1. I RRIGATION S YSTEM ME 414: Team 4 Chris Cook Matt Griffey Jason Colgan Breanne Walters Jeremy Johnson

2. S PECIFICATIONS - Provide a efficient watering system - One inch coverage - Layout area as shown - Electric Utility Cost - Water Waste

3. H UNTER PGJ R OTOR S PRINKLER - 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

4. S PRINKLER H EAD L AYOUT

5. AFT V ERIFICATION BY Z ONES 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

6. E XAMPLE Z ONE 1

7. C OMBINED AFT R ESULTS AFT was run for all 4 Zones Overall Pressure Drops Concerned about pressure at each Head All pressures were in check for each Head Pressure Drops For Each Zone Zone Starting pressure (psi)Ending Pressure (psi) Pressure Drop (psi) 16035.3424.66 26035.2224.78 36034.2625.74 46035.2924.71

8. O VERALL S YSTEM R ESULTS

9. Q UESTIONS

10. ME 414: P ROJECT 2: T UBE AND S HELL H EAT E XCHANGER D ESIGN Jason Colgan, Chris Cook, Matt Griffey, Jeremy Johnson, Breanne Walters

11. D ESIGN P ARAMETERS Remove 1.2 Megawatts of power Process Water Inlet 90ºC Outlet 40ºC City water Inlet during summer 25ºC Optimal Length 4-6 meters

12. O RIGINAL D ESIGN P ARAMETERS Tube Side Heat Transfer Parameters Number of Tubes, N212 Number of Passes1 Tubes OD0.0254 m Tubes ID0.0186 m Tube Length, L5.15 m Tube Pitch, PT0.0318 m Heat Transfer Coefficient, h 1088.79 W/m 2 *C Shell Side Heat Transfer Parameters Shell ID0.5398 m Shell Cross Sectional Area0.2289 m 2 Shell Flow Area0.1214 m 2 Shell Equivalent Diameter0.0251 m Mass Velocity, G123.53 kg/m 2 *s Heat Transfer Coefficient, h 1565.28 W/m 2 *C Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient U (Tube outside Area)501.29 W/m 2 *C Heat Transfer Rate Desired Heat Transfer Rate1201725.86 W Calculated Heat Transfer Rate1205437.99 W Difference-3712.13 Desired - To - Calculated Ratio1 HE Pressure Drop Shell Side ∆P57.58 Pa Tube Side ∆P77.21 Pa Heat Exchanger Weight Total Weight1653.42 kg

13. V ARIABLE R EDUCTION Important Variables Tube Thickness Shell Thickness Shell Material Mdot Tube Shell I/D Tube Length Counter / Parallel Tube O/D Tube Material From previous iterations these nine were the variables that had the greatest effect on Weight, Length, Q, and ∆P’s

14. M AIN E FFECT P LOTS

15. P ARETO C HARTS FOR O PTIMIZATION 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

16. O PTIMIZATION R ESULTS Tube Side Heat Transfer Parameters Number of Tubes, N267 Number of Passes1 Tubes OD0.0254m Tubes ID0.0186m Tube Length, L4.12m Tube Pitch, PT0.0318 Heat Transfer Coefficient, h 1049.9 Shell Side Heat Transfer Parameters Shell ID0.6063 Shell Cross Sectional Area0.2887 Shell Flow Area0.1534 Shell Equivalent Diameter0.0251 Mass Velocity, G97.77 Heat Transfer Coefficient, h 1387.23 Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient U (Tube outside Area)471.96W/m 2*C Heat Transfer Rate Desired Heat Transfer Rate1442071.03 W Calculated Heat Transfer Rate1083921.73 W Difference358149.3 W Desired - To - Calculated Ratio1.33 HE Pressure Drop Shell Side ∆P42.2 Pa Tube Side ∆P60.40 Pa Heat Exchanger Weight Total Weight 1662.27 kg

17. A DJUSTED O PTIMIZED R ESULTS Tube Side Heat Transfer Parameters Number of Tubes, N293 Number of Passes1 Tubes OD0.0254 m Tubes ID0.0186 m Tube Length, L4.4 m Tube Pitch, PT0.0318 m Heat Transfer Coefficient, h854.85 W/m 2 *C Shell Side Heat Transfer Parameters Shell ID0.6350 m Shell Cross Sectional Area0.3167 m 2 Shell Flow Area0.1682 m 2 Shell Equivalent Diameter0.0251 m Mass Velocity, G89.17 kg/m 2 *s Heat Transfer Coefficient, h1308.37 W/m 2 *C Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient U (Tube outside Area)446. W/m 2 *C Heat Transfer Rate Desired Heat Transfer Rate1201725.86 W Calculated Heat Transfer Rate1152519.81 W Difference-49206.06 Desired - To - Calculated Ratio1.04 HE Pressure Drop Shell Side ∆P37.55 Pa Tube Side ∆P38.92 Pa Heat Exchanger Weight Total Weight1945.79 kg

18. C OMPARISON OF R ESULTS 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 Initial Design Optimized Design Adjusted Optimized Design Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient U (Tube outside Area)501.29 W/m 2 *C471.96W/m 2*C446. W/m 2 *C Heat Transfer Rate Desired Heat Transfer Rate1201725.86 W1442071.03 W1201725.86 W Calculated Heat Transfer Rate1205437.99 W1083921.73 W1152519.81 W Difference-3712.13358149.3 W-49206.06 Desired - To - Calculated Ratio11.331.04 HE Pressure Drop Shell Side ∆P57.58 Pa42.2 Pa37.55 Pa Tube Side ∆P77.21 Pa60.40 Pa38.92 Pa Heat Exchanger Weight Total Weight1653.42 kg1662.27 kg1945.79 kg Length Tube Length, L5.15 m4.12m4.4 m

19. C ONCLUSIONS 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

20. Q UESTIONS ?