is a painful, inconsistent and lengthy process.

Current Method

Long Term Goal

Develop a new method that is more consistent, less painful and less time consuming.

Ultrasonic transducer

1st Generation

Develop a test fixture to validate the use of an ultrasonic transducer to perform the sulcus depth measurement.

• Tooth phantom• Test Fixture• Automated program

Original Customer Needs

Phantom Material Research

• Relevant properties: acoustic impedance, density, speed of sound

• Initial material selection: – Bone: brick– Dentin: concrete– Soft tissue: paraffin, polyurethane

• Revised material selection: – Bone: aluminum– Soft tissue: rubber, fabric paint

Phantom Design

Mechanical- System Needs

• Hold tooth phantom and transducer• Move through 5 axes • Accuracy to +/- 0.1mm and +/- 1 deg• Portable

Mechanical

3 Linear Axes

• Lead Screws• Anti-Backlash Nuts• Ball Bearings• Couplings

Rotational Axes• Servo’s• Linear Bearings

Challenges Faced

• Misalignment– Machining quality– Positive location

• Time• Miscommunication during manufacturing• Probe Holder– Spring mechanism

Electrical

System Description

• Arduino UNO development board directly controlling 2 servo motors and indirectly controlling 3 stepper motors through EasyDriver MicroStep controllers.

• Arduino analog to voltage converter interprets linear position of the stepper motors.

• Programmatically captures data from the Oscilloscope then compares and logs it.

Programming Flowchart

Adapted Customer Needs

Phantom Test Results

Mechanical Test Results

Lateral

Requested Measured Difference

in mm in mm mm

0.5 12.70 0.497 12.62 0.08

0.5 12.70 0.497 12.62 0.08

0.5 12.70 0.497 12.62 0.08

0.75 19.05 0.748 19.00 0.05

0.75 19.05 0.749 19.02 0.03

0.75 19.05 0.749 19.02 0.03

Linear Axes

Vertical

Requested Measured Difference

in mm in mm mm

0.5 12.70 0.497 12.62 0.08

0.5 12.70 0.496 12.60 0.10

0.5 12.70 0.497 12.62 0.08

0.75 19.05 0.753 19.13 -0.08

0.75 19.05 0.754 19.15 -0.10

0.75 19.05 0.753 19.13 -0.08

Longitudinal

Requested Measured Difference

in mm in mm mm

0.5 12.70 0.496 12.60 0.10

0.5 12.70 0.497 12.62 0.08

0.5 12.70 0.497 12.62 0.08

0.75 19.05 0.752 19.10 -0.05

0.75 19.05 0.753 19.13 -0.08

0.75 19.05 0.753 19.13 -0.08

• All within spec

Rotational AxesTurn Table

Requested MeasuredDeg Deg

1 22 43 64 85 10

6 12

7 148 16

9 18

10 200 to 5 10

5 to 10 2010 to 0 0

0 to 10 21

Pitch AxisRequested Measured

Deg Deg1 02 33 54 75 9

6 11

7 138 15

9 17

10 190 to 5 7

5 to 10 910 to 0 0

0 to 10 17

• Turn Table• Factor of two

• Pitch Axis Possible Problems• Motor size/capability• Motor mount• Coupling

Electrical Test Results

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Ampl

itude

(VD

C)Bone Response and Dentin Response

Bone Dentin

Future Work

• Ultrasonic transducer: – Higher frequency– Different type?

• Phantom materials: baseline research• Representative sulcus

Future Work Cont’d

• Servo motors: mounting change (reduce angular torque)

• Stepper motors: – Positional feedback system– Larger power supply

• Wire harnesses

Acknowledgements

• Dr. Brown – RIT• Dr. Caton – U of R• Neal Eckhaus – faculty guide• Dr. Helguera – RIT• Professor Landschoot – RIT• Dr. Stephen McAleavy – U of R• Dr. Phillipps – RIT • Dr. Rosenblum – customer• RIT Machine Shop