project4 detailed design report

8/8/2019 Project4 Detailed Design Report

1/36

ME 340.5 Water TurbineProject Proposal 5/4/2010 Page 1 of36

FINAL REPORT

THE FANTASTIC FAUCETTHE SELF POWERED AUTOMATIC SINK

Team 5D

Benjamin ClarkMike Kinney

4 May 2010

Executive SummaryThe Fantastic Faucet is a self powered automated sink accessory which can easily be installed onany existing faucet. The device uses a nozzle which directs the water onto a Pelton water turbineinside of a transparent housing to drive a small electric generator. The Pelton turbine design waschosen due to its efficiency with flow characteristics found in a typical faucet. The discharge isin a vertical downward direction, so the water stream is still usable. The power generated fromthe turbine is used to power a motion sensor, which automates the water flow, turning the flowon when a hand is placed under it. This creates a hands free faucet, perfect for residential use.

The Fantastic Faucet has an attractive, slim profile, hanging only 4 inches below the faucet head,which allows the faucet to retain all of its functionality. The product is anticipated to retail forapproximately $50 and can produce 0.35 Watts, with an estimated net return of $27 million overfour years.


2/36


Table of Contents_________________________________________________________________

Executive Summary Page 11. Introduction Page 3

1.1 Background Information Page 31.2 Project Planning Page 3

2. Customer Needs and Specifications Page 42.1 Customer Reviews Page 42.2 Customer Needs Page 42.3 Product Specifications Page 5

3. Concept Development Page 53.1 External Search Page 53.2 Problem Dissection Page 73.3 Concept Generation Page 73.4 Concept Selection Page 8

4. System Level Design Page 94.1 Preliminary Tests Page 94.2 Product Performance Calculations Page 11

4.3 Economic Analysis Page 115. Detailed Design Page 12

5.1 Housing Page 125.2 Fittings and Nozzle Page 125.3 Shaft and Sealants Page 125.4 Turbine Page 135.5 Testing Page 13

6. Alpha Prototype Page 136.1 The Pelton Wheel Page 146.2 The Casing Page 146.3 Additional Components Page 146.4 Conclusions Page 14

7. Test Results Page 158. Conclusions and Recommendations Page 15

8.1 Product Viability Page 158.2 Design Improvements Page 158.3 What the Team Learned Page 168.4 Recommendations Page 16

9. References Page 17Appendices

A. Project Planning and Gantt Chart Page 18B. Dimensioned Part Drawings Page 19C. Final Bill of Materials Page 22D. Needs Metrics Matrix Page 23

E. AHP Weighting Matrix Page 24F. Concept Scoring Matrix Page 25G. Mabuchi Motor (Generator) Spec Sheet Page 26H. Patent Search References Page 27I. Preliminary Test Procedures and Results Page 32J. Product Performance Calculations Page 34K. Net Present Value Analysis Page 36

____________________________________________________________________________________


3/36


1. IntroductionPeople have become very aware of energy conservation today. More and more consumers are looking forenvironmentally friendly products to use in their homes and businesses. In particular, consumers arelooking at residential, green energy devices, including solar, wind, and hydro power. For the final projectin ME 340Design Methodology, each team has been tasked with building a small water turbine forresidential use which will mount to the end of a standard faucet. A strict set of specifications has beenincluded with the project, mandating performance results, size restrictions, installation instructions, andaesthetic considerations. The team must conduct research about how to design and prototype a costeffective and efficient turbine design while meeting the specifications and constraints. Additionally, theproduct must be aesthetically pleasing, and we must include a concept for an accessory product whichwould be powered off of the energy generated.

1.1Background InformationHydropower has been harnessed by humans since Egyptian times, where water was used for irrigation andto power clocks. Hydropower technology improved over time with the emergence of water wheels andhydraulic power pipes in Switzerland (Hydropower, 2010). Today, advanced water turbines are usedthroughout the world to generate electricity for homes and businesses. Approximately 5.8% of the UnitedStates electricity and 16% of the worlds electricity is generated from hydropower stations (Cimbala,

2010).

Modern hydropower plants are incredibly efficient, with some turbines having efficiencies around 95%.These generators have long life spans as well; some have been in operation for over 100 years and are stillworking. Plants now have the ability to store hydropower for peak usage times, where the turbines areconverted to pumps which pump water back up into the reservoirs. This mechanical energy storageproves to be very efficient and much more effective than electrical energy storage in batteries (Cimbala,2010).

Hydropower has become more and more popular recently, primarily due to the emergence of the greenmovement. The world is becoming more environmentally aware, and people are demanding that we lookfor alternative fuels and energy generation systems that produce less carbon emissions and pollution.

Hydropower is such a system. There is no pollution or emissions from generating power from water.Granted, rivers must be modified by building dams and reservoirs, but this is less taxing on nature thanburning coal and oil. Currently, only 100 GW of power is produced from hydropower in the UnitedStates, but by retrofitting existing dams, we could produce an additional 60 GW of power (Cimbala,2010).

Many individuals are also attempting to be more environmentally minded in their purchases andconsumption today. With this in mind, it would be appropriate to introduce a personal, small scale,hydropower generator. This can be used to raise awareness of hydropower and how it works.

1.2 Project PlanningIn order to begin the project and keep the timelines on track, the team created a series of deadlines and

tasks organized in a Gantt Chart in Appendix A. This is a clear and concise format of tasks and deadlinesthat shows what needs to be accomplished and who will accomplish each task (Ulrich, 2008). Deadlinesare marked with a diamond, and correspond to the project deliverables.

The Gantt Chart serves an added purpose in assigning tasks to each group member. We decided to dividethe main elements of the problem dissection up among the team. The turbine, housing, and shaft/gearassembly are the primary components of the product and were assigned to Mike Ganci, Ben Clark, andMike Kinney, respectively. This component will be that members primary charge through the external


4/36


search, detail design, and then finally manufacturing of the part. This way, each group member developsa specialty within the group. The remaining deliverables and project memos were divided evenly toprovide an even workload, with an attempt to accommodate members schedules.

