Solar Assisted Oil Distiller System Design ReviewP15484October 2, 2014

Johnathon Wheaton

Bruno Moraes

Peter Coutts

Nathan Johnson

Benjamin Wolfe

Agenda

Project introductionFunctional DecompositionFunctional ArchitectureMorphological AnalysisPugh MatrixConcept SelectionPreliminary Test PlanUpdated RisksNext Steps

Project Introduction

http://www.anandaapothecary.com/images3/distillation.gif

http://www.vetivernurseries.co.nz/uploads/images/3%20Months%20growth%202.JPG

Pass Steam Through Plant Material

Contain Steam

Contain Plant Material

Transport Steam from Boiling Water

Design Dependent

Operate Safely

Allow Heat Shutdown at Any

TimeAllow User to Shut

Off

Shut Down Heat Source When

Finished

Regulate Pressure

Protect User from Heat

Other Functions

Boil Water

Supply Water

Supply Heat

Contain WaterProduce Steam

Regulate Pressure and Temperature

Convert Energy

Operate Safely

Pass Steam Through Plant Material

Condense Steam Transfer Heat

Contain Steam/Oil Mixture

Transport Steam Mixture from Plant

Material

Recover Heat (design dependent)Produce Steam

Separate Oil Collect Condensed Mixture

Allow Water and Oil to Separate by

Gravity

Functional Decomposition

Distill OilExtract Oil

Separate Oil

Condense Steam Transfer Heat

Contain Steam/Oil Mixture

Transport Steam Mixture from Plant

Material

Recover Heat (design dependent)

Functional Architecture

Morphological Table

System AlternativesConvert Energy Boil H2O Condenser Direct Steam Separate Oil Insulate Picked This Combination for:

A Reflector + Methane Pressure cooker Coil bath Dry steam, one tube Separatory funnel Spray foam Best OptionsB Evacuated tube Pressure cooker Cool coil Wet-dry steam Floatation separator Pipe foam Next Best OptionsC Photo voltaic battery Heat exchane boiler Air cooled tube Fan directed steam Centrifuge None WorstD Methane burner Pot Flat top Wet-dry steam Turkey baster None CheapestE Lens Gold nano-particles Cool coil dry steam Floatation separator Spray foam Most ExpensiveF Methane Pressure cooker Air cooled Wet-dry steam Separatory funnel Spray foam General OptionG Flat plate Pressure cooker Cone and bowl 2 layered Height drain Foam tape General Option

H Evac Tube + Methane Pot Flat top Wet-dry steam Turkey baster NoneOption D + Evacuated tube (Post 1st Pugh run through)

I Propane / Electricity Chamber / pot air cooled Wet-dry steam Separatory funnel None HomebrewerBen Reflector + Methane Pressure cooker w/drip feed Aircooled Dry steam Separatory funnel Spray foam Ben's option

Peter Evac Tube + Methane Pot w/ drip feed Coil bath Dry steam Separatory funnel Spray foam Peter's pickJohn Reflector + Methane Pressure cooker Water cooled cone Wet-dry steam Separatory funnel Spray foam John's pickNate Flat plate + Methane Pressure cooker Coil bath Wet-dry steam Separatory funnel Spray foam Nate's pickBruno Reflector + Methane Pressure + pot Coil bath Wet-dry steam Seperatory funnel Spray foam Bruno's pick

Alt

erna

tive

s

Pugh Matrix (1st iteration)

Cost to make + + - + - + + +Safe - S S S + S S SOil yield + S + S + S + +Time required to design and build - - - - - - - -Ease of set up - - S S - S S SEase of Operation S - S S + S S SDurability - - - + - S - -Maintainability (cleaning) - S - S S S - -Size/weight - - - + - S - -Sustainability of fuels + + + + + + + +Manufacturability - S - + - S - -Repairable (in Haiti) - S - + - S - -Sum + 's 3 2 2 6 4 2 3 3Sum S's 1 5 3 5 1 9 3 3Sum -'s 8 5 7 1 7 1 6 6Net Score -5 -3 -5 5 -3 1 -3 -3Rank 5 4 5 1 4 2 4 3

