detailed design review p11451

Detailed Design Review P11451

Cook Stove Test Stand GroupFebruary 4th 2011

David Sam (ME)Huseyin Zorba (ISE)Phillip Amsler (ME)

Agenda

• Introduction for the Project Status• Customer Needs • Engineering Specifications • System Level Work • Risks• Schedule • Bill of Materials • Modifications on Test Stand • Calculations & Feasibility Analysis• Data Acquisition • Preliminary Test Plan • Process Flow Chart • Issues

Meeting Purpose

1. Overview of the Project 2. Confirm its Functionality of the Design 3. Receive feedback from attendees on critical

technical issues 4. Receive approval from Customer to complete

design as presented 5. Receive approval from Customer to purchase

materials & services for project

Action List

DESIGN INPUTS

Customer Needs

Engineering Specifications

System Level Work

InputsTest Standards

a)Charcoalb)Stove (Any Kind)c)Test Type (Short, Relevant, WBT)d)Lighting Technique

SYSTEM

Outputsa)Emissionsb)Solid Wastesc)Test Timed)Efficiencye)Statistical Accuracy

System Level Work

Improvement Assessment

Change in Design Waste Management

Impact AssessmentEcological Health

InventoryQuantify:Raw Material,Energy,Waste Perform the Test

GoalProject Scope

Fish Bone

Risk List

Schedule

Integrated Test Strategy

• Performed 1 Comparison Test – Boiling Times were found for 3 different stoves

• The data outputs are shared among PM’s• New Tests with Stove Design Team– Flow Rate– Skirt Size– Pot Shape

Bill of Materials

DESIGN OUTPUTS

Proposed Test Stand

Modifications on Test Stand

SET-UP TIME≈ 5 MINUTES

Modifications for Measurement

• OLD • NEW

Modifications for Measurement

OLD

NEW

Improved Functionality

• New thermocouple mount – New steel mount to replace previous wooden

mount. Mount is also insulated to reduce impact of ambient temperatures on water temperature readings.

• Test stand now has two handles and larger wheels to provide easier transportation. – Test stand can be transported by one user and is

very durable.

Improved Mass Measurements

• By sealing openings in the bottom of the test stand, “noise” in mass measurements have been improved. The impact of wind has a substantially smaller impact on the test stand. Mass measurements from Stovetec stove support the test stand improvements.

Installation of CO monitor

• New monitor has been installed in the exhaust stream of the test stand.

• It allows USB interface to recover data instead of burdening tester with recording data every minute.

Design Calculations

Convective Heat Transfer

Stove

q

q

q

• Assume Stove is a cylinder D~15”, H~20”A=.6m2

• h (air free convection) range 5-10 W/m2K – Use 10 for conservative value

• Ts~600°C

• T∞ range -10°C to 30°C

• q=h*A*(Ts-T∞)• Hot q=3420W• Cold q=3660W• Δq =240W or ~5% of total output of

stove (using 5kW output)

• Use area and temperatures from previous– Ts~600°C=873K

– T∞ range -10°C to 30°C=263K to 303K– A=.6m2

• Assume Steel (ξ=.07)• q=σ*ξ*A*(Ts

4-T∞4)

– σ=5.6703E-8 W/m2K4

• Hot q=1363W• Cold q=1372W• Δq=9W or ~.2% of total output of stove

(using 5kW output)

Radiation Heat Transfer

Stove

q

q

q

Feasibility Analysis-Stove Tec

Carbon Monoxide

CO

• In a water boil test, CO emissions should be lowest during the simmer phase, however during these three tests there is a spike or “noise” during the simmer phase in all three instances. – Hypothesis– Charcoal is shifting position during the simmer

phase, creating abnormalities in CO emissions.– Test – Place stove in test stand and record emission data for

Stovetec stove during combustion without pot of water. Every five minutes, stir charcoal around in stove and after recovering CO data from logger, determine if at every 5 minute interval there was a significant shift in CO emissions.

Water Temperature

Weight-Before

Weight-After

Efficiency

Modified WBT Output 1-Rebar Stove

Simmering starts at 16th min

Modified WBT Output 2-Rebar Stove

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 409.5

10

10.5

11

11.5

12

12.5

Weight vs Time

Weight (kg) 1

Time (min)

Tem

pera

ture

(C)

Simmering starts at 16th min

Modified WBT Analysis-Rebar Stove

Data Acquisition

Desired Outputs

Measured Quantity

Acquisition Method

Efficiency H2O Temp, Mass

Thermal couple with data loggingScale with operator recording (written notes)

CO Emissions PPM, Flow Rate

EL-USB-CO data logging deviceHot wire anemometer with uniform flow assumption.

Particulate Emissions

Mass WIP

Efficiency Acquisition

• Known values for the Efficiency are: Heat Capacity of Water(cp), Latent Heat (LH) of Water, Heating Value (HV) of charcoal, and Heating Value of butane.

• To calculate Efficiency we need: mwater, Water Temperatures, mevaportated, mfuel, mbutane. – All of this data comes from measurement devices as well as initial and

final test measurements.

