No-Moving-Parts FanObjective Airmaster Fan Company is a business strictly devoted on the creation, manufacturing, and sales of fans. Airmaster has presented four engineering students and one marketing student with the specialized task of developing the current prototype in order to create an optimal no-moving-parts fan. The fan was designed with respect to the air flow, cost, manufacturing process, efficiency and noise radiation. A viable marketing vehicle was designed to fit the product and the company’s objectives Fluent Analysis CFD software, Gambit and Fluent, were utilized in the optimization of the no- moving-parts fan. Using the software saved the design team a considerable amount of time in the optimization process due to the fact that it was possible to run numerous tests with multiple compressed air outlet gap sizes in a single day. Prototype Essential Design Parameters Function/Performance Safety Reliability Quality Cost Noise Economic Analysis The economic analysis shows that for the no-moving-parts fan, the operating cost is 17 times more expensive per year, than a regular bladed ¾ hp explosion proof fan. Over time, as the ¾ hp fan requires maintenance, the operating cost gap will narrow. However, even over 20 years the no-moving-parts-fan is still 7.4 times more expensive. Final Recommendation In order for the no-moving–parts fan to be viable, the operational noise and cost needs to be reduced whereas the CFM rating has to increase. Using Airmaster’s resources and current methods of manufacturing, this product is not feasible. If Airmaster was willing to consider new production methods such as CNC machining or casting, a feasible product would be possible pending additional research. Experimental Analysis Given the working prototypes, an analytical study of the velocity distribution was conducted on the inlet portion of Airmaster’s original prototype, prototype 1, and the prototype that was created by the engineers, prototype 2. The velocity distribution was obtained by collecting data at various points along the cross-sectional area of the inlet portion. The velocity at each independent point was determined by using an Anemometer measuring meters per second. This data was then used to validate the Fluent model. The pictures below show the 3D velocity profiles of prototype 1 and the recommended prototype 2. Prototype 1: Velocity Profile Horizontal Axis Vertical Axis Prototype 2: Velocity Profile Horizontal Axis Vertical Axis Front View Cross Section Final Prototype Drawing Type of Fan Purchase Price Operating cost per year (4380 hrs) Maintenance Cost per year 5 years10 years15 years20 years 3/4hp Regular fan$1,400.00$183.73$100$2,818.96$4,237.61$7,056.26$8, hp Compressor$300.00$3,124.53$0.00$15,922.65$31,545.30$47,167.90$62, The CFD software analysis began with a simple 2D rectangular model of the no- moving-parts fan. The final model, was identical in dimensions and complexity to the prototype fan. The output data from the verified CFD model proves that the optimum gap size for the 12 inch no- moving-parts fan operating at 90 Psi is inches. Static Pressure Contour Plot Velocity Contour Plot ’’ gap – mass flow rate = kg/s Iteration mass flow rate (Kg/s) gap (inches)Engineering Anthony Beal L. Marie Verrier Michael Lambert Steven Yang Marketing Business Advisor Dilip Thomas Dr. Michael Lobbestael Faculty Advisor Dr. Eann Patterson Industry Sponsor Bob LaZebnik MICHIGAN STATE U N I V E R S I T Y AttributePerformanceBenchmarkEvaluation Noise Level At109 dB, above prescribed standard 89dBBelow standard Operating Costs$3100+ per year $118+ per year Below Standard Performance CFM1500 CFMBelow Standard LongevityTesting required20 years- SafetyTesting required-- Team Members