Biodiesel Reactor

1. Biodiesel Reactor Marquette CoE 2006-07 Senior Design Group E-8 – Team BioMarq Billy Daniels Jamie Formea Danny Hartmann Nick Klosinski Advisor: Dr. Mark Polczynski Sponsor: Mr. William Gehrs Florida Biodiesel, Inc. May 4, 2007

2. Introduction • Overview • Project objective statement • Design process • “Final” design • Experimental verification • Safety/Economic analysis • Future development • Conclusion

3. Florida Biodiesel B-60 Processor • Our Mission: • Automate and time circulation mixing and pumping • Time all settling periods • Automate valve operation • Provide a low cost adaptation of current product • Facilitate further research through robust design

4. Project Inspiration and Sponsor • Dr. Mark Polczynski • Research interests in sustainability, lean manufacturing, and process improvement • Dr. Martin Seitz, et al. • Existing relationship with sensor manufacturer with interest in integration into batch processing • Florida Biodiesel, Inc. • Owner Bill Gehrs contacted team about automating existing processor

5. Project Objective Statement “Design and implement automation hardware and software for Florida Biodiesel Inc.’s B-60 processor, to facilitate minimally interactive biodiesel production at an additional cost of approximately $1500, to be completed by May 1, 2007.”

6. Customer Needs Extraction of recurring key customer needs • Minimal user interaction • Safe operation • Minimal modification to current product • Component flexibility • Low cost • Easy fuel dispensing • Flexible inputs for sensory interaction

7. Target Specifications Extraction of governing target specs • “Bucket-to-bucket” automated solution • No mid-process material handling • All controls NEMA 4X • Washdown-safe controls and enclosure • Open interface architecture • No proprietary components • Reprogrammable • Minimal user interaction • Equipped to produce fuelwith one user “GO!” input

8. Design Process • Initial brainstorming • Customer needs gathered • Concepts generated • Scoring/ranking • Selection • Specification • Initial design • Initial economic analysis • Final system design • Validation

9. “Final” Design • Designed/implemented forconcept validation • Intended for use as test apparatus • Substantial minimization neededfor marketability • R&D to be continued by sponsor and subsequent design teams • Concept has been proven feasible; additionaltechnologies to be explored

10. Main Features • Pushbutton operation of batch process • Minimal user interaction throughout • Robust design for future expansion • Compatibility with alternativeprocessing methods • Accommodation of sensory input • Vendor-programmable software code

11. Electrical Design RSLogix 500 PLC Ladder Logic Programming Screenshot

12. Electrical Design Control Panel Enclosure Physical Layout

13. Control Panel Interior Rough placement Mounted components Wired for testing and validation

14. Operation • Main power • Through-door disconnect; interlock • Mode selection • MAKE | OFF | PUMP • Pushbutton inputs • Start – 2 second safety start • Advance – sensory bypass input • E-STOP • Software-only, no hardware control

15. J K I D E A C B H F G Automated Batch Process Mode 1: Make Biodiesel

16. J K I D E A C B H F G Automated Batch Process Mode 2: Pump Biodiesel

17. PLC Computer simulation Timing verification Attempt input overload Electronics Load sustainability Connection integrity Reactor Valve reliability Material compatibility Piping analysis System Component synergy Large component wiring Standards compliance Experimental Verification

18. Experimental Verification • Experimental Trials • Varied ingredient input • Time trials • Minimal impact • User interface stressing • Simultaneous input • Safety interlocks • Startup • Ball valve safety close • Off-state startup

19. Experimental Verification Full Process Test

20. Safety • Standards/codes compliance • NEMA 4X, NEC • Control interlocks • Individually fused outputs • Interposing relays • Enclosed heat exchanger

21. Environmental Impact • Control panel poses no threat • Impacts of Biodiesel productionas a generic process • Disposal of glycerin byproduct • Storage and disposal of excessalcohols, oxides • Storage of completed fuels

22. Economic Analysis • Initial concept validation prototype • Marketability/salability of little concernfor this iteration • Cost considered “feasibility constraint” vs. “design requirement” • Estimations in order to predict possible cost reduction for future iterations

23. Conclusion • Automation concept validated • Test apparatus control panel functional • Biodiesel batch process successfully run to yield 20 gallons of fuel • Control panel ready for use in lab setting for fuel production and testing of alternative process technologies

24. Acknowledgements • Dr. Mark Polczynski Project Faculty Advisor • Bill Gehrs Sponsor, Florida Biodiesel, Inc. • Dr. Otto Widera Senior Associate Dean, CoE • Tom Silman Discovery Learning Center • Tom Ganey MU Facilities Services • Mark Johnson Reporter, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel • Senior design faculty and students