• To have the scale output over RS232 will require expensive software or a different model scale. Therefore we are recommending manual data input for mass only.

)*()*(

)*()**(

tantan ebuebufuelfuel

waterevaporatedwaterpwater

HVmHVm

LHmTcmEfficiency

CO Acquisition

Distance Air Velocity 1 Air Velocity 2 Air Velocity 3 Average Air V Dist (r)(in) (ft/min) (ft/min) (ft/min) (ft/min) (ft)

0 977.7 -0.250.5 999 1091 952 1014.0 -0.20833

1 1062 1056 1033 1050.3 -0.166671.5 1131 1059 1056 1082.0 -0.125

2 1074 1025 1022 1040.3 -0.083332.5 1076 1007 1025 1036.0 -0.04167

3 1064 1027 1011 1034.0 03.5 1054 992 1025 1023.7 0.041667

4 1053 986 1027 1022.0 0.0833334.5 1074 1026 1026 1042.0 0.125

5 1124 1016 1041 1060.3 0.1666675.5 990 1001 1019 1003.3 0.208333

6 946.3 0.25

Start with calculating the flow rate.

Turbulent Air Flow Cont.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Flow Rate

Air Velocity 1

Air Velocity 2

Air Velocity 3

Average Air V

Average Vel

Distance from Center (ft)

Flui

d Ve

loci

ty (ft

/min

)

Volumetric Flow Calculation

Ring Velocity (ft/min) dA ft2 Flow CFM1 985 0.0600 59.122 1032 0.0491 50.663 1059 0.0382 40.424 1047 0.0273 28.545 1031 0.0164 16.866 1031 0.0055 5.62

SUM 201

Numerical Integration Uniform Flow Assumption

Average Vel 1037 ft/minStdDev 22.0 ft/minArea 0.196 ft^2

Flow Rate 204 CFMMin 199 CFMMax 208 CFM

CO Output

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.50

102030405060708090

100

CO (ppm) vs Time (not actual data)

Time (min)

Co (p

pm)

dA

– When given ppm vs. time take integral using differential area with trapezoid method.

CO continued

• After integrating and taking sum of differential areas, then units = ppm*min

• Using standard air 1ppm CO=1.23mg CO per m3 air.– ppm is a mass concentration of CO compared

to the fluid it is in.• Finally convert 204 CFM to 5.777 m3 /min• Then

dA

dt

d(pp

m)

min]/[777.5*][

]/[23.1*min]*[][ 3

3

airmppm

airmmgCOppmAreaCOm

Particulate Matter Acquisition Concept

Sampling Entire Exhaust Stream• Advantages

– Using a settling chamber is easy to integrate

– Can obtain an absolute value for total particles collected

– No moving parts

• Disadvantages– No real time results– According to EPA, only particles

with diameter < 75 µm would settle

– Semi-volatile organic compounds would not settle

Sampling % of Exhaust Stream• Advantages

– Can provide numerous samples during one test

– Capture smaller particles– Can have samples sent to NTID

for chemical breakdown

• Disadvantages– No real time results– Difficult to implement– Dealing with heat and humidity– Only provides a rank

comparison

Proposed Sampling System

• Based off concept from last year’s Testing Team and team 10056’s design

• Additional information from WBT publication, appendix 6. Emission Measurement

Concept• Cyclone

– Separate larger diameter particles that don’t need to be measured

• Filter & Holder– Cambridge Filter & Holder system

from team 10056

• Impinger– Filled with methanol to collect any

remaining gaseous particles for visual analysis and to protect pump

• Vacuum Pump– Find acceptable pump for system,

perhaps borrow pump from Dr. Robinson’s lab temporarily

Emissions

Most of Exhaust

Concept Analysis

Advantages• Can hopefully obtain most

parts from Team 10056• With help from Dr. Hanzlik,

quickly set up an experimental system to test feasibility

• Filters can be sent to NTID lab for chemical composition breakdown

Disadvantages• Could be difficult to integrate

to maintain a mobile test stand• Could impact CO monitoring

which is downstream (relocation of monitor?)

• Does not provide an absolute value for comparison

• Only a rank comparison between stoves tested by RIT

Preliminary Test Plan

Plans for MSD2Week # Test Plan

Week 1 • 3 Cold Start for each stove to achieve repeatable time to boil• Implement Particulate Matter Monitor

Week 2 3 Modified WBT for each stoves efficiencies, CO, and firepower

Week 3 Perform 3 full WBT for each stove

Week 4 • Take experience gained and draft test procedures, and testing template• “Peel Onion” and test more extreme cases

Week 5 • Feedback and Analysis of testing procedure• Receive Refurbished CO meter

Week 6 Have other groups use test procedure, and continue to gather data

Week 7 Perform “realistic” test on each stove and gain efficiencies

Week 8 Prepare Imagine RIT presentation and poster

Week 9 Print materials and present at Imagine RIT

Week 10 Finalize work and presentation

Process Flow Chart (a)

Process Flow Chart (b)

Issues

Issue List

Issue Analysis

Issue Analysis Cont.

Max H2O Temp =100.2◦C

Questions?