Datum

Selection Criteria

A B C D E F G H I

Cost to make + + - + - + + +Ease of set up - - S S - S S SEase of Operation S - S S + S S SDurability - - - + - S - -Sustainability of fuels + + + + + + + +Manufacturability - S - + - S - -Repairable (in Haiti) - S - + - S - -Sum + 's 2 2 1 5 2 2 2 2Sum S's 1 2 2 2 0 5 2 2Sum -'s 4 3 4 0 5 0 3 3Net Score -2 -1 -3 5 -3 2 -1 -1Rank 4 3 5 1 5 2 3 3

F G H IA B C E

Selection Criteria

D

D

Pugh Matrix (2nd iteration)

Cost to make S - - - S S - SSafe - - - S - - S -Oil yield + + S S + + S STime required to design and build S - - S - - - SEase of set up + - + S - - S SEase of Operation - - - S - - S -Durability - S S + - - + +Maintainability (cleaning) S S S S - S S SSize/weight S - - - S S S -Sustainability of fuels - - - - - - S -Manufacturability - - - S - - - +Repairable (in Haiti) S S S S - S - +Sum + 's 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3Sum 0's 5 3 4 8 2 4 7 5Sum -'s 5 8 7 3 9 7 4 4Net Score -3 -7 -6 -2 -8 -6 -3 -1Rank 3 5 4 2 6 4 3 1

Selection Criteria

Datum

Ben Peter John Nate Bruno A B G H

Cost to make S - - + S S - SEase of set up + - + S - - S SEase of Operation - - - S - - S -Durability - S S + - - + +Sustainability of fuels - - - - - - S -Manufacturability - - - S - - - +Repairable (in Haiti) S S S S - S - +Sum + 's 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 3Sum S's 2 2 2 4 1 2 3 2Sum -'s 4 5 4 1 6 5 3 2Net Score -3 -5 -3 1 -6 -5 -2 1Rank 3 4 3 1 5 4 2 1

Ben Peter John Nate Bruno A B G H

Selection Criteria

D

Pugh Matrix (3rd iteration)

Cost to make S + S + + + + +Safe S - S - - + + SOil yield S - - + S - S -Time required to design and build S S S - - + - +Ease of set up S S S - S + + SEase of Operation - S S - S + + -Durability S S + - S S S +Maintainability (cleaning) S S S - S S S SSize/weight S + S S + + + SSustainability of fuels S S S S S + + SManufacturability S S S - S + + +Repairable (in Haiti) S S S - S S S SSum + 's 0 2 1 2 2 8 7 4Sum 0's 11 8 10 2 8 3 4 6Sum -'s 1 2 1 8 2 1 1 2Net Score -1 0 0 -6 0 7 6 2Rank 5 4 4 6 4 1 2 3

A B G H

Selection Criteria

Ben Peter John

Datum

Nate Bruno

Cost to make S + S + + + + +Ease of set up S S S - S + + SEase of Operation - S S - S + + -Durability S S + - S S S +Sustainability of fuels S S S S S + + SManufacturability S S S - S + + +Repairable (in Haiti) S S S - S S S SSum + 's 0 1 1 1 1 5 5 3Sum S's 6 6 6 1 6 2 2 3Sum -'s 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 1Net Score -1 1 1 -4 1 5 5 2Rank 4 3 3 5 3 1 1 2

D

Bruno A B G H

Selection Criteria

Ben Peter John Nate

Pugh Matrix ConclusionsSub-systems are highly independent

Concepts can be combined with varying degrees

Ex. Photovoltaic & Methane burning

Feasibility was one of the most important deciding factors

Solar heating is the greatest design challenge Must be independently analyzed

Solar Heating Requirements2 gallons of water per distillation process

19.3 MJ (5.36 kWh) required to boil 2 gallons of water (25°C to 100°C boiling)

Inefficiencies can be supplemented by propane (later methane)

Criteria for selection: Initial cost Operating cost Safety Lifespan, durability

Available Solar Energy

Total average daily energy = 8.47 kWh/m2/day

Solar Heating ConceptsCollector

1. Evacuated tubes

2. Flat plate

Concentrators

3. Fresnel Lens

4. Water lens

5. Parabolic reflector

6. Solar trough

Photovoltaic Panels

Solar Thermal CollectorsEvacuated Tubes

http://tgalsolar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Edson-Heat-Transfer-300x248.jpg

http://www.siliconsolar.com/wp-content/uploads/how-evac-tubes-work.jpg

Solar Thermal CollectorsEvacuated Tubes

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51i5tzmlzuL.jpg

Solar Thermal CollectorsFlat Plate Collector

http://www.gunt.de/networks/gunt/sites/s2/mmcontent/img/E3-S-ST-B.jpg

http://www.htproducts.com/images/products/Solar-Flat-Plate-Panels-Installed.jpg

Solar Thermal CollectorsEvacuated tubes x Flat Plates

- Relative costs

- Efficiency

Solar Thermal CollectorsRelative costs (evacuated tubes)

