Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Jump to first page n Team Members:  Katie Kaser - Introduction & Concept Generation  Moshe Solomon - Concept Selection  Joanna Pirnot - Concept Development.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Jump to first page n Team Members:  Katie Kaser - Introduction & Concept Generation  Moshe Solomon - Concept Selection  Joanna Pirnot - Concept Development."— Presentation transcript:

1 Jump to first page n Team Members:  Katie Kaser - Introduction & Concept Generation  Moshe Solomon - Concept Selection  Joanna Pirnot - Concept Development  Lihong Xu - Budget Sponsor: Fraunhofer USA Advisor: Dr. Michael Keefe TEAM 11 ULTRASONIC MIXER

2 Jump to first page

3 Mechanical Mixers Size Cost Wear Contamination Maintenance

4 Jump to first page Mission Design a non-mechanical mixer for homogenizing powder injection molding feedstock by April 1999 Approach : u Identify wants and constraints u Benchmark previous technology u Generate set of concepts u Select best concept u Execute design via best engineering methodology

5 Jump to first page Customers n Sponsor - Fraunhofer n Mixer suppliers u Misonix Inc. n Ultrasonic consulting companies u Advanced Sonic Processing Systems n Anyone involved in powder injection molding

6 Jump to first page Wants & Constraints Top 5 Wants u Temperature Control u Low Contamination Level u Ease of cleaning u Cost u Produce measurable quantity Constraints u Completion by April 1999 u Produce homogenous mixture u Safety

7 Jump to first page System Benchmarking n Mechanical Mixers n High Shear Mixers u Static mixer u Pump/internal obstacle mixer (Sonolater) Ultrasonic Mixers u Probe-type u External sound source

8 Jump to first page Metrics n Want u Temperature control u Low contamination level u Handle variety of materials n Metric u Temperature control range u Percentage contaminants u Viscosity range

9 Jump to first page Functional & Ultrasonic Benchmarking n Functions u Feeding u Heating u Mixing u Cooling n Ultrasonics u Ultrasonic Generators u Transducers

10 Jump to first page What did we learn? n Ultrasonics is a significant source of heat n Heating and mixing should be as concurrent as possible n A system incorporating a probe is subject to contamination and wear on the probe n More energy reaches the material to be mixed using a probe than transmitting through walls of a vessel n Ultrasonics are capable of mixing solid powders in a polymer resin. u On the macroscopic level a homogenous mixture was achieved

11 Jump to first page Target Values n Metric u Temperature control range u Volume loading metal powder u Ease of cleaning n Target Value u 0 to 200 degrees C u 60% u Time to Disassemble

12 Jump to first page Critical Functions n Feeding n Heating n Mixing n Cooling/Removal

13 Jump to first page Concept Generation n Rotating Mixer n Opposing Sound Sources n Probe-type ultrasonic mixer n Separate heating/mixing chamber n Hexagonal tube mixer

14 Jump to first page Concept 3: Rotating Mixer

15 Jump to first page High Intensity Ultrasonic Processor

16 Jump to first page

17 CONCEPT SELECTION S S D R E S U L T S CONCEPTS WANTS METRICS TARGET VALUES1 2 3 4 5 SUITABLE TEMPERATURE AVOID CONTAMINATION DUE TO ABRASION AVOID CONTAMINATION DUE TO AN EXTERNAL SOURCE EASY TO CLEAN VARIETY OF MATERIALS REASONABLE COST PRODUCE A MEASURABLE QUANTITY OF MATERIAL REPEATABLE PERFORMANCE PRODUCE FEEDSTOCK IN USABLE FORM AVOID WASTE MATERIAL WHEN CLEANING CONTROLED FEEDING MECHANISM TEMPERATURE OF THE MATERIAL BEING MIXED % CONTAMINANTS IN THE PRODUCT % CONTAMINANTS IN THE PRODUCTS ABILITY TO DISASSEMBLE, CLEAN BY HAND, & KEEP WARM WHILE CLEANING VISCOSITY COST MUCH LESS THAN A MECHANICAL MIXER OUTPUT / HOUR RELIABILITY GEOMETRY OF THE PRODUCT % OF MATERIAL LOST % OF MATERIAL LOST 0 TO 200 DEGREES CELSIUS LESS THAN 3% 0 TO 100 DEGREES CELSIUS 0 - 1000 Pa-s LESS THAN $5000 GEATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 5 LBS/HR LOW STANDARD DEVIATION IN MIXING RESULTS PELLET OR SPHERICAL SHAPE LESS THAN 5% 0% 15255555245551525555524555 43434421342334343442134233 44434421343434443442134343 43423421242334342342124233 54434421545445443442154544

