Detailed Design Report

Hydroelectric Turbine Generator

ME 340 Team B
Matthew Coleman Logan Hamilton William DelGiorno

Executive Summary
A faucet-powered hydroelectric generator is an example of a clean energy production, which provides free and efficient energy to the consumer. The faucet-powered generator presented here will be an easily attachable device that fits on the end of a faucet and converts the moving water from mechanical to electrical energy. Other than the initial cost of the product, the consumer will not need to pay for anything else, since they are already paying for the volume of water supplied to the household. The voltage generated will be greater than 1.5 volts across a 10 ohm resistor. This translates to a minimum power output of .225 watts. This power will be utilized by small devices such as phones, electric toothbrushes, etc. Team B is confident that this product will benefit both the customer AND the company. 1

Table of Contents
Executive Summary Introduction Problem Statement Background Information Project Planning Customer Needs and Specifications Identification of Customer Needs Design Specifications and Weights Concept Development External Search Problem Decomposition Concept Generation Concept Selection Detailed Design Overall Description Detailed Drawings Final Theoretical Analysis Component and Material Selection Fabrication Processes for Mass Production Industrial Design Safety Testing Test Procedure and Plan Conclusion References Appendices Appendix A: Project Plan Appendix B: Customer Needs/Weights Appendix C: Theoretical Analysis Appendix D: Attestation of Work 1 3 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 8 9 9 10 11 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 17 18 18 19 20 23

Introduction
Problem Statement
Team B will develop a product that converts the mechanical energy of water flowing through a typical household faucet, to electrical energy, which can then be used to power a small accessory designed into the product. The specific requirements of the product can be found below in the Customer Needs and Specifications section. There are also constraints that must be met such as: Final product should be designed for easy manufacturing Expelled water must be no less than 50% of original flow rate The voltage generation must be greater than 1.5 volts across 10 ohm resistor

Background Information
Hydroelectric power is used all over the world, most commonly produced from dams. Whenever there is some sort of water flow or pressure differential, power can be converted from it. Hydroelectric turbines utilize the flow rate and pressure of the water, and turn it into electrical power with no remnants of pollution or anything else harmful. The faucet-powered generator is a small scale hydroelectric turbine. The water from the faucet creates the pressure and velocity necessary to spin the miniature turbine, which creates the electrical power from the DC motor.

Project Planning
Team B chose to follow Product Design and Development, 4th edition to develop a process to figure out the most efficient way to build this hydroelectric generator. A Gantt chart (Appendix A, Table 4) helped to plan each stage of the design process for the 15 weeks alotted to develop the product. Research was then executed to find information regarding turbines, water properties, and electrical properties. Team B then needed the customer needs weighted by importance to determine what the product needs to be like (i.e. looks, performance), so a survey was performed to gather this data. Once the importance of each need was figured out, each member drew concepts. Utilizing the weighted customer needs for each concept, a final concept was chosen, and a SolidWorks base model was created of that design. Upon acceptance of this proposal, Team B will begin building prototypes which will be extensively tested to optimize the efficiency of the product. A final product will then be produced to compete against other models.

Customer Needs and Specifications

Identification of Customer Needs
Evaluation of customer needs show: The cost should be relatively cheap Functions reliably and repeatedly in a wet environment Should be attractive Easily attaches to faucet with no leaks Desirable to see inner workings Can power/charge an object Does not require assembly Is not too large Does not affect usage of faucet While all customer needs are very important, the team decided that the four most important needs to be focused on for a successful product are its performance, aesthetics, cost, and ease of use. By optimizing these four standards we believe that the desire for the product will increase much more. The team utilized a survey of ten college students to determine the weights of the four primary customer needs. The potential customer base is basically anyone who uses a sink so these college students fall into this category, therefore their opinions are valid. The survey used ranked each of the four needs (performance, cost, aesthetics, ease of use) from 1-4 with 4 being the most important and 1 being the least important. The actual survey results with the customers decisions can be found in Appendix B but the final weight results were: Survey Weight Results Needs Performance Cost Aesthetics Ease of Use 34% 29% 15% 22% Table 1: Weighted Survey Results The majority of the students, as expected, ranked performance and cost, most important. These are quantitative values that potential customers can easily look up, so the team wants to focus most of the design on these two specifications. Ease of use came in third. 4 Weight

Since we are hoping this is a one-time installation, we will not have to focus too much of our time on that aspect. Aesthetics came in last, and while we will try and make this product look as visually appealing as possible, this customer need will be the last of our worries.

