210 likes | 373 Views
TEAM 12. P.V. Panel wind load effects. Design Review #3. February 2011. Arman Hemmati , Brady Zaiser , Chaneel Park, Jeff Symons, Katie Olver. Overview. Refresh Wind-Tunnel Experimental Progress CFD Progress What’s Next. Refresh – Where did we start?.
E N D
TEAM 12 P.V. Panel wind load effects Design Review #3 February 2011 Arman Hemmati , Brady Zaiser, Chaneel Park, Jeff Symons, Katie Olver
Overview • Refresh • Wind-Tunnel • Experimental Progress • CFD Progress • What’s Next
Refresh – Where did we start? • Ideal angle of inclination is 51° • Too much weight for the roof? • Wind-Tunnel testing – Experimental • Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) - Computational
Refresh – Where were we? • Best model for the wind tunnel testing • Screw-Bolt MDoF Model • Why? - Intuitive Design - Robust & Simple • Measurement Method • Drag Plate & Load Cells • Availability & Simplicity • CFD convergence issues discussed
Wind Tunnel – Spec. & Set-backs • Wind tunnel dimensions: Target area = 20% (total area) • Status: • Functional – It is currently being used by Tail fin group. • Wind Speed – Still unclear how to obtain the correct speed (May use a device!) • Availability of the Tunnel – Time conflict with other groups 20% 76.2 cm 137.2 cm
Experimental Progress – Prev. Design • Feasibility issues related to the previous design
Experimental Progress – Machining • Incremental Bar • Slider • Connection Plate • 0.5” Threaded Support Nut
Experimental Progress – Machining • Main Connection Nut • Upper Hinge • PV Panel • Lower Hinge
CFD Progress – Expectations • Establish a functional and feasible model • Rooftop boundary layer • Panel – Rooftop separation distance • C.V. size (inlet and outlet buffer zones) • Confirm the credibility of the model • Pressure Coefficient (Cp) • CD /CL ratio • Parameter variation study • Panel – Rooftop separation distance • Panel angle of attack • Wind speed / Reynolds Number • Number of panel in series
CFD Progress – Dummy Run • Geometry – Horizontal Open Channel • Simple Physics – Laminar flow • Open Channel Flow: Wall (No Slip) Inlet Height (m) Outlet Wall (No Slip) Velocity (m/s)
CFD Progress – First Trial - Laminar Flow - Vin = 0.005 m/s • 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: (3) Wall (No Slip) (4-7) Wall (No Slip) (1) Inlet Pressure (Pa) (8) Outlet (2) Wall (No Slip)
CFD Progress – Rooftop Slip Condition - Turbulent Flow (k-e) - Vin = 29.0 m/s • 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: (3) Outlet (8) Outlet (1) Outlet Wall (No Slip) Wall (Slip)
CFD Progress – Pressure Coefficient - Larger C.V. – Behind the plate - Away from the roof (No Slip) • 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: Cp (Dim. Less)
CFD Progress – Pressure Coefficient - Longer inlet in front of the plate • 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: 10 m Cp (Dim. Less) Cp (Dim. Less)
CFD Progress – Current Model • No Roof (Open all sides) • Mesh Refinement (No Effect) • 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: Outlet Vin= 29 m/s Outlet Inlet Cp (Dim. Less) Vin= 29 m/s Outlet
What’s Next – Where are we going? • Experimental: • Complete the testing model • Familiarization with the Wind Tunnel • Computational: • Fully fix the Pressure Coefficient (Cp) issue • Confirm the relationship between CD & CL ( ) • Calculate the Forces