duramill final project report · crank flashlight was ÒdissectedÓ for research. this experiment...
TRANSCRIPT
DURAMILL
Engineering Fundamentals 152
Final Project Report
Section A1, Team 3
Bryan Allen
Kirstin Childrey
Tim Stephens
Robert Wise
November 4, 2008
Allen, Childrey, Stephens, Wise 2
Overview
For this project, our team of engineers was charged with the task of designing and
constructing a windmill that could generate electricity. The given restrictions for the
design and construction process were for the device to be original, fit within the size
specifications of 2 cubic meters, function without interaction once started, and work with
a budget of only $40. The use of readily available materials was strongly advised and we
had a time frame of approximately one month to complete all project requirements,
mostly outside of class time. We were also encouraged to choose a design that would not
take a long time to build.
Design Process
The initial steps in creating our device design involved establishing what kind of
generator the device would utilize. To better understand how a generator works, a hand
crank flashlight was “dissected” for research. This experiment exemplified how a
generator could easily be assembled using coiled copper wire and a powerful magnet.
Though the flashlight’s generator also involved gears, in the essential concept, turning the
handle would spin a coil of wire within a large cylindrical magnet creating enough
electrical current to power the light. Our initial plan
was modeled after this design; however, we soon
moved to a more practical design where magnets
spin within a larger continuous coil of copper wire.
Once we acquired the magnets we would use, we decided to spread them out over a small
piece of cardboard rather than using them in the column form that was in our original
Allen, Childrey, Stephens, Wise 3
design. This reduced the mass moment of inertia of the magnets by having them more
spread out, allowing a quicker start-up to the rotation and more ease of movement.
It was also decided fairly early in our design process that the generator and
windmill would be closely connected, namely by a lightweight aluminum rod with the
blades of the windmill on one end and the magnets on the other. The idea of using gears
to increase the rotation of the magnets was also briefly entertained; however, we were
afraid this might create too much resistance to allow the blades to still spin freely so this
idea was discarded.
In brainstorming, our design plans
consistently incorporated a lateral orientation
for the generator. However, this layout soon
presented the challenge of finding a way to
support the windmill without much resistance
to its rotation. This was finally solved with the
addition of a cork insert and a series of washers to reduce friction. The next design
obstacle involved the blades of the windmill, for which we had countless suggestions. For
several weeks, we worked under the concept of having a central joint connecting
individual blades. We researched and tested several possible materials and structures for
the blades including soda cans, stretched fabric wings,
and plastic. Unsatisfied with any of these options, we
returned to brainstorming and found a new idea for the
windmill, a pinwheel in place of individual blades.
Allen, Childrey, Stephens, Wise 4
Final Product
We named our final product DuraMill. The total construction time for the device
was approximately 4 hours, with the most time-consuming tasks involving coiling the
wire and stripping the ends, and cutting the wood components to size and connecting
them as necessary. All team members participated in the construction of the windmill and
generator components, and much teamwork was required in finding our raw materials
and building the device. Our final design was somewhat similar to
our original ideas, but with some sizeable changes such as the
blade structure and magnet orientation.
We used a pinwheel for the blades of our windmill in our
final design, made of rigid, but lightweight cardboard. This new design eliminated the
need for a central joint, and ensured that the blades would all be sturdy, since the entire
blade system was one piece. It was easily connected to the opposite end of the aluminum
rod and washers between the back of the pinwheel and the wood base reduced any local
friction.
Efficiency Analysis
Power=0.5 XrhoXareaXvelocity^3
Where:
Rho is the density of air (approximately 1.225 kg/m3)
Area is the area swept by the rotor (blades){ pi Xradius^2 }radius
approximately 0.14 meters
Velocity is the velocity of the air( approximately 1.7 meters/second)
Power=0.5X1.225X(piX.14^2)X1.7^3=0.185 Watts
Allen, Childrey, Stephens, Wise 5
Actual Power= .001 Watts
Efficiency=Actual Power/Power=(0.001/0.185)x100=0.54 efficient
Bill of Materials
Many of the materials used in our final project were items team members already had, or
were acquired at no cost from other sources. The prices for these components are
approximate, roughly calculated based on an average value for these items and the
amount of each material present in the final device.
Materials Used: Cost: Magnets $ 13.99 Copper Wire 10.99 Wood (estimated) 4.00 Electrical Tape 2.99 Cardboard (estimated) 2.00 Cork 0.99 Aluminum Rod 1.50 L-Brackets 1.99 Washers (estimated) 1.00 $ 39.45 Our budget restriction for this project was $40. As shown in the bill of materials, we were
able to stay within this limitation when building our device. To do this, we had to try to
use materials that we already had or that were inexpensive and easy to find. This required
much creativity and ingenuity in the device design from our team. While our team’s
device efficiency was limited by this budget, a much more efficient generator could be
built with more expensive and higher quality materials.
Conclusions
During the in-class testing, our generator produced approximately 1 watt of power
while the windmill was in operation. We found our device was not very efficient,
however we believe it performed well for the budget and time restrictions we were given.
Allen, Childrey, Stephens, Wise 6
One change we would have made to our device to improve our efficiency would be to use
more copper wiring in the coil to increase our power production, as well as coiling the
wire tighter around the magnets. Also, by increasing the surface area of the pinwheel, our
windmill could catch more of the air flow from the fan and spin faster, though we would
increased drag would also have to be taken into account.
Our knowledge of generators coming into this project was virtually nonexistent,
so we had a lot to learn about the flow of electricity and how the different components of
a generator work together as a system before we could even being to draw up our original
designs. Our building process consisted largely of a system of trial and error, making
small changes, observing any potential improvements, and adjusting accordingly.
In this project, we learned about working on a deadline and with a team of busy
schedules to coordinate and finish tasks. We gained experience working with a group and
brainstorming, planning, and executing our ideas. Input and discussion from all members
was integral in achieving each aspect of our objective. This dynamic is a good indication
of what we will see when we begin working as engineers. Most importantly however, this
project exemplified how engineering can be fun!
References
Tim’s flashlight