Temperature difference =75ºC

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 4000

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

f(x) = 3.23742205977209 xR² = 0.97049939068447

Slope: 3.24 $/WRelative cost average: 3.56 $/W

Power (w)

Cost (US$)

Solar Thermal CollectorsRelative costs (flat plates)

Temperature difference =75ºC

Slope: 7.34 $/WRelative cost average: 8.20 $/W

80 100 120 140 160 180 2000

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

f(x) = 7.33887149156807 xR² = 0.891753776412852

Power (w)

Cost (US$)

Solar Thermal CollectorsEfficiency

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1400

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Duda Solar SC5815 Evacuated TubesTitan Power ALDH29 Flat Plate

ΔT

Efficiency

Solar Thermal CollectorsEfficiency

http://www.solardynamix.com/uploads/6/8/1/0/6810974/6112205.png?312

http://www.aeodexia.com/Images/UpFile/2008123085258946.gif

Photovoltaic Collectors Solar Panels - Converts the suns radiation into electricity Charge Controller – Prevents overcharging of the battery Deep Cycle Battery – Stores energy to offset power fluctuations Electric Heating Coil – Converts electricity into heat

Solar ConcentratorsSolar energy through concentrated light

Fresnel LensWater LensParabolic ReflectorSolar TroughGold Nanoparticles

All require tracking

CalculationsBroke down energy required for processing:

% needed from solar source: (~6 hours of sun) 111 Watts for 48 hours straight 222 Watts for 2 x 12 hour sessions

Remaining % from propane (methane)

Calculated cost of solar source to meet power requirement Benchmarking

Calculated cost savings vs 100% propane

Hypothetical payback period

CalculationsKnown Values & Assumptions:

19.3$6.38

1320.75$

2%1.40$ 88.80

183.12$ 1.170.17

90.00$

Total Energy Req (MJ):Propane Cost per Gallon:

Oil yield:

Distillation cycles per year:

Initial cost of propane:

Labor rate in Haiti ($/hour):

Oil yield per cycle ($):

100% propane annual cost ($):Labor hours for tracking + propane:

Labor hours for just propane:

Energy per gallon of propane (MJ):

Completed Solar Concept Table

Evac Tube

Parabolic Reflector w/

Tracker

Solar Trough w/

Tracker PropanePercent renewable* 100% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 0%Percent from propane* 0% 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100%Initital cost (not including propane components) 1,200$ 359$ 227$ 99$ 300$ 332$ -$ Gallons of propane/cycle 0.000 0.163 0.163 0.163 0.163 0.163 0.217Labor hours required/cycle 0 0.167 1.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0Payback period (yrs) 6.49 11.61 NEVER 3.20 9.70 10.74 0.00Payback period (yrs, assuming gas is free) 6.49 2.13 3.28 0.59 1.78 1.97 0.00Annual savings vs propane 183.12$ 29.25$ (69.75)$ 29.25$ 29.25$ 29.25$ (0.00)$

Photovoltaic

48 Hour Continuous Cycle – 111W24 Hour Cycle Over 2, 12 Hour Processes – 222W

Evac Tube

Parabolic Reflector w/

Tracker

Solar Trough w/

Tracker PropanePercent renewable* 100% 50% 25% 50% 50% 50% 0%Percent from propane* 0% 50% 75% 50% 50% 50% 100%Initital cost (not including propane components) 1,500$ 647$ 517$ 395$ 300$ 332$ -$ Gallons of propane/cycle 0.000 0.109 0.163 0.109 0.109 0.109 0.217Labor hours required/cycle 0 0.167 1.167 0.167 0.167 1.167 0Payback period (yrs) 8.12 8.43 NEVER 5.15 3.91 NEVER 0.00

