200 likes | 259 Views
Design and optimize an irrigation system with Hunter PGJ rotor sprinklers for maximum coverage and water efficiency. Detailed analysis of head pressure, adjustable radii, and precipitation rates. Project also includes Tube and Shell Heat Exchanger Design for efficient power removal and water processing. Compare initial, optimized, and adjusted designs for best performance.
E N D
Irrigation System ME 414: Team 4 Chris Cook Matt Griffey Jason Colgan Breanne Walters Jeremy Johnson
Provide a efficient watering system One inch coverage Layout area as shown Electric Utility Cost Water Waste Specifications
Very Versatile Head Pressure Range with Large Radii Range Under $10 per Head Adjustable Radii Adjustable Heads for Required Pressures Good Range for Precipitation Rates Hunter PGJ Rotor Sprinkler
AFT Verification by Zones • Each Zone was modeled in AFT • 4 Zones • Common radii or general area • General Components set with 52.5 K value • End Components Modeled with Sprinkler • Hunter Professionals Gave Exit Flow Area • Assumed 60psi • PVC-Gauge 40 Pipe with Default Resistance
Combined AFT Results • AFT was run for all 4 Zones • Overall Pressure Drops • Concerned about pressure at each Head • All pressures were in check for each Head
ME 414: Project 2: Tube and Shell Heat Exchanger Design Jason Colgan, Chris Cook, Matt Griffey, Jeremy Johnson, Breanne Walters
Design Parameters • Remove 1.2 Megawatts of power • Process Water • Inlet 90ºC • Outlet 40ºC • City water • Inlet during summer 25ºC • Optimal Length 4-6 meters
Variable Reduction • From previous iterations these nine were the variables that had the greatest effect on Weight, Length, Q, and ∆P’s
Pareto Charts for Optimization • Shell side pressure drop- Shell I/D had the greatest effect • Heat Exchanger overall weight- Shell I/D and Tube Length • Tube pressure drop- Mass flow rate through the tubes, Shell I/D and Tube Length
Comparison of Results • The optimized design- lower pressure drop and a shorter length than the original but heat transfer rate was too low • The adjusted optimized design- lowest pressure drop, medium length, and heat transfer rate off by 4% but highest mass • Initial design- closest heat transfer rate, lowest mass, highest pressure drop, but longest length
Conclusions • Depending on the most stringent requirements two of these designs are valid • Initial Design • Closer Heat transfer rate- 1.205 MW • Longer Length- 5.15 m • Higher Pressure Drops-∆Pt= 77.21 Pa ,∆Ps= 57.58Pa • Lower Mass- 1653.42 kg • Adjusted Optimized Design • Close Heat Transfer Rate- 1.15 MW • Shorter Length- 4.4m • Lower Pressure Drop- ∆Pt= 38.92 Pa ,∆Ps= 37.55 Pa • Higher Mass- 1945.79 kg