Design Specifications and Weights

Some design specifications that were needed to be considered are: Generate 1.5 volts across a 10 ohm resistor Will cost less than 50 dollars retail Will attach to a faucet head with 3/8 internal pipe thread Will be at most 4 inches long Must be self contained Aesthetically pleasing Placed in clear casing Water discharged vertically downward 50% of original flow rate must exit In order to compare the design specifications with the customer needs, a Quality Function Deployment chart (QFD) was created. This can be found in Appendix B. The darkened boxes (on the diagonal) show where the customer needs relate to the design specifications.

Concept Development
External Search
We initially, discovered that there were two main types of turbines: impulse turbines and reaction turbines. Impulse turbines use the velocity of the water that comes in contact with it to spin the turbine. Impulse turbines work best in higher head applications. The pelton turbine (shown to the right) is the most widely used of Figure 1: the different types of impulse turbines. Pelton Turbine A pelton turbine has spoon like blades [1] that catch the water coming in from the nozzle, which helps it spin and output more power. Reaction turbines combines water flow and water pressure to produce power. Unlike impulse turbines, reaction turbines work better in Figure 2: Patent USD681552 S1 [2] 5

low head applications. The most common reaction turbine is a propeller. Propellers have blades that are always in contact with water and has a constant pressure as to keep everything in balance. . Researching showed patented designs that help us develop ideas for our project. Patent USD681552 S1 is a micro-hydro electrical generator that uses a pelton turbine to generate power. This is a relatively simple design. The water flows in at the bottom, goes through a nozzle, and proceeds to hit the pelton turbine to generate power. We saw that this design used a direct connection from the turbine to the generator. Figure 3: We developed many ideas from this design including Patent US8125096 B2 [3] the pelton turbine and the direct connection. Patent US 8125096 B2 uses a Kaplan turbine which is a type of propeller. The Kaplan turbine allows for adjustable blades which provides a wider range of action. This particular Kaplan turbine was designed to operate at around 90% efficiency and is able to produce anywhere from 100 kW to 700 kW of power. This may be due to the fact that this design has a complex belt system to help generate power. This design was interesting, but we chose to go with a design similar to patent USD681552 S1.

Problem Decomposition
Our team generated concepts by decomposing the system into four subsystems. All of our designs were based off of this decomposition.
Volumetric Flow Rate Torque and Power Voltage and current

Water Inflow

Turbine

Generator

Power output

Figure 4: Problem Decomposition

Concept Generation
All three of us came up a design by ourselves that fulfilled the project requirements. Here are our three concepts:

Concept A

Figure 5: Concept A full view

Figure 6: Concept A component view

Concept B

Figure 7: Concept B side view

Figure 8: Concept B front view

Concept C

Figure 9: Concept C front, side, and back view Concept A: Has the water flow hit the turbine that is directly connected to the DC motor. The DC motor generates power and is connected to an outlet. Figure 5 shows how this device would connect to the faucet and it shows what it would look like on the inside. Figure 6 shows the inside parts that make up this component. This concept had plug on it so it could be used as a phone charger or something of that nature. Concept B: The water flows through the nozzle to hit the pelton turbine. The pelton turbine is directly connected to the DC motor which is off to the side. This is very similar to Patent USD681552 S1. It would be a simple design that is meant to be easy to come up with parts and assemble. It would be small and easy to operate. The casing would be made with see-through materials such as acrylic so that the customer could learn from the product. Concept C: This design is basically Concept B but with two turbines, two motors, and two nozzles. This was put in to hopefully double the output power. This would be much wider that either of the other designs. Similar to Concept B, this design would have a see-through casing for learning purposes.

Concept Selection
For the concept-ranking table we scored each design on a 1-3 scale (1 being the worst and 3 being the best) for each category. For example we gave Concept B a 3 on aesthetics because of the casings see-through material and because of its small size. The rest of the scores can be found in the Concept Ranking table in Appendix B, Table 6. After reviewing our concept-ranking table Concept B came out with the highest score. Concept B ended up on top because of its projected low cost and its ease of use. This design 8

would be the easiest for the customer to set up while also being aesthetically pleasing. We did not choose Concept A because we thought it would be a bad idea to have a plug that close to the water making the product too dangerous. Concept C would have been very difficult to assemble without making any mistakes. Even though it would have a chance for double the power, the chance of there being a problem increases as well.