2. Customer Needs and SpecificationsThe team has been tasked with developing a faucet mounted water turbine. The goal of the project is todevelop a small residential device that will produce usable power from a water turbine mounted to astandard faucet. This product is similar in function to the Sylvania ECOlight Water Powered ShowerLight, so we have used customer reviews from this product to determine customer needs in addition to theneeds and specifications provided with the project prompt.

2.1 Customer ReviewsCustomer reviews of the Sylvania ECOlight, posted on websites like Amazon.com which sell the product,revealed that people like the eco-friendly nature of the product and the easy installation. Users also likedthe range of motion of the shower head, which we have translated to versatility of the outlet side of thedevice in relation to the faucet. The product should not alter the usability of the faucet. Aesthetics wereheavily stressed in the reviews. The ECOlight has a gap along its casing which causes it to have anunfinished and industrial appearance. This was a major detractor for several users.

One major complaint of the ECOlight was its reliability and longevity. Some of the components, like thethreaded connections, are made of plastic and can be easy to damage during installation. The ECOlightalso suffers from a short shelf life; many fail after less than a year in use. Customers are looking for aquality product that looks and feels like it is robust and can last for many years regardless of water quality(mineral content of water supply) without any maintenance.

2.2 Customer NeedsWe have compiled the above customer needs with the indicated needs of the project prompt to develop amaster list of customer needs. We then created product specifications using a needs metrics matrix,located in Appendix D (Ulrich, 2008). Once the needs metrics matrix was completed, we used an AHPweighting matrix, located in Appendix E (Lamancusa, 2007) to determine specific weights for each

specification. This allowed for an easy way to analyze the various concepts based on their ability toperform in each area. The weights are listed below in Table 1.

Table 1: Concept selection criteria and weights

Need Weight Description

Ease of Installation 7% The products ability to install quickly and easily by the consumer

Aesthetically Pleasing 7% The shell of the product will look attractive in the home

Unobtrusive/Compact 8% The product will not interfere with general use of the faucet

Reliability/Robustness 16% The product must last a long time with no maintenance

Compatible with Home Faucet 9% The product must fit a standard home faucet

Visibility of Mechanics 3% The internal parts will be visibleMaximizes Power Production 20% The product is efficient

Waterproof 8% The product does not leak; electronic elements are protected

Easy to Use 8% The product works right out of the box

Cost 7% The product is economical

DFM/DFA 7% The product must be cheap to build and assemble


5/36


2.3 Product SpecificationsThe following constraints and specifications have been noted for The Fantastic Faucet design:

Must attach to a 3/8-18 NPS internal pipe threaded faucet Water discharge must be vertically downward The outlet of the product must be a 3/8 18 NPS internal pipe thread The product must extend no longer than 4 inches from the end of the faucet The product should allow visibility to the working components The product must be able to work in a wet environment and not leak The product must generate at least 1.5V at 10 Ohms resistance The product must not exceed $50 MSRP The product must be aesthetically pleasing and ergonomically functional The product installs easily and with no tools Design product with DFA and DFM in mind

3. Concept DevelopmentOur team used extensive research on water turbines and existing patents when developing The Fantastic

Faucet. Many concepts were developed from this knowledge, and a careful concept selection process wasutilized to ensure that the final design met all of our customers needs.

3.1 External Search:In order to design a high performance and customer focused product, the team did an external search onsubjects relating to fluid dynamics, turbines, generators, and power efficiency. We also completed anextensive patent search, which is summarized in Table 2. Full copies of the patents are available inAppendix H.

The primary sources of introductory material came from Dr. Lamancusaslectures. Specifically, we learned the background necessary to test and design ahigh efficiency water turbine. The external search also turned up many videos

and descriptions of simple turbine systems made out of household items. Thishelped the team to start envisioning the designs behind the product and to get theideas flowing for concept generation. Furthermore, the teams external searchrevealed many different types of turbine designs. This is relevant because in the

early stages of the design process, the system design must be ultimately focusedaround the central component, the turbine.

It is apparent that the Francis turbine, Pelton wheel and Kaplan turbine are the simplest and most efficientturbines to use in these low flow, low head applications. These three main turbine types are summarizedand analyzed below.

The Francis turbine is a very common turbine used in industrial applications

which combines radial and axial flow concepts (Bruno, 2004). The Francisturbine is a reaction turbine, which relies on pressure of submerged water flow,as opposed to an impulse turbine which uses the force of a water jet on theturbine (Cengel, 2010). Francis turbines are very efficient in industrialapplications, but the team found that the shape and flow characteristics are toocomplex to design and machine for this project.

A Kaplan Turbine is a propeller-type impulse turbine (Bruno, 2004). It isessentially a fan or propeller shape, which is driven to spin by water flow

Figure 1: Francis turbine

Figure 2: Kaplan turbine


6/36


pressure. However, Kaplan turbines do best in high flow applications, whichis not ideal for this project. Additionally, the axis of rotation must be uptowards the faucet. This orientation makes it much more difficult toimplement the generator into the system.

The Pelton wheel turbine is an impulse turbine that acts like a water wheel; the

buckets on the wheel collect almost all of the flows energy, making it a veryefficient turbine (Bruno, 2004). Due to this high efficiency in the turbine, it isan appealing design choice for the team. Additionally, the turbine orientationmakes it very easy to attach the generator along the same axis as the turbine.The Pelton does pose the added challenge of having the water still flow outdespite losing almost all of its energy at the Pelton stage.

