1 / 22

Composite Generator Enclosure

Composite Generator Enclosure. PROJECT 99.12 New Castle Design Associates. Team 12. Composite Generator Enclosure. Members:. Justin Schaffer Tom Winward Noel Goldstein Jeremy Freeman. Partner:. Center for Composite Materials. Advisor:. Dr. Michael Keefe. Mission:.

lecea
Download Presentation

Composite Generator Enclosure

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Composite Generator Enclosure PROJECT 99.12 New Castle Design Associates

  2. Team 12 Composite Generator Enclosure Members: • Justin Schaffer • Tom Winward • Noel Goldstein • Jeremy Freeman • Partner: Center for Composite Materials • Advisor: Dr. Michael Keefe • Mission: It is our goal to design and construct a prototype portable generator enclosure made from composite materials that successfully satisfies all the wants and constraints defined by our customers, and to have a prototype built by April 1999. • Approach: We will first identify customers and their wants. We will also attempt to find all current technology in use for sound reduction and in the area of composites. Then concepts will be developed based on the information gained during our benchmarking. The best design will be determined by comparing our concepts with customer wants and constraints. Next we will begin a process of prototype design and evaluation, culminating with the production of a prototype part. This prototype is then to be further developed by CCM to fit the D Star generator.

  3. Background • Army needs portable generator for use in remote locations • D-Star Engineering designing lightweight diesel engine • Team 12 to design a prototype enclosure • CCM to finish development for pre-production model

  4. Customers • D-Star Engineering • U.S. Army • New Castle Design Associates • Safety Organization (NFPA) • Army Soldier • Home Owners • Construction Industry • Outdoor Entertainment • RV Owners • Emergency Services

  5. Will not break Thermally Stable Quiet Portable Stackable Constraints • Maximum Size • Maximum Weight • Primary Materials Wants and Constraints Wants • Ease of Operation • Longevity • Ease of Maintenance • Cost • 15” x 16” x 30” • 25 LBS • Composites

  6. Metrics and Target Values • Years of Exposure 10 yrs / 3000 hrs • Tg 350F / 800F • Weight 15 lbs • Cost $200 • Sound Level 35 dBA reduction • Drop Test 4 ft • Stackable 5 units high • Time to Access 10 min • Time to Start 1 min

  7. System Benchmarking • Open Tubular Frame • Westerbeke Clamshell Enclosure • Honda Super Quiet Generators • Fisher Panda Generators • Previous UD NCDA Enclosure

  8. System Level Best Practices • Years of Exposure Painted Metal • Tg N/A • Weight Open Frame • Cost Open Frame • Sound Level Enclosed Box • Drop Test ? • Stackable N/A • Time to Access Open Frame • Time to Start Electric Start

  9. Functional Benchmarking • Sound Suppression • Accessibility • Ventilation/Heat Rejection • Stackable • Rolling • Carrying • Weather Exposure • Ease of Starting

  10. Physical Model Testing 1 • Sound Testing • Temperature Testing • Unenclosed/ Enclosed • Load/ No Load • Enclosed • Forced Convection

  11. Physical Model Testing 2 The Equipment Sound Test

  12. Critical Concepts Wants Concepts • Stackable • Access to interior • Portable • Quiet, Longevity, Cost, Will not break, Thermally stable • Rectangular • Panels (removable, hinged, sliding) • Handles, Wheels • Composite sandwich

  13. Concept #1 • 6 removable access panels • Advantages • Easy Access • Disadvantages • Not Structurally Sound • “Hand Buggy” Style • Advantages • Easy to Use Outdoors • Disadvantages • Increases Height

  14. Concept #2 • “Clam Shell” Design • Advantages • Easy Access • Disadvantages • Large Stress Concentrations • 4 Dolly wheels • Advantages • Easy to Roll on Smooth Floors • Disadvantages • Difficult to Use Outdoors

  15. Concept #3 • Sliding Side Door Access • Advantages • Easy to Use • Disadvantages • Limited Access • Multiple roller wheels • Advantages • Easy to Use on Smooth Floor • Disadvantages • Difficult to Use Outdoors

  16. Concept #4 • 2 Piece Shell Access • Advantages • Easy to Use • Disadvantages • High Stress on Latches

  17. Mobility Access Composite Structure Final Concept Selection • Hand Buggy Style • with Additional Handle • Multiple Panels at Critical Locations • Ciba Resinfusion 8605 Epoxy, E-Glass and Kevlar Fibers, Foam Core

  18. Final Concept Multiple Handles Removable Top Panel Recessed Wheel Hinged Starting Panel

  19. Schedule

  20. Budget To Date: • Materials: ………………………...$20.00 • Miscellaneous:…………………....$60.00 Predicted: • Materials:………………………..$580.00 • Miscellaneous:…………………....$45.00 • Total Spent:……………………...$705.00 • Total Remaining:……………….$2045.00

  21. Est. Engineering & Shop Hours Build Mold……………………………120 Make Enclosure………………………..80 Testing…………………………………40 Reevaluate/Redesign…………………160

  22. Conclusion Present Design Future Work FEA Build & Test Prototype

More Related