Detailed Design
Overall Description
We chose a water wheel turbine housed by an acrylic, clear casing. The turbine is coupled to the generator via a dowel (part 6) and pin (part 7). Part six and seven are made of plastic, as to cause minimal friction with the acrylic housing. Part one shown below utilizes a nozzle to direct flow onto an ideal location of the water wheel to maximize torque. An inch of housing is left below to allow for any excess water buildup. Housing width is confined tightly to not let water get by the turbine.

1 5 4

2 3 Figure 10 Exploded View

1 2 3 4 5 6

inlet outlet casing motor turbine dowel

3/8 inch nozzle 3/8 standard outlet clear acrylic casing for educational value motor rated 2200 RPM at 2.5 volts water wheel turbine (3D printed) keeps motor water-proof and locks into turbine (plastic) Seals far side from water leakage (plastic) Table 2: BOM

7 pin Detailed Drawings

Figure 11 Side isometric view of the assembly to illustrate how the waterproof pin fits in and does not inhibit the turbine from rotation.

10

Figure 12 Side view showing transparent motor to show fitting between motor and turbine to make effective seal.

Final Theoretical Analysis

Experiment 1: Faucet Analysis A simple faucet analysis was performed to determine the pressure and flow rate that produces the max power. The team connected a valve with a pressure gage to the end of a faucet, the valve was completely shut and the faucet was opened so there was maximum flow. The maximum pressure determined was 40 psi. The team then went down increments of 5 psi, allowing flow rate to increase. At each increment of 5 psi, the team calculated the time to fill up one gallon in a bucket. The results can be found in Appendix C, table 9.The flow rate was determined by the equation: Q = 1 gallon/T Where Q is the flow rate, in gallons per minute, and T is the time it took to fill up the 1 gallon bucket. After going from 40 psi to 0 psi, the power was then calculated. The equation to calculate power is: Power = (Q*P)*.435 Where Q is the flow rate (GPM), P is the pressure (psi) and power is in the units of watts. 11

These values were then placed on the same graph and trend lines were placed on the graph to determine the intersection point. The intersection point gives the pressure and flow rate that produces the highest power input of the system. For a maximum power of 17.5 watts, the values for the flow rate and pressure were roughly 1 GPM at 33 Psi, respectively.

Figure 13 Faucet Analysis Experiment 2: Generator Analysis Procedure: Attach generator to a height so that the mass has enough space to fall in order to collect usable data. Put the mass on a string attached to the generator shaft. Drop the mass a known length (L) and record the max voltage and time it takes to fall a distance L. Repeat for different masses. The results can be found in Appendix C, table 8. Equations: Torque: Rotational velocity: Mechanical Power: Electrical Power:

Efficiency:

12

Generator Analysis
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 6

Efficiency

4 3 2 1 0 4000

Torque (mN*m)

Efficiency Torque

RPM

Figure 14: Generator Analysis

Component and Material Selection Process for Mass Production

The final product requires a turbine casing, a turbine, a nozzle, covering for support of the motor, and a rod to connect the turbine with the generator. The casing will be made with clear acrylic. The clear casing will allow for customers to see how the power is generated in the system. Also the acrylic has adequate strength to hold everything together, as seen in our testing phase. Acrylic costs only $14.50 per square foot, making it much cheaper than its metal counterparts. The turbine was made with ABS (Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) plastic. ABS plastic is very lightweight which allows for the water stream to spin the turbine faster. The ABS plastic costs $13.30 per square foot. We purchased a brass nozzle. We purchased the nozzle from McMaster-Carr and they only offered the nozzles in brass and stainless steel. Although stainless steel does not rust, we chose the brass nozzle because it cost about $20 less. The covering of the motor will be made of PVC (Polyvinylchloride). We chose PVC because it is a strong material that has a cost of $10.00 per square foot. The rod will be made of nylon. The rod needs to be able to hold on to the generator and spin with relative ease, meaning that this material must be strong and mobile. Nylon has high wear resistance and a low coefficient of friction, which makes it a good candidate for this connecting piece. Nylon has a cost of $21.00 per square foot, however the pieces we will need will be nowhere near a square foot.