Table 2: Patent Search Summary

Home Power

Station

Water Turbine

and Brush Head

Floating Water

Turbine

Hydro

Turbine

Hydro

Turbine

4122381 4531250 4849647 6409466 6309179

Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:

This product uses awater turbine togenerate electricitywith a generator,and then uses that

electricity to chargebatteriescontinuously untilthe batteries areneeded.

This is a pipecleaner thatcombines a brushsystem that ispowered by a water

turbine (pumpedthrough the pipe)and a water flowfrom the outflow ofthe turbine to cleanthe inside of thepipe.

This product usesa floatinggenerator and asubmergedscrew-like

turbine that sits inwater below thegenerator,generating powerfrom thesecurrents.

This patent usesturbine andgenerator toproduce power.This also uses a

nozzle to focusthe water andincrease thepressure, thusincreasing powergenerated.

The final productuses a Peltonwheel as a turbine.It forces the waterinflows around the

circle, turning thewheel, andproducing powerthrough thegenerator.

Analysis: Analysis: Analysis: Analysis: Analysis:

This system is toocomplicated andlarge for the teamsuses, but it uses a

similar technologyand an interestingalternative powerapplication.

This is aninterestingcombination ofpower use and

utilization ofturbine outflowwater, which isrelevant to thisproject. Thisproduct is toonarrow in scope

This product isnot that practical(as far asapplications) but

it is creative.This screw-liketurbine isinteresting andcan be useful indesign of theteams turbine.

This patent isuseful to usbecause itcombines the most

fundamentalconcepts of thisdesign project forthe team: focusingthe water andusing a practicalturbine for the job.

This productintroduces theidea of using 2inputs and 2

outputs into asingle turbine, andalso the idea ofusing a peltonwheel as a turbine.

Figure 3: Pelton wheel


7/36


3.2 Problem Decomposition:

Turbine: water wheels, Francis, Kaplan, different materials Generator: provided, can design own if desired Housing: plastic, rubber, metal (screws or clipping) must allow no water to generator. Need for high rpm in generator: gears, nozzle, less resistance Shaft: metal shaft, gearing, belt Attachment to faucet: screw-on, clamping mechanism, adhesive, suction cup Power application: see customer needs

3.3 Concept GenerationThe team conducted an external search to better familiarize ourselves with the current market of homehydropower generation systems in use today. We also looked at several commercial hydropower systems,as this is a much more mature industry. By using scale modeling techniques, we were able to determinewhich turbine runner styles would work best for our faucet flow, as each style of turbine is suited to aspecific flow rate, head, and pressure.

Once the team familiarized itself with the various styles of turbines available, we brainstormed severaldifferent ideas, including some unique design concepts, summarized in Table 3. We did not limit ourconcept germination process to only turbine styles optimized for our flow. Rather, we generated ideaslooking at the system as a whole: how the turbine would influence the outer shell design and generatorplacement. Fluid flow through the entire system was also an important component during the conceptgeneration phase, considering that the water entered the device vertically and had to discharge from theoutlet vertically as well.

Our brainstorming session arrived at a variety of interesting designs. We looked at how to best direct thewater flow so as to maximize outlet flow while keeping a vertical downward exit stream. One design weconsidered was the experimental Tesla turbine. Boundary layer friction can be problematic in smallerturbines. A turbine style that works specifically off of friction could operate effectively on a small scale.

Table 3: Concept Generation Summary

Francis Turbine Pelton Turbine Lateral Pressure Driven Turbine

Description: Description: Description:

The water enters radially along therunners and exits axially through thecenter.

The water enters in a vertical manner,enters a nozzle and stikes the wheel.Bucket like runners catch the water.

This is a custom design; the water fills achamber with directional nozzles. Thewater discharges through these nozzles,causing the chamber to spin.

Pros: Pros: Pros:

The product would have a visuallyinteresting shape. This turbine style is

The water enters and exits in a verticaldirection. The generator can easily be

This would be a visually interestingdesign to watch. The construction would


8/36


well suited for the given flowconditions.

mounted away from the water. be fairly simple.

Cons: Cons: Cons:

The water leaves 90 degrees from howit enters, requiring the water to beredirected.

This turbine typically is used withhigher flow head, but should still workin this application.

This may not produce much torque.There are no equations to base predictionsoff of. There may be significant head loss

through the product.Kaplan Turbine Modified Francis Turbine Tesla Turbine

Description: Description: Description:

The water enters vertically and flowsthrough the runners. The water thendischarges vertically downward. Thegenerator has been mounted outside ofthis design, but can be a center mountas well.

The water enters vertically into asplitter. The flow then goes into tubeswhich spiral around the centrallylocated generator. These tubes changethe flow to enter the Francis turbine ina radial manner.

This is an experimental design. Thewater enters vertically and passes throughseveral closely spaced flat plates. Theseplates are attached to a generator. Thiscould be modified to be a form of Peltonwater wheel.

Pros: Pros: Pros:

The water enters and exits in a verticalmanner. The overall system design issimple, and the water enters and exitsin a vertical manner.

The generator is encased within thedesign with easy coupling to theturbine. The water enters and exits in avertical manner.

This turbine works off of boundary layerfriction which is known to be present insmall turbine designs. It is simple todesign and build.

Cons: Cons: Cons:

This type of propeller design is verydifficult and complex. It may not bevisually interesting to watch.

This is a part intensive design whencompared to other options.

There are no equations to base predictionsfrom. This is not a tested design and maynot work well.

3.4 Concept SelectionThe team had many different ideas with widely different characteristics at the end of our conceptgeneration phase. We discussed the pros and cons of each idea to narrow our focus down to a pool of sixfinal design concepts. Once we had a final list, we used a concept scoring matrix (Ulrich, 2008) todetermine the most favorable final design (Appendix F).

The concept scoring matrix determined that the Pelton turbine design was the best option. Reflecting onthese results, the group decided that the Pelton design is the best option. It does not require a change inthe flow direction, and finished product should be compact. The generator can be isolated from the waterflow as well.


