Team 7 - Project Team Members: J. M. T ate, J. A cheson, P. S ullivan, and A. A bumohor Advisor: Dr. J. Glancey Sponsor: Dr. Limin Kung

Mission: The purpose of our team is to design and build a means to quickly and reproducibly load a test silo without requiring extensive manpower. Approach: We will use the Total Quality Design Process, through the SpreadSheet Design Process on Microsoft Excel.

Academic –Dr. Limin Kung –Dr. Martin Stokes –Dr. Joseph Harrison Industrial –Mr. Chris Rhoden –Ms. Carol Myers Agricultural –Mr. Richard Morris

1) Reproduce Desired Results 2) Not Physically Demanding 3) Fast Operation 4) Simple Operation for User 5) Low Cost

6) Easy to Clean 7) Easy to Repair 8) Easily Transportable 9) Variable Silo Size 10) Easy to Store

The apparatus should be able to: 1) Pass though a doorway 2) Be moved by 2 people 3) Pack faster than Kung’s methods 4) Give a proper sink distance 5) Be built for under $500

Stoke’s Pneumatic Loader Trash Compactors Shotshell Loaders Pharmaceutical Capsule Filling Machines Dr. Kung’s Packing Methods Main Competitor: Stoke’s Pneumatic Loader

Functions: Compacting Devices Material Transport Container Transport Pressure and Load Sensors User-Interface Controllers

Best Practices: Pneumatic Piston Compactor Screw Feeder Silage Transporter Conveyor Belt Silo Transporter Piezoelectric Pressure Sensor Foot Switch Controller

MetricWant Number if UsersSimple Operation Pressure per Layer Change in Pressure Reproduce Desired Results Per Layer Operating ForceNot Demanding Total CostLow Cost

MetricWant Total Time to FillFast Operation Storage Volume Easy to Store or Transport Number of Silo SizesVariable Silo Sizes WeightEasy to Transport

Straight ExtruderTapered Extruder Extrusion Family

Gravity Fed PistonHand Fed Piston Horizontal Piston Family

Piston with Vibrating Chute Crank Slider Vertical Piston Family Screw Fed Piston

Centrifuge Weight Press “Other” Design Family Blower

Experiments Types: Effect of Lips and Sudden Changes in Diameter Effect of Plunger Size on Packing Effect of Piston Orientation – Vertical and Horizontal Silage Behavior on Chutes and in Ramps

Low Rated Concepts Extruder Family: Cost metric too high Lack of experimental data Horizontal Piston Family: Change in Pressure Per Layer metric too high Time to Fill metric is too high Jamming problems inherent in the design

Low Rated Concepts “Other” Family: Pressure target is not met Dimensions outside of constraints Weight outside of constraints

Vertical Piston Family: High Scoring Metrics: Pressure per layer Change in Pressure per Layer Time to Fill

Screw Fed Piston Evaluation: User Actions is low Time to Fill is low Cost of Screw Feeder is too high

Piston with Vibrating Chute Evaluation: Clogging problems increase time to fill Cost metric is too high

Crank Slider Evaluation: Time to Fill is good. Low Cost User Actions is high.

Evaluation: Time to Fill is good. Low Cost User Actions are high, but can be split up between multiple users.

Final Weight and Storage Volume Time Trials –Different Users –Multiple Users Trials at Varying PackingPressures Operating Force Comparisons with the Previous Apparatus

Metric MeasurementTarget Number of Users22 Pressure per Layer100 psi100 psi Change in Pressure 5 psi30 psi Per Layer Operating Force5 lbs.20 lbs. Total Cost$436$500

Metric MeasurementTarget Time to Fill80 sec80sec Storage Volume9 ft 3 36 ft 3 Number of Silo 12 Sizes Weight42 lbs88 lbs

ActivityTime Engineering Development 360 hours Fabrication Hours 60 hours Testing Hours 10 hours

PART PRICE $ Pneumatic Cylinder 230 Regulator and Valves 47 Electrical Systems 21 Frame and Fasteners 40 Silo Extensions 98 TOTAL $436