Fabrication Process for Mass Production

The laser cutter will cut the acrylic pieces for the casing from a large slab of acrylic, the turbines will be 3D printed, and the brass nozzles will be ordered from McMaster-Carr in 13

bulk. The pieces of nylon will be ordered in bulk. The nylon pieces will have a hole drilled in the center matching the dimensions of the turbines shaft diameter. The first part of the assembly process will first require the nylon to be connected to the turbine. The piece of nylon will then be put through the hole in the acrylic casing where it can be connected to the generator. The thread will then be put through the hole in the top piece of the casing. The nozzle will be put on the piece of thread. The last part of the assembly will be to glue all the pieces of the casing together. The assembly is very simple and inexpensive.

Industrial Design
This product was designed so that it comes fully assembled. This makes for better usability for the customer. The user simply has to take the inlet of the product and twist it on the end of their faucet. The product is also aesthetically pleasing. Since the casing is made from acrylic, it will be clear allowing for the customer to see its inner workings. The final product, if machining permits, will have a bright green turbine which also contributes to better aesthetics. PVC piping will cover the motor to hold it in place and help limit water damage. The product will also be safe. The PVC and the close tolerance between the shaft and the casing shows that water will not come into contact with the motor, preventing any risk of electrical shock. Since the system is compact (length is less than four inches), it will not interfere with any daily faucet uses, meaning the user will not accidentally break the product.

Safety
The only safety hazard of this product is the containment of the electrical equipment. All materials used in the product are environmentally safe. Some of the safety standards that would be met were taken from the UL and IEC safety standards. The safety standards that the product would most likely be checked for are:

14

Commission International Electrotechnical Commision (IEC) International Electrotechnical Commision (IEC) Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Underwriters Laboratories (UL)

Standard Code IEC 62006

Standard Description Acceptance tests of small hydroelectric installations Electromechanical equipment guide for small hydroelectric installations Standard for enclosures for electrical equipment Standard for electric generators Electric motors and generators for use in hazardous locations

IEC 61116

UL 50 UL 1004-4 UL 674

Table 3: Safety Standards New standards are created for products all of the time. In combination with these standards above, commissions may even develop a whole new standard that specifically apply to faucet powered turbine generators.

Testing
1. Purpose of prototype: test power outputted. In testing, our max voltage for the alpha prototype was 0.5 Volts. Ways to maximize voltage include building a new turbine, refining housing, minimizing axial friction within motor-turbine coupling, and adjusting flow location to turbine.

Figure 15: Alpha Prototype 15

2. Planning a prototype: How to improve upon alpha-prototype. Building motor generator coupling is crucial to creating prototype that effectively uses flow rate. After this is created we will construct a compact housing around coupling. We found this is the most effective method from building the alpha prototype. 3. Experimental plan: Variables we will be testing include angular velocity, flow rate, torque, mechanical and electrical power. Ways to improve performance include using a waterproof dowel and pin, using different sized generators, and using waterproof sealant . Equipment: voltmeter, weights, flow restrictor, stopwatch, control volume, dynamometer. Tests include flow rate from outlet, documenting angular velocity from dynamometer, and outputted power and various flow rates.

4. Schedule for testing: Our testing for our beta prototype has already begun; we will have another week to refine a design based off of the experimental variables mentioned above. We plan on having a smoke test next week to see where we can make final improvements. From there we have several more days at the learning factory to produce a final beta prototype.

Conclusion
We have made it through the beginning phases of the design process. We first considered the project specifications and the customer needs, which lead to us coming up with criteria that we used in our concept selection process. A survey was then given to our peers so we could correctly weight these criteria for the concept-ranking table. We then started to do some external research on other hydroelectric turbine generators. From there we came across a few patented designs that we used in our concept generation. Each of us then came up with one design to put into our concept-ranking table. When Concept B came out on top, we began to start our CAD drawings on Solidworks. We believe that our design will attract customers because of its simplicity and ease of use. It will be small and able to fit to an ordinary residential faucet. Customers looking for a little extra power for their phone or toothbrush in the bathroom or to be a little more eco-friendly will be interested in this product. Since our design is simple and compact it will most likely come out cheaper than many of our competitors designs. We would like to continue in our design process and see this project through to the end. 16

References
[1] "Energy.gov." Types of Hydropower Turbines. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Mar. 2014. <http://energy.gov/eere/water/types-hydropower-turbines>. [2] Bentley, Roy E. Micro-hydro Electric Generator. Roy E. Bentley, assignee. Patent US D681552. 7 May. 2013. Print. [3] Shifrin, Salvatore, and Joseph Shifrin. Hydor Turbine Generator. Salvatore Shifrin, Joseph Shifrin, assignee. Patent US 8125096 B2. 28 Feb. 2012. Print. [4] UL LLC. "Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) Plastic." Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) Plastic. UL LLC, 2014. Web. 21 Apr. 2014. [5] Hegde, Raghavendra R., Atul Dahiya, M.G. Kamath, Monika Kannadaguli, and Ramaiah Kotra. "Nylon Fibers." Nylon Fibers. N.p., Apr. 2004. Web. 21 Apr. 2014.