9/36


4. System Level Design

The primary objective is to create a high efficiency waterturbine that will be reliable and run for many years with nomaintenance. The basic product design consists of a threadedfitting that attaches to a 3/8-18 NSP internal pipe threadedfaucet. A nozzle directs the water down on to a Pelton wheel.The wheel buckets are designed to maximize the impulsedelivered by the water stream. The water then collects in thehousing below the wheel and exits in a vertical downwarddirection. The inlet nozzle will be sized so as to maximizeefficiency of the Pelton wheel while preventing water backup inthe system, which would otherwise fill the casing with waterand inhibit the effectiveness of the turbine.

The entire outer shell is to be constructed of a transparentmaterial so as to allow viewing of the moving components fromany angle. This will add an exciting aspect to the product while

simultaneously educating people about how water turbinesfunction. This outer shell will hang from the metal nozzle attachment. The casing also isolates thegenerator from the water to protect it. The entire package has afootprint of less than four inches from any of the three principalviews. The shell will be assembled in the production version withan ultrasonic welder in order to prevent leaks and lower the cost ofmanufacturing. We will attempt to use the ultrasonic welder forthe prototype as well so as to test the alpha and beta versions in asclose to actual conditions as possible.

The Pelton wheel design was selected for this product because itworks well with a high head and low flow that is available from a

household faucet at standard pressure. The housing allows plentyof space to allow the water to flow away from the turbine. Thegenerator is attached directly to the turbine via a coupling shaft thatis supported by bushings. This strategy provides for the lowestmanufacturing cost while accurately locating the turbine.

4.1 Preliminary TestsIn order to estimate the efficiency of the given electric generator and the power available from the faucet,the team conducted a series of preliminary tests. These tests aided the team in properly designing anappropriate system to incorporate the given faucet and generator.

1.Generator TestA weight was dropped, causing a shaft connected to the generator to spin. The output voltage of thegenerator was measured and compared to the power generated by the falling weight. A complete testprocedure and test data can be found in Appendix I. The data was used to compute the efficiency of thegenerator, summarized below in Figure 6. We determined the overall efficiency of the generator to beapproximately 28%.

Pelton

WheelElectrical

Connector

Nozzle

Generator

Figure 4: The Fantastic Faucet, Concept

Rendering, rear view

Figure 5: The Fantastic Faucet, Concept

Rendering, side view


10/36


2. Faucet TestWe tested the volumetric flow rate and pressure from the faucet in room 239 Reber, the competitionfaucet. The flow rate was measured across a range of pressures. A complete test procedure and test datacan be found in Appendix I. The resulting data is summarized below in Figure 7.

Because power is directly proportional to the product of volumetric flow rate and pressure, it is necessaryto run the system somewhere around 30 psi and 0.07 gal/sec (shown on graph) in order to maximize thearea under the curve, the power delivered from the faucet. It is also necessary to run the system at areasonably high volumetric flow rate because the faucet should still be able to be used for general kitchenpurposes.

Figure 6

Figure 7


11/36


4.2 Product Performance CalculationsWe calculated our expected output power from our Pelton wheel design. With a generator efficiency of28% and a very conservative turbine efficiency of only 1.7%, we calculated an overall system efficiencyof 0.47%. This yields an output power of 0.36 Watts. The required output power is 0.225 Watts. We areabove the minimum requirements for the project. All calculations are provided in Appendix J.

4.3 Economic AnalysisBecause the product uses four main plastic parts, the team has decided to use plastic injection molding toproduce these parts cheaply and designed for ease of manufacturing. In order to estimate the cost of theplastic injection molds, the team used a Java program created by David Kazmer, a Ph.D. specializing inintegrated polymer and process design. This program takes into account the part complexity, the numberof parts, the material, the cavities, the size, and the machining costs of the injection mold to give the teama very good estimate of the part cost. All cost estimates assume medium grade plastic and 100,000cycles. The results of the estimations are in Table 4.

Table 4: Cost Analysis of Custom Injection Molded Parts

Plastic Injection Molded Parts

Costs Main Housing Front Cover Back Cover TurbineProcess $0.17 $0.14 $0.14 $0.12

Material $1.22 $1.22 $1.16 $2.20

Tooling $0.90 $0.67 $0.67 $1.00

TOTAL $2.29 $2.03 $1.95 $3.32

For the remaining five parts, the team used all standard or stock parts in order to minimize the price perpart. For the shaft, the team minimized costs by buying aluminum stock of 8 foot rods. Judging howmany shafts could be produced per rod, we determined the number needed to accommodate 100,000units, and found the price per unit. The Electrical Connector, Generator, Marine Grease, and Bearing

were all standard or given parts that the team found cheapest at the listed vendors. These standard partsare summarized in Table 5.

Finally, the unit price must include the overhead and assembly cost of the product. Given the eight parts,including two press fits and assembly orientations, the team estimated the cost per unit of assembly to be$1.60.

Table 5: Cost Analysis of Stock Parts

Standard Parts

Shaft

Elec Connector

and Wires Generator Bearing Lube

Part Desc 3/16" dia, 1 3/4" Given Mabuchi RF-370CA Ball Bearing Marine Grease

Vendor Grainger Barstock Waytek Wire Yeno Electronics Ali Express RestockIt

Quantity 1 1 1 1 approx .05oz

TOTAL $0.91 $0.22 $1.49 $0.97 $0.01

Summing all of the estimated prices per part, per unit and the estimated cost due to assembly per unit, theunit price of the product is determined to be $14.79. Consequently, our net profit over four years isestimated to be $27 million, as calculated in Appendix K.


