team 7 project 99 07 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Team 7 - Project 99.07 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Team 7 - Project 99.07

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 31

Team 7 - Project 99.07 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 66 Views
  • Uploaded on

Experimental Silo Packer. Team 7 - Project 99.07. Team Members: J. M. T ate, J. A cheson, P. S ullivan, and A. A bumohor Advisor: Dr. J. Glancey Sponsor: Dr. Limin Kung. Silo Background. Problem. Summary Chart.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Team 7 - Project 99.07' - teige


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
team 7 project 99 07

Experimental Silo Packer

Team 7 - Project 99.07

Team Members:

J. M. Tate, J. Acheson, P. Sullivan, and A. Abumohor

Advisor: Dr. J. Glancey Sponsor: Dr. Limin Kung

slide4

Summary Chart

Mission: The purpose of our team is to design and build a means to quickly and reproducibly load a test silo without requiring extensive manpower.

Approach: We will use the Total Quality Design Process, through the SpreadSheet Design Process on Microsoft Excel.

slide5
Academic

Dr. Limin Kung

Dr. Martin Stokes

Dr. Joseph Harrison

Industrial

Mr. Chris Rhoden

Ms. Carol Myers

Customers

  • Agricultural
    • Mr. Richard Morris
slide6

Wants: 1-5

1) Reproduce Desired Results

2) Not Physically Demanding

3) Fast Operation

4) Simple Operation for User

5) Low Cost

slide7

Wants: 6-10

6) Easy to Clean

7) Easy to Repair

8) Easily Transportable

9) Variable Silo Size

10) Easy to Store

slide8

Constraints

The apparatus should be able to:

1) Pass though a doorway

2) Be moved by 2 people

3) Pack faster than Kung’s methods

4) Give a proper sink distance

5) Be built for under $500

slide9

System Benchmarking

  • Stoke’s Pneumatic Loader
  • Trash Compactors
  • Shotshell Loaders
  • Pharmaceutical Capsule Filling Machines
  • Dr. Kung’s Packing Methods

Main Competitor:

Stoke’s Pneumatic Loader

slide10

Functional Benchmarking

Functions:

  • Compacting Devices
  • Material Transport
  • Container Transport
  • Pressure and Load Sensors
  • User-Interface Controllers
slide11

Functional Benchmarking

Best Practices:

  • Pneumatic Piston Compactor
  • Screw Feeder Silage Transporter
  • Conveyor Belt Silo Transporter
  • Piezoelectric Pressure Sensor
  • Foot Switch Controller
slide12

Metrics: 1 to 5

Metric Want

Number if Users Simple Operation

Pressure per Layer

Change in Pressure Reproduce Desired Results

Per Layer

Operating Force Not Demanding

Total Cost Low Cost

slide13

Metrics: 6 to 9

Metric Want

Total Time to Fill Fast Operation

Storage Volume Easy to Store or

Transport

Number of Silo Sizes Variable Silo Sizes

Weight Easy to Transport

slide14

Concept Generation

Extrusion Family

Straight Extruder

Tapered Extruder

slide15

Concept Generation

Horizontal Piston Family

Gravity Fed Piston

Hand Fed Piston

slide16

Concept Generation

Vertical Piston Family

Piston with Vibrating Chute

Screw Fed

Piston

Crank

Slider

slide17

Concept Generation

“Other” Design Family

Weight

Press

Centrifuge

Blower

slide18

Concept Evaluation

  • Experiments
  • Types:
  • Effect of Lips and Sudden Changes in Diameter
  • Effect of Plunger Size on Packing
  • Effect of Piston Orientation
    • Vertical and Horizontal
  • Silage Behavior on Chutes and in Ramps
slide19

Concept Evaluation

  • Low Rated Concepts
  • Extruder Family:
  • Cost metric too high
  • Lack of experimental data
  • Horizontal Piston Family:
  • Change in Pressure Per Layer metric too high
  • Time to Fill metric is too high
  • Jamming problems inherent in the design
slide20

Concept Evaluation

  • Low Rated Concepts
  • “Other” Family:
  • Pressure target is not met
  • Dimensions outside of constraints
  • Weight outside of constraints
slide21

Concept Evaluation

  • Vertical Piston Family:
  • High Scoring Metrics:
  • Pressure per layer
  • Change in Pressure per Layer
  • Time to Fill
slide22

Vertical Piston Family

Screw Fed

Piston

Evaluation:

User Actions is low

Time to Fill is low

Cost of Screw Feeder is too high

slide23

Vertical Piston Family

Piston with Vibrating Chute

Evaluation:

Clogging problems increase time to fill

Cost metric is too high

slide24

Vertical Piston Family

Crank

Slider

Evaluation:

Time to Fill is good.

Low Cost

User Actions is high.

slide25

Final Concept

Evaluation:

Time to Fill is good.

Low Cost

User Actions are high,

but can be split up between

multiple users.

slide26

Testing Procedure

  • Final Weight and Storage Volume
  • Time Trials
      • Different Users
      • Multiple Users
  • Trials at Varying Packing Pressures
  • Operating Force
  • Comparisons with the Previous Apparatus
slide27

Testing Results

Metric Measurement Target

Number of Users 2 2

Pressure per Layer 100 psi 100 psi

Change in Pressure 5 psi 30 psi

Per Layer

Operating Force 5 lbs. 20 lbs.

Total Cost $436 $500

slide28

Testing Results

Metric Measurement Target

Time to Fill 80 sec 80sec

Storage Volume 9 ft3 36 ft3

Number of Silo 1 2

Sizes

Weight 42 lbs 88 lbs

slide30

Development Statistics

Activity Time

Engineering Development 360 hours

Fabrication Hours 60 hours

Testing Hours 10 hours

slide31

Budget

PART PRICE $

Pneumatic Cylinder 230

Regulator and Valves 47 Electrical Systems 21 Frame and Fasteners 40

Silo Extensions 98

TOTAL $436