18 Jump to first page Concept Selection Evaluation of Wants (Scale 1-5, 5 being the highest score) n 1st (probe type mixer) - 54 pts n 2nd (opposing sound sources) - 40 pts n 3rd (rotating mixer)- 43 pts n 4th (separate heating and mixing) - 37 pts n 5th (hexagonal tube mixer) - 49 pts

19 Jump to first page CONCEPT SELECTION CRITICAL FUNCTIONS FEEDING  Automatic Feeder Unit  Trough HEATING  Double Walled Vessel with Inlet and Outlet for Water Circulation  Heat Exchanger Fluid Pumping System

20 Jump to first page CONCEPT SELECTION CRITICAL FUNCTIONS MIXING  600 Watt Ultrasonic Probe  Booster Horn REMOVAL / COOLING  Teflon Stopcock  Conveyor Belt  Collecting Pan

21 Jump to first page Concept Development n Demonstration (Video) n Test Results u Critical Functions u Prototype vs. Target Values n Modifications/Suggestions

22 Jump to first page Feeding n Capabilities u Automated feeder sufficiently transports powder to the mixing vessel n Limitations u speed of feeder u Residual amount of material remains on the surface of the funnel and feeder tubing

23 Jump to first page Heating n Capabilities u sufficiently melts materials with a low melting point  ex. Paraffin u sufficiently removes excess heat produced by ultrasonic processor u sufficiently keeps materials warm during removal n Limitations u the variety of materials (with a high melting pt.)  ex. Polypropylene u temperature range 0 to 100 degrees Celsius  due to probe limitations u the heating fluid (water) is incapable of temp. higher than 100 degrees Celsius

24 Jump to first page Mixing n Capabilities u Solids Loading F Original Design 20% solids loading F Shape of the vessel 35% solids loading F Shape of vessel and Booster Horn 60% solids loading u Product F Satisfactory homogeneity microscope examination melting (consistency) capillary rheometer u No degradation of polymer of deposits of powder n Limitations u Volume no greater than 50ml  splashing occurs u Amplitude of the Horn must be 65%  splashing occurs u Variety of materials F only soft materials, otherwise erosion of the tip occurs

25 Jump to first page Removal of Material n Capabilities u regulating flow of the material  flick valve u material is removed within 2 minutes u no excess heat is required u 96% of material is recovered F prior to cleaning n Limitations u If the flow is too slow, material tends to solidify prior to exiting the vessel

26 Jump to first page Cooling n Capabilities u material does not solidify prior to contact with the conveyor belt u Air cooling is a sufficient method of cooling feedstock u the material is in a usable form n Limitations u conveyor belt must be set horizontally F material flows too quickly u speed of conveyor belt must be on the lowest setting F material not cooled upon reaching the end of the conveyor belt

27 Jump to first page

28 Modifications/Suggestions (addressing our limitations) Feeding u use spherical shaped powders n Heating u purchase an air cooling converter F allows probe to safely reach higher temperatures u use a fluid capable of reaching a higher temperature

29 Jump to first page Modifications/Suggestions Mixing u purchase a larger vessel to increase the output/hour (no greater than 250ml batches - probe tip (1/2 diameter) u purchase a larger probe tip - 1in diameter (capable of mixing volumes up to 1000ml) u coat the tip of the probe with tungsten carbide  this will reduce the erosion of the titanium tip

30 Jump to first page Removal u Apply heat to the nozzle area to eliminate faster cooling of material; use heating gun Cooling u Use longer conveyer belt; current length insufficient for air-cooling of larger pelleted feedstock

31 Jump to first page

32

33 Budget All Budgeted Material and Equipment Expenditures Estimated Upgrade Cost Engineering Development Time Conclusion

34 Jump to first page Projected Production Cost: $15520.99 Total cost for the project: $520.99 All Budgeted Material

35 Jump to first page Estimated Upgrade Cost Total upgrade cost: $6670.99 $50K to $70K $6700

36 Jump to first page Engineering Development Time Fall 10 hr/person/week for 13 weeks Winter 4 hr/person/week for 4 weeks Spring 12 hr/person/week for 10 weeks (include testing time 4hr/person/week for 6 weeks) Total time: 1064 hours

37 Jump to first page In Conclusion... A great team gained experience from the opportunity to use engineering theory in a practical way, developing an innovative technology solution meeting the specific real-world wants of our industrial customer...


Download ppt "Jump to first page n Team Members:  Katie Kaser - Introduction & Concept Generation  Moshe Solomon - Concept Selection  Joanna Pirnot - Concept Development."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google