12/36


5. Detailed Design

Figure 8: The Fantastic Faucet, Final Design Rendering, exploded view

5.1 HousingThe housing of the turbine will be plastic injection molded, allowing for tabs to align internal parts andthe housing covers while retaining a transparent outer shell. The front and back covers will be attachedvia ultrasonic welding, which will effectively seal the unit so that it is waterproof. Internal threads at theoutlet and external threads at the inlet will be molded directly into the casing, reducing the number ofrequired parts and decreasing assembly time. The housing is molded into separate compartments, a wetcompartment for the turbine and water flow, and a dry compartment for the generator and electronics.

5.2 Fittings and NozzleThe Fantastic Faucet attaches to a standard 3/8-18 NPS threaded faucet.The external inlet threads and internal outlet threads are molded directlyinto the clear, plastic housing. This allows the faucet to retain all of itsfunctionality, even when the turbine is attached. A nozzle is used torestrict the flow, increasing the flow velocity and direct it onto the Peltonbuckets. This is molded into the inlet and is a part of the housing. Theconnection to the faucet will be sealed with Teflon tape, typical withother plumbing connections. The cost savings of using molded plasticthreads in lieu of a metal threaded connector outweigh the decreasedquality of the product.

5.3 Shaft and SealantsThe shaft will be made out of 3/16 aluminum rod. The turbine will bepress fit directly onto this shaft. The shaft will rest in a cradle moldedinto the front cover on one end and a bearing mounted in the wallseparating the wet compartment wall from the dry compartment. The cradle will act as a bushing for theshaft, and hydro-sealant grease will be used to lubricate these points of contact. This grease will double

Back Cover

Electrical

Connector

Main Housing

Body

Front Cover

Nozzle (molded

into housing)

Shaft

Pelton Wheel

Turbine

Generator

Figure 9: The Fantastic Faucet,

Final Design Rendering, front

view with fittings, nozzle, and

Pelton wheel


13/36


as a sealant, keeping the wet compartment sealed and keeping the drycompartment watertight. The rest of the unit will be sealed via ultrasonicwelding of the covers onto the main housing body. This shaft will thenpress fit onto the RF-370CA Mabuchi motor (Appendix G) shaft, making adirect connection to the generator.

5.4 TurbineThe Pelton wheel turbine will be plastic injection molded with a glass fillednylon, due to the strength of this material. This strength is needed due to thelong term force from the water stream on this part. It will receive hightorques compared to other parts in the design. Since the torque is deliveredvia the impulse of the water against the bucket, the buckets have been designto maximize this impulse. The water enters the bucket and is direct 174degrees back on itself. This angle prevents the water stream from hitting the

next bucket but maximizes the impulse received. There is also a notch cut into each bucket to allow for abetter contact angle between the bucket and the stream.

5.5 Testing

We will construct a prototype of this design for initial testing. The unit will be built as specified, and thevoltage will be measured across a 10ohm resistor with a digital multimeter. We should be able tocalculate all necessary information from this data. The prototype will use a gear train so that we canmake adjustments. The gear train will not be used in the final design; this is only for testing purposes.

6. Alpha PrototypeOnce we completed our preliminary designs of theFantastic Faucet, our team developed an alphaprototype for initial testing. While this prototype wasnot constructed from the final materials ormanufacturing processes, it provided a means to testturbine efficiency, generator output, and water flow

through the casing. Some modifications were madeduring the build time, including the use ofsubassemblies to aid in easy assembly and disassemblyfor modification. Once all modifications werecomplete, the device was sealed completely.

The alpha prototype was built around three mainmodulesthe turbine module, the gear train module,and the generator module. This allowed the turbine tobe sealed off from the rest of the system, protecting theelectronics from moisture. This design also allowed foreasy assembly. The generator module mated with the

gear train module. This subassembly then fit against the turbine assembly, mating the gears.

Figure 4: Completed alpha prototype, acrylic

casing with RP turbine

Figure 10: The Fantastic

Faucet, Final Design

Rendering, side view


14/36


Figure 5: Modular design of alpha prototype

6.1 The Pelton Wheel

Due to the complexity of the design, the Pelton wheel was built on a rapidprototyping machine. The part was then coated in epoxy to seal it and provideadditional strength. This wheel was then press fit onto a shaft. This shaft wasalso press fit into two ball bearings which mounted to the casing. The shaftextended from the turbine module to the gear train module where a gear waspress fit onto this shaft as well.

6.2 The CasingThe casing was constructed entirely of acrylic so as to maximize visibility tothe moving parts. To get the required thickness, several sheets of in acrylicwere cut and glued together. The exterior cuts were made on a bandsaw, and the interior cuts were madevia a dremel. Once everything was assembled, all parts were sanded down and polished to help increase

the transparency of the acrylic.

The turbine module was made from three cuts of in material capped on each end with a piece of 1/8inmaterial. The gear train module was made from one cut of in material and one cut of 1/8in material,and the generator module was made from four cuts of in material and one cut of 1/8in material. Allmodules were assembled with epoxy for a watertight seal. Additional holes were cut for the inlet valveand outlet valve, shaft, and electrical connection.

6.3 Additional ComponentsAll additional parts were constructed from stock parts. A compression fitting was cut down to be used asa nozzle. A plastic insert was then machined which fit inside of this fitting which could be used to adjustthe exit velocity of the water stream. Stock ball bearings and gears were used for the turbine shaft.

Plastic plugs were machined so that the bearings could mount to the outer walls of the casing. Inproduction, this would be molded directly into the casing. An O-ring was used as a seal on the turbineshaft. The generator, electrical connector, and wiring were all stock items used without modification.