Payback period (yrs, assuming gas is free)8.12$ 3.85$ 7.46$ 2.35$ 1.78$ 4.79$ -$ Annual savings vs propane $ 75.03 $ 75.03 $ (23.97) $ (0.00) $ 183.12

Photovoltaic

Select ConceptCustomer feedbackPrimary plan: solar trough

Novel ideaLow CostSafe

Back-up plan: photovoltaicLess efficientProven concept

http://wims.unice.fr/xiao/solar/collector.html

http://solarknowledge.blogspot.com/2010_12_01_archive.html

All other Sub-systems

Boiler Store bought pressure cooker

Pressure monitor Lid that clamps sealed Steam outlet port

Stainless Steel Stock Pot Simple Cheap Ability to be modified

http://www.morningmystbotanics.com/images/pdf/distillationpdf/df4316.pdf

Wet Wet-Dry Dry

Steam Distillation

Wet Wet-Dry

Steam Distillation Comparison

Cheapest✔ High Simple

0.25%

Middle✔ - Moderate

0.25%

Dry Most Expensive✔ - Complex

0.08%

Cost

Feasible

Fuel Req.

Design

Oil Yield

High

0.08%

http://www.morningmystbotanics.com/images/pdf/distillationpdf/df4316.pdf

Wet-Dry Steam Concepts

CondenserSteam/Oil Mixture must be condensed in order to separate oil from water.

Coil Bath Condenser LengthFlow

Separate Oil

Water must be seperated from oil.Immiscible fluids separate by densityWays to separate include:

Manually drawing out oil using pipetteSeperatory Funnel

System CostsCategory Part Type of Part Cost

Aluminum Pressure Cooker (5.5 gal) $80Vintage Steel (~1970's) (4 gal) $45Stainless Steel (1.5 gal) $65Stainless Steel (2.6 gal) $72Kettle (not pressure) (4 gal) $80Stainless Steel Pot (8 gal) $67Canning Pot (Porcelain on steel) $18Stainless Steel pot (5 gal) $28

Container Plastic water bucket (5 gal) $10Copper Coil (20 feet x 3/8") $21Stainless Steel (25 feet) $58Stainless Steel (25 feet, 3/8in) $33

Collector Stainless bucket (3.25 gal) $207.5 ml Plastic (LDPE) x 50 $73 ml Plastic x 5 $1.39

Plastic Piping (most only are rated to 150 deg F)Copper Pipe 3/4" x 10 ft $18Copper elbow $4

Fiberglass pipe 3/4" diameter, 3 feet $6Spray Foam Spray Foam (1.25 cu feet) $39.95

Total Cost (Low Estimate) $133.39Total Cost (High Estimate) $224.95

Boiler

Condenser

Separator

Piping

Insulation

Pressure Cooker

Coil

Pipette

Metal Piping

Pot

Water Container

Water Flow

Solar Trough

Steam Flow

Plant Matter Container

Condenser

Oil/

Ste

am F

low

Water/Oil Separate by Density

Water/Oil Mixture

Test Plan OutlineTest Related Engineering Requirement

Heating/Boiling S2, S3, S19, S20, S21, S26

Steaming S4, S26

Condensing S26

Collector/Separator S5,S6,S26

Oil Quality S22, S23, S24, S25

Total System S1, S7, S8, S9 S10, S11, S12, S13, S14, S15, S16, S17, S18

Heating/Boiler Time to reach boiling Continuous steam production Total water boiled in 1 day

Steaming Plant material capacity Ensure steam passes through plant

material Check for pressure build up

Condenser Steam flow rate Input/output fluid temp Operation over time

Detailed Test Plan Collector/Separator

Oil recovery rate Oil Quality

Quality of store bought oil Quality of distilled oil

System Processing time Ease of use Area of exposed hot surfaces Set up and repair tools required Size and weight

We Have Vetiver!

6 sterile plantsGoal: have developed roots to test distillation process

Grown in College of Science Greenhouse

Project Management UpdatesAdded risks:

Vetiver diesSolar trough does not provide enough energy

Solar tracking is too fragileLessons Learned:

Meeting plans are essentialConsult customer early onMSD tools & templates may need to be adapted to fit the project

Next Steps (sub-system design)

Assign sub-system design ownersIdentify sub-system interfacesDetermine appropriate dimensionsSelect materialsPrepare for tests

Questions?