Water Maker P13417 Introduction to the Team Team Members: Guides: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
water maker
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Water Maker P13417 Introduction to the Team Team Members: Guides: - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Apr 15, 2023 347 likes •940 views

Human Generated Power for B9 Better Water Maker P13417 Introduction to the Team Team Members: Guides: Vincent Burolla Kreag Bradley ISE Leo Farnand Diane Kang ISE Emily Belonga ME Nicholas Higgins ME Jordan Lahanas EE Customer:

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Human Generated Power for B9 Better Water Maker

P13417

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Introduction to the Team

Team Members: Kreag Bradley ISE Diane Kang ISE Emily Belonga ME Nicholas Higgins ME Jordan Lahanas EE Trang Pham EE Guides: Vincent Burolla Leo Farnand Customer: B9 Plastics

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Table of Contents

  • Project Overview
  • Problem Statement
  • Customer Needs
  • Specifications
  • Current Design
  • Testing
  • Preliminary Concepts
  • Concept Selection
  • Conclusions
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Project Overview

  • B9 Plastics:

A not for profit organization dedicated to social and environmental improvement through the use of certain materials (plastics).

  • Better Water Maker (BWM):

A water treatment device used in the developing world to kill water microbes by using ultraviolet light. The device uses a human powered crank to generate power for the device at 12v.

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Problem Statement

  • Our project, in conjunction with B9 plastics, is to redesign the

power generator to ease the use of this device for women and

  • children. The current design seems to be too physically

demanding to maintain the proper power output for the time required to cleanse a moderate amount of water (over 1 gallon).

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Customer Needs

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Specifications

slide-8
SLIDE 8

V02 Testing

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Current Design

slide-10
SLIDE 10
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Current BOM

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Current BOM

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Preliminary Concepts

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Concept Selection

  • New Gear Box
  • To obtain better gear ratio
  • Maintain/reuse all electrical work
  • Motors still experience same input rpms
  • New Motors
  • To obtain better gear ratio
  • Ease cost
  • Reduce losses due to friction
  • Significant increase in total lifetime

Goal: Each proposal is to decrease input crank rpms *Both proposals include using legs/feet to pedal generator

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Maximum allowable leg force required to power generator

  • Current generator requires 50in*lbs of torque to maintain

required rpms

  • Equates to 9 lbf at crank arm handle which is 40% of

maximum arm force of women (21 lbf)

  • Maximum leg force of average woman is 63 lbf
  • Allowable force = 40% of 63 lbf
  • 25 lbf experienced at crank arm handle (pedal)
slide-16
SLIDE 16

New Gear Box Comparison

Current New Gear Box Design

slide-17
SLIDE 17

New Gear Box

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Torque Equations

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Basic Stress and Deflection Analysis

  • f Crank

Arm

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Current Design

Type: Apply normal force Value: 4.11 lbf

Ultimate Strength of “Harbec plastic” is 10,700psi

  • Large Gear with 9 lbf applied to crank handle
slide-21
SLIDE 21

Proposed Design

  • Large Gear with 25 lbf applied to crank handle

(pedal)

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Current Crank Arm

  • 9 lbf

applied

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Current Crank Arm

  • 25 lbf

applied

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Gear Small Radius

  • 25 lbf applied to crank arm pedal
slide-25
SLIDE 25

Proposed Gear Box

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Proposed Generator Cover

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Proposed Generator Cover DRW

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Proposed Motor Mount Box

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Proposed Motor Mount Box DRW

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Proposed New Gear (Small Radius) DRW

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Proposed New Gear (Large Radius) DRW

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Proposed Steel Axle DRW

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Proposed Crank Arm Pedal DRW

slide-34
SLIDE 34
slide-35
SLIDE 35

New Gear Box

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Current Motor

  • Mabuchi RS-555PC
  • Short lifetime
  • <6000 hours
slide-37
SLIDE 37

Mabuchi RS-555PC

slide-38
SLIDE 38

New Motor

  • CF Motor RS-390PH
  • Brushed motor
  • Longer lifetime
  • More efficient
  • 4 of these motors in a configuration with 2 parallel
  • Desired voltage/power of 12 V/17 W
  • Desired RPMs of ~1650
slide-39
SLIDE 39
slide-40
SLIDE 40
slide-41
SLIDE 41

Proposed Changes

  • Reverse diode across inductor
  • Incentive: circuit integrity
  • Currently the circuit contains an inductor near the input that has

no alternative current path, should the transistor in series with it turn off

  • Adding a reverse diode in parallel with this inductor ensures a

discharge path for this current

  • Replacement of potentiometer by low tolerance resistors
  • Incentive: cost
  • The current circuit uses an op-amp comparator and a 5V

reference to control powering of a power LED

  • This LED turns on when a sufficient voltage is generated (>12 V)
slide-42
SLIDE 42

Pump Circuit

  • Existing Pump Circuit
  • Accepts a variable input voltage
  • 12 V/19 W required to power the ballast and pump
  • After 10 seconds, pump will activate, moves water through device
slide-43
SLIDE 43
slide-44
SLIDE 44
slide-45
SLIDE 45
slide-46
SLIDE 46
slide-47
SLIDE 47

Proposed Changes

  • Smoothing RC network (“electrical flywheel”)
  • Incentive: efficiency, easiness of use
  • Add smoothing smoothing RC network for charge storage
  • The time allowed for not cranking the generator and keeping the

pump on was decided to be 1.0 seconds

  • Time constant
  • This time constant can be achieved with a 100 µF effective

capacitance and a 135 kΩ effective resistance.

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Motor Alternative BOM

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Motor Alternative BOM

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Seat Design Proposal

  • Preliminary concepts:
slide-51
SLIDE 51

Proposed Seating Position Assembly

slide-52
SLIDE 52

Proposed Seating Position Assembly (Hidden Lines View)

slide-53
SLIDE 53

Proposed Plywood Insert Geometry DRW

slide-54
SLIDE 54

Proposed Seat Back Rest DRW

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Proposed Bucket Seat DRW

slide-56
SLIDE 56

Entire proposed gearbox and seat modification

slide-57
SLIDE 57

Conclusion

  • New Gear box requires major tool changes
  • Adds expense
  • New motors requires less tool changes
  • Less expensive
  • Overall more efficient