6.4 ConclusionsThe casing proved to be the most time consuming part of the prototyping process. This was mainly dueto us having to cut each part by hand. The production run housing will be injection molded, significantlycutting down on the assembly time. We must also ensure that the casing allows for quick and easyassembly of all parts with self locating components. Pins will need to be used to align the different parts

TURBINE

MODULE

GENERATOR

MODULE

GEAR TRAINMODULE

Figure 6: Rapid prototyped

Pelton wheel turbine


15/36


of the housing. We also learned that, when building prototypes, we need a reliable way to align shaftsand mating parts. Trying to keep all parts aligned during the build phase proved challenging. Ultimately,the final alpha prototype proved to be usable and was close in comparison to the actual design. It alsoinformed us of several potential assembly problems before we go into production with the design.

7. Test ResultsThe Fantastic Faucet performed within the estimated performance characteristics. We estimated that ourturbine would output 1.9 volts, and the actual output was 1.85 volts. We were only 3% off of our initialestimates. With such conservative calculations, we were hoping that the turbine would perform above ourestimates, but this was not the case. With the information learned from the alpha prototype though, wefeel that we could significantly increase our efficiency in the beta prototype.

We did find that our output voltage dropped by nearly 50% on the day of the competition when it wasproducing 1.85 volts the night before. We eventually traced the problem to the seal on the faucet.Drilling a ventilation hole in the top of the casing restored our output. Apparently the leak at the faucetallowed the turbine to breathe, which prevented water from backing up in the casing. This was a veryimportant design component that we did not find in initial testing, primarily because we were not testingunder the same conditions present for the competition day.

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

8.1 Product ViabilityAfter the results of the testing of the teams alpha prototype, we are confident in the viability of theFantastic Faucet.

The biggest hurdle for the product is efficiencythe product cannot be produced if it does not supplyenough voltage for the electrical hands-free sensor accessory. However, after researching similarproducts, it is apparent that the industry standard is either a 6-Volt DC power supply or four AA batteriesin series, also producing 6 Volts (Air Delights 2010). We are confident that our water turbine can

produce this voltage with improvements to the design and removing losses due to poor manufacturing ofthe alpha prototype.

Another design constraint is the volumetric flow rate out of the faucet. Significantly restricting theoutflow will render the product useless. We had been having some problems with our volumetricoutflow, but after switching to a larger nozzle and putting an airflow inlet into our prototype, it becameapparent that the outflow of the turbine produced more than enough flow to be usable by the customer.

The final constraint is that of product size. Our product is relatively large (around four inches by fourinches by four inches). Consequently, this is the biggest room for improvement in our product. However,the team believes it can be made smaller with the proper manufacturing, without losing any efficiency.Additionally, even at this size, it will still fit most faucets without being an obstruction.

8.2 Design ImprovementsLooking back at the teams production of the turbine design and alpha prototype, there is much room for

improvement. The biggest room for improvement is making our Pelton wheel smaller and having asmaller number of buckets. The team is confident that this will increase efficiency because the currentlarge Pelton is slowed down by its large rotational inertia. Also, this will allow us to make the nozzlesmaller and thus, the whole product smaller.


16/36


Another place for improvement is the gearing of the product. It became apparent from the prototype thatour turbine was actually limited in efficiency by torque, due to resistance from the load. Therefore, wewere actually hurting our turbine by adding gears. Additionally, the system inevitably experienced lossesdue to gear meshing and friction. Finally, making the system direct drive will decrease the price of TheFantastic Faucet since there are fewer parts and less assembly time.

In learning from our peers, it is apparent that the most successful turbines used small Pelton wheels, asmall nozzle, and a direct drive. Implementing these ideas to the Fantastic Faucet will make it a betterproduct.

8.3 What the Team LearnedThis project was a very good learning process for us. In retrospect, we learned about how to carry out

the entire product development process from start to finish, with numerous very tight deadlines. Inparticular, we learned that starting early, and getting a strong background on the subject with an externalsearch is very important. If done properly, knowledge of the subject will make concept development andscoring very quick and easy. Once a final concept developed, it is important to make a very simpleprototype with as much variability as possible. The best prototypes in the class were the ones that werethe most simple. Additionally, the success of our product was largely due to the ability to swap nozzles

and gears until the final test. Mike Ganci had the great idea of machining different nozzles out of plasticon the lathe to fit into the threaded brass nozzle, varying the flow rate and velocity. We learned that thiskind of variability in a prototype is very valuable.

We also learned about how to produce professional and aesthetically impressive technical reports andproject posters. These are very important skills for both the senior design class and also for employmentdown the road. Finally, we learned the importance of working together in a team. For all of the parts ofthe project, we had very good coordination between group members in communicating between CADdrawings, tests and calculations, and the writing of reports. All of these things resulted in successfulprojects.

Ultimately, this project was a very useful learning experience that cannot be replaced by other classes;

there is no substitute for projects like this with trial and error when it comes to the art of engineering.

8.4 RecommendationsWhile we enjoyed this project very much, and the end result was relatively successful, we do have somerecommendations.

1. We think it would have helped us to make the report submissions due at midnight of the due date.We would frequently not be able to meet on the weekends to work on the report, due to othercommitments, and most of our time to work as a full team on the project was from the end ofclass until submission. I think we could have produced better reports if we had those extra twohours.

2. One difficulty with the project came from writing the detail design report while simultaneouslymachining theprototype. It was hard for us to specify things in our detail design that we werentreally decided on yet, because it required some help from building and testing our prototype.

3. In terms of our turbine, we need to make a smaller turbine for the beta prototype while decreasingthe overall size of the unit. We will eliminate the gearing and revert back to a direct drivesystem.


17/36


9. References

Automatic Sensor Faucets Air Delights. May 2, 2010.

Bonneville Kaplan Turbine. April 14, 2010.

Bruno, Leonard. Turbine. Gale Virtual Reference Library. The Gale Encyclopedia of Science.Ed. K. Lee Lerner and Brenda Wilmoth Lerner. Vol. 6. 3rd ed. Detroit: Gale, 2004.p4135-4138.

