Team Twistin turbines integrating wind power to Pittsburgh convention center

1. Team Twistin turbinesintegrating wind power to Pittsburgh convention center Michael Morgan, Scott Parker, Matt Heath, and Ken Coolbaugh April 28, 2009

2. Project Management

3. Final Hierarchal Chart • This is the customer needs list with the elements that we focused on the most.

4. Revised Problem Statement • Design a wind turbine system that is aesthetically pleasing that adds to the “Green” design of the building • Enhance the building by reducing the energy consumption on Pittsburgh’s power grid • Create an efficient wind turbine system that utilizes the building’s location and design • Target Population: Users and Owners of the Convention Center

5. Concept Generation: Turbines • Small Horizontal – efficient at high wind speeds • Large Horizontal – efficient at lower wind speeds • Small Vertical – sleek design and efficient at high wind speeds • Large Vertical – sleek design and efficient lower wind speeds

6. Concept Generation: Tunnel • Circular Tunnel – Helps create a higher wind speed than out in the open • Funnel with two holes on each side – Creates higher wind speed as the diameter decreases • Funnel with one hole on each side – Larger openings and wind travels half the length of the building

7. Concept Generation: Materials • Aluminum – lightweight and cheap material • Fiber Glass - not reflective, durable • Carbon Fiber – lightweight and strong • Steel – durable and heavy • Glass – transparent and minimizes shadows

8. Morphological Chart

9. Concept Selection • Turbine on Roof • Criteria: Efficiency, Appearance, Cost • Turbine in Tunnel • Criteria: Efficiency, Ease of use, Cost • Tunnel • Criteria: Efficiency, Cost • Materials for Turbine • Criteria: Reflectivity, Weight, Cost, Durability • Materials for Tunnel • Criteria: Appearance, Noise, Cost, Durability

10. Pugh Chart For the second iteration the large vertical axis was the base and ranked number one. Since it was the best in both iterations, we selected the large vertical turbines for the roof.

11. Pugh Chart For the second iteration, the base was the large vertical and the large horizontal ranked number one. Since the large horizontal was the best in both iterations, we chose that concept for our turbines in the tunnel.

12. Pugh Chart In the second iteration the base was the funnel with one hole on each side, In both iterations it ranked number one, so we chose that concept for our type of tunnel.

13. Pugh Chart In the second iteration the base was carbon fiber and the aluminum ranked number one. In both iterations, the aluminum was the best, and therefore was selected for our turbine material.

14. Pugh Chart In the second iteration, the base was steel which ranked number one, along with carbon fiber and glass. Since the steel was ranked the highest in both iterations, we chose steel as our material for the tunnel.

15. Bill of Materials

16. Final Design

17. Final Design (cont.)

18. Final Design (cont.)

19. Engineering Analysis • Final Cost = $ 361,584.70 • This cost is reasonable because the Convention Center’s purchase of our wind system will pay for itself in roughly 10.5 years. • The wind turbine system is about .1% of the Convention Center’s original cost ($375 million).

20. Conclusion • Design blends into the building (not an eye-sore) • Reduces the cost of powering the convention center • Wind turbine system will pay for itself over time(10.5 yrs.) • Varied wind technology (HAWT and VAWT) • Profit per yr. = $34,155.00