17

Appendices
Appendix A: Project Plan

Table 4: Gantt Chart updated as of 4/22/14

18

Appendix B: Customer Needs/Weights

Table 5: Quality Function Deployment Chart Criteria High Performance Low Cost Aesthetics Ease of Use Totals A 2 2 2 2 2.00 B 2 3 3 2 2.44 C 3 1 2 2 2.05 Weighting .34 .29 .15 .22 1

Table 6: Concept Ranking Table

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 High 4 1 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 Performance Low Cost 3 2 3 2 3 4 2 3 4 Aesthetics 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 Ease of Use 2 3 2 4 2 1 3 2 2 Table 7: Customer Ranking Survey to determine weighting

10 4 3 2 1

Total Weight 34 .34 29 15 22 .29 .15 .22

19

Appendix C: Theoretical Analysis

Experiment 2: Generator Data Voltmeter Figure 16: shows a weight attached to a string wound around the shaft of the generator.

Generato r( Shaft (Radius r)

Mas s

Procedure: 1. Drop various weights from top. 2. Record time to reach bottom 3. With L, Vmax, and r data in table can be found

Mass (g)

Shaft Dia (mm)

Drop Distanc e (m)

Time (s)

Voltage (V)

RPM

Torque (mNm)

Pmech (watts)

Current (A)

Pelec (watts)

Efficienc y

108.7 108.7 108.7 60 60 60 20 20

10.07 10.07 10.07 10.07 10.07 10.07 9.53 9.53

1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.73 1.73

0.91 0.95 0.94 1.23 1.33 1.28 1.99 1.93

2.608 2.568 2.572 2.324 2.352 2.228 0.815 0.821

3230.4 3094.4 3127.3 2390 2210.3 2296.6 1743.1 1797.3

5.364 5364 5.364 2.961 2.961 2.961 0.935 0.935

2.461 2.357 2.383 1.005 0.929 0.966 0.171 0.176

0.261 0.257 0.257 0.232 0.235 0.229 0.082 0.082

0.680 0.660 0.662 0.540 0.553 0.524 0.066 0.067

27.6 28.0 27.8 53.7 59.5 54.2 38.9 38.3

Table 8: Generator Data 20

Appendix D: Experiment Processes Experiment 1: Volume Flow Rate Calculation

Pressure Gage

Control Volume (1 gallon)

Figure 17 shows control volume of 1 gallon, and pressure gage used to vary pressure. Procedure: Time was recorded to fill control volume from fully open gage in increments of 5 psi until gage was closed. Data can be seen in table below.

21

Pressure (psi) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Flow Rate (GPM) 0 1.35 1.5576 2.058 2.412 2.502 2.73 3.288 3.39

Power (watts) 0 20.55650671 20.32940625 22.38375175 20.98721447 16.32773961 11.87709277 7.15235916 0

Table 9: Faucet Analysis Data

22

Appendix D: Attestation of Work:

William DelGiorno My primary contribution to this proposal document was basically everything previous to the Concept Development section. Some other things in this document that was done by me include the Gantt chart, the customer survey table, and the concept ranking table. Concept C was also my own idea and drawing.

Matthew Coleman My main contribution was writing up everything in the concept development part of the project. I also completed a few other parts of this document including the Table of Contents, Conclusion, and References sections. I also wrote up the material selection process and fabrication process. Lastly, I helped put the document together by labeling the figures, tables, and page numbers. I came up with Concept B.

Logan Hamilton My primary work consisting in the document is part four. I took our drawing and designed the basic solid works model our group is going to work from. Along with this, I also calculated predicted values for how efficiently our motor can run and what kind of output we can generate. As with the rest of the group I also contributed to the editing of our proposal to narrow effectively utilize the number of pages.

By signing this document we all attest that it provides an accurate representation of our individual efforts in the completion of this work Date:__4/22/14___ Member Name Printed:_ Matthew Coleman____ Signature: Matthew Coleman Member Name Printed:__William DelGiorno__ Signature: William DelGiorno Member Name Printed:__Logan Hamilton_____ Signature: Logan Hamilton

23