180 likes | 287 Views
Team Superior Tube. Sponsor Preview Final Presentation. Advisor: Dr. James L. Glancey Sponsor Contacts: James Brooks, Chris Nagele, and Jeff Mlynarski. 12/06/2013. Agenda. Introduction……………………………………………Stanley Anderson Scope…………………………………………………………. Mingze Niu
E N D
Team Superior Tube Sponsor Preview Final Presentation Advisor: Dr. James L. Glancey Sponsor Contacts: James Brooks, Chris Nagele, and Jeff Mlynarski 12/06/2013
Agenda • Introduction……………………………………………Stanley Anderson • Scope………………………………………………………….MingzeNiu • Wants, Needs, and Metrics…..…………………………..…MingzeNiu • Proposed Solution……………………………………...Kenneth Manley • Prototyping………………………………………...…Nicolette Grannum • Financial Overview…………………………………...Stanley Anderson • Path Forward……………………………………...…….Kenneth Manley
Introduction • Company produces cold drawn tubes • Tubes must be cleaned to sell to clients • Long tubes are loaded into a basket and into the solvent
The Problem • Solvent is n-Propyl Bromide or nPB • Aggressive solvent and hazardous at boiling • A refrigerated boundary layer keeps solvent vapors contained • Heated basket breaks the barrier causing solvent loss
Project Scope • The team is to design a basket that will reduce solvent loss throughout the degreasing process when compared to the current basket design. • The team is to have significant testing and/or a model to prove that the design will work as proposed.
Proposed Solution • Metric measurements • Weight: 454 lbs • Factor of Safety: 10 • Points of Contact: 6 • Material Cost: ~ $18,500 • < • 10% additional loading area (800 sq. in.)
Prototype Testing and Goals • Outcomes • Confirm material selection • Determine practicality of insulation • Limitations • Test with temperature only, not actual solvent • Structural components and shape will not be tested
Material Testing • Finite Element Analysis (FEA) validated structure, but cold barrier information is limited • Scale test using hot plate, water, and metal samples to show effectiveness of both material change and insulation • These samples were cross referenced and a general assumption that less heat released in the cold barrier would lead to decreased nPB loss Shown above: Titanium sample covered with a sample of Aerogel insulation and sealed with a rubber coating
Material Test Results • The insulation reduced heat transfer by over eighty percent • Based on the design, energy deposited in the boundary layer is reduced • Reduction in nPB losses, creating a huge opportunity for savings
Fabrication Process • Basket material available from titanium supplier • Transportation to and from the machinist is offered by supplier • From there the welding contact can fabricate the basket
Financial Overview - Background • Overview of estimated solvent savings • Scenarios generated with the following assumptions • Two barrier breaks per dip • Losses per dip were the same • Low cost of capital • Fiver percent production growth rate
Financial Overview – Analysis • Short term prospects for single baskets are dismal • Effect of the increased product load removes run time losses • After two years, the baskets will more than pay for themselves • If pursued, two baskets will be the best prospect
Financial Overview – Continued • From here, the need for two baskets is apparent • The total savings counters the increased emissions • The scenario facilitates increased production
Path Forward • Determine loading conditions of side and end meshes • Recommendation of the basket fabrication strategy • Develop more comprehensive financial strategy • Pursue design and implement the basket in facility