1. Redd Team Design Project Review Cailin Penberthy, Nora Sedgwick, Parker Burton, Ruth Reeber, Ujjwal Shrestha

2. Needs Research salmon habitat to gain an understanding of specifications Optimize incubator design (streamside and collapsible in-stream)

3. Needs (Cont.) Create a model to test the design Incorporate project learning into design Increase egg survival rate

4. Project Learning: Research Interviews Existing incubators General research: biological needs of salmon and trout Materials

5. Project Learning: Process Research salmon and obtain requirements from client Visit with Scott (Cold Water Research Laboratory) Create multiple models Simulate models in SolidWorks Build and test best design

6. Specifications Temperature37.4 to 48.2 °F Dissolved Oxygen 8ppm or higher TurbidityLess than 200 NTU pH7 to 8 Velocity Range0.2 to 0.79 ft/s Depth0.5 to 0.9 ft TurbulenceLess than 4 ft-lb/ft 3 /s Environmental Concerns No material leaching or contamination Use Duration Streamside