Cengel, Yunus A., and John M. Cimbala. Fluid Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications.Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2010. Print.

Cimbala, John M. Hydropower. 022 Deike Building, The Pennsylvania State University. 1 April 2010.

Holden, Joseph. Hydro Turbine. U.S. Patent 6309179. Filed Nov 23, 1999. Issued Oct 30,

2001

Hydropower. Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 14 April 2010. Web. 14 April 2010.

Kaisha, Kyowa. Water Turbine and Brush Head using the water turbine for cleaning pipes.U.S. Patent 4531250. Filed Jun 6, 1983. Issued Jul 30, 1985

Lamancusa, J. S. Concept Generation. Spring 2007. Online PowerPoint. Angel.psu.edu. 12April 2010.

Lamont, John. Hydro Turbine. U.S. Patent 6409466. Filed Aug 25, 2000. Issued Jun 25, 2002.

McKenzie, T. Floating Water Turbine. U.S. Patent 4849647. Filed Nov 10, 1987. Issued Jul18, 1989

Stahlkocher. April 14, 2010

Sturm, Zeynab. Home Power Station. U.S. Patent 4122381. Filed May 4, 1977. Issued Oct24, 1978

Ulrich, Karl T., and Steven D. Eppinger. Product Design and Development. New York: McGraw-HillHigher Education, 2008. Print.

Voith Siemens Hydro Power Generation. April 14, 2010.


18/36


Appendix AProject Planning and Gantt Chart


19/36


Appendix BDimensioned Part Drawings


20/36



21/36



22/36


Appendix CFinal Bill of Materials


23/36


Appendix DNeeds Metrics Matrix

Needs

M

etrics

Theproductwillsecuretoastandardfaucet(willfitastandard3/8-18NPSpip

ethread)

Theproductwillattachwithnoadditionaltools

Theproductwillbenolongerthan4"inlen

gth

Theproductwilldischargewaterinavertical,downwarddirection

Theproductwillretailfor$50orless

Theproductwillisolatethegeneratorande

lectricalconnectionsfromm

oisture

Theproductwillbecontainedinasealed,d

ecorativecasing

Theproductwillgenerateaminimumo

f0.2

25watts

Theproductwillbedesignedtomaximizee

rgonomicsoftheoutercasing

Theproductwillterminateinastandard3/8-18NPSinternalpipethread

Theproductwillbedesignedwithmaterials

notsuseptibletowaterdamage

Theprod

uctcasingwillbeconstructedwith

windowsorsomeformo

ftranspa

rentmateria

The unit is easy to install X X X

The unit is economical X

The unit creates enough energy to be

usable for another deviceX

The water from the faucet should still

be usableX X X

The unit can get wet X X

The unit is reliable and robust X XThe unit is aesthetically pleasing X X X

The unit should not leak X

The unit is small and unobtrusive X

The unit can be used with typical

home faucetsX X X

The user should be able to see how it

operatesX


24/36


Appendix EAHP Weighting Matrix (Lamancusa)

AHP Weighting Matrix

EaseofInst

allation

AestheticallyPleasing

Unobtrusive/Compact

Reliability/Robustness

Compatible

withHomeFaucet

Visibilityof

Mechanics

MaximizesPowerProduction

aterproof

EasytoUse

Cost

DFM/DFA

TOTAL

EIGHT

Ease of Installation 1 1 1/3 1 2 1/4 1 1 1/2 2 10.083 0.07

Aesthetically Pleasing 1 1 1/3 1/2 3 1/4 1/2 1 1 2 10.583 0.07

Unobtrusive/Compact 1 1 1/3 1/2 2 1/3 1 2 2 1 11.167 0.08

Reliability/Robustness 3 3 3 2 3 1 2 1 3 2 23.000 0.16

Compatible with Home Faucet 1 2 2 1/2 2 1/2 1 1 2 1 13.000 0.09

Visiblity of Mechanics 1/2 1/3 1/2 1/3 1/2 1/4 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 3.750 0.03

Maximizes Power Production 4 4 3 1 2 4 3 3 4 2 30.000 0.21Waterproof 1 2 1 1/2 1 3 1/3 1 2 1 11.830 0.08

Easy to Use 1 1 1/2 1 1 3 1/3 1 2 1 11.833 0.08

Cost 2 1 1/2 1/3 1/2 3 1/4 1/2 1/2 2 10.583 0.07

DFM/DFA 1/2 1/2 1 1/2 1 3 1/2 1 1 1/2 9.500 0.07

*Based on a scale of relative importance; 1=equal, 2=slightly important, 3=moderately important, 4=extremely

important


25/36


Appendix FConcept Scoring Matrix


26/36


Appendix G: Mabuchi Motor (Generator) Spec Sheet


27/36


Appendix H: Patent Search References

Patent 1: Home Power Station


28/36


Patent 2: Water Turbine and Brush Head using the Water Turbine for Cleaning Pipes


29/36


Patent 3: Floating Water Turbine


30/36


Patent 4: Hydro Turbine


31/36


Patent 5: Hydro Turbine


32/36


Appendix IPreliminary Test Procedures and Results

Generator Test Procedure1. Attach wires to the leads of the generator, and connect them to a 10 ohm resistor.2. Monitor the voltage generated across the load by a DMM.3. Attach a long string to the rotor of the generator.4. Wrap the string around the cylinder, minimizing overlap, which will change the

radius, and thus, the moment.5. Attach a known mass to the other end of the string.6. Raise the mass/generator assembly to a marked level from the ground (approx 100+

in.), for accurate readings.7. Measure the distance off the floor and the radius of the generator cylinder8. Drop the weight, measuring the time it takes for the mass to hit the floor and also the

voltage generated on the DMM.9. In order to find power in, or the mechanical energy into the generator, calculate rpm

from height, radius of cylinder and time.

=h/(tr)10.Then, find torque using mass, g, and radius (r = 0.153in)

T=ma*r

11.Calculate Power from and T (ft-lb)Pin=T/5252

12.In order to calculate Power out, which is the electrical power generated,Pout=(V^2)/R, because V=IR and P=IV

13.Finally, we have values for the mechanical power into the generator and the electricalpower out of the generator. Comparing these values results in the generatorefficiency.

=Pout/Pin

14.The team found our actual efficiency to be close to 28%15. The values from our test of efficiency, required current, torque and Power are plotted

against RPM (Appendix G, figure 1).

Generator Efficiency

Time

(s)Mass

(g)Voltage

(V)Height

(m)mass

(Kg) rad/secTorque

(Nm)Power in

(hp)power out

(hp)efficiency

nCurrent

(A)

6.42 50 0.87 2.7432 0.05 109.9505 0.0019 0.000281 0.0001015 0.3614567 0.07569

6.42 50 0.83 2.7432 0.05 109.9505 0.0019 0.000281 9.2383E-05 0.3289834 0.06889

2.72 100 1.77 2.7432 0.1 259.5156 0.00381 0.001326 0.00042013 0.3169335 0.31329

2.72 100 1.77 2.7432 0.1 259.5156 0.00381 0.001326 0.00042013 0.3169335 0.313291.25 200 3.00 2.7432 0.2 564.7059 0.00762 0.005769 0.00120692 0.2092065 0.9

1.25 200 3.10 2.7432 0.2 564.7059 0.00762 0.005769 0.00128872 0.2233861 0.961

1.23 240 3.00 2.7432 0.24 573.8881 0.00914 0.007035 0.00120692 0.1715494 0.9

Faucet Test Procedure


33/36


1. Attach the threaded end of a pressure gauge to the faucet.2. Attach a valve to the bottom of the pressure gauge.3. Draw a line at the 2 gallon mark in a medium sized bucket.4. Beginning at a fully open valve, and thus no pressure of resistance, use a stopwatch to

measure the time it takes to fill 2 gallons. From this, we know the volumetric flow

rate.Vdot=volume/time=2gal/t5. With the faucet on, adjust the valve to a more shutoff position by increasing the

pressure valve by 5 psi.6. Continue this process until the cutoff pressure is reached, the point in which no water

flows through the valve.7. Finally, plot the pressure versus volumetric flow rate (Appendix G, figure 2).

Faucet Flow Rate vs. Pressure Data

time(s)Vol

(gal)Pressure

(psi) Volume Flow rate (gal/s)

18 2 0 0.11111111119 2 5 0.105263158

21 2 10 0.095238095

23 2 15 0.086956522

23 2 20 0.086956522

26 2 25 0.076923077

30 2 30 0.066666667

33 2 35 0.060606061

39 2 40 0.051282051

52 2 45 0.038461538

183 2 50 0.01092896299999999 0 55 0


34/36


Appendix JProduct Performance Calculations

Calculating overall turbine efficiency:Equations for the efficiency of a Pelton wheel turbine were obtained from the Fluids Mechanics textbook(Cengel, 2010).

turbine=4

2 (1)where u = linear velocity of wheelVi velocity of water flow

In order to find these values, calculate the torque on the wheel.

= 2

2 (2)where r = radiusand V = linear velocity of the wheel

= mass flow rate = = (volume flow rate)(density of Water)

= 2.5 1 60 sec .00383

1000 3 =

.

Note: use 4gpm as volume flow rate. This is where the team specified optimum operating flow and is arealistic point on the graph of pressure versus . After testing many nozzles, the team found that athreaded 4mm nozzle gives a flow of 4gpm.

To find V, use same =2.5gpm and =V*(area of nozzle)=V((.0015)2)V=10.2 m/sR=0.0015 m

Therefore, F=

1

2(0.03)(2.4)

2

=0.086N

To find the torque on the wheel, T=Fr=(0.086)(1 inch)(0.0254 m/in)=.002 N-m(0.737 ft-lb/N-m)=.0017ft-lbTo find rpm, use the plot of rpm versus Torque, and find that 3000 rpm corresponds to the Torque.Converting this rpm to rad/s and then to linear velocity of the wheel, we find u=0.471 m/sGoing back to Equation 1, using Vi=V=20.2 m/s and u=0.471 m/s

turbine=4uViu

Vi2=

40.47110.20.47110.22

= .017

Calculating overall system efficiency:

Use the decided ideal running conditions, which are proven attainable from the faucet in 239 Reber.

= efficiencyp = pressure (psi) = 15 psi = volume flow rate (GPM) = 2.5 gal/min

P = power (HP) = *p**1

1713(3)

turbine = 0.017 (approximately 1.7%)


35/36


generator = 0.28 (approximately 28%, determined above)total= turbine * generator = 0.017*0.28 = 0.0047 = N = 0.47% (4)

Plugging into equation 3:

P = 2.5*15*0.0047*1

1713= 4.837x10-4HP*

0.00134

= 0.36 Watts

However, this result does not include viscous losses, bearing friction, etc.Additionally, the Pelton wheel efficiency means this is at steady state, once the wheel has fullyaccelerated, since turbine is proportional to the speed of the wheel. Therefore, this is a very generousestimate.

Calculation of power output:Required by project: 1.5 V over 10 ohm resistor

Therefore, since P=IV (5)and V=IR (6)

Solving Equations 5 and 6, we obtain:

P =2 =

1.52

10= . (7)

Comparing the results of the 2 calculations, we see that given this pressure and volume flow rate of thefaucet, it is possible to attain the power required by the project.

As a result, it is apparent that we have more than enough power coming from the faucet, even with anoverall efficiency of 4.97%, as specified in the project constraints.


36/36

K. Net Present Value Analysis

project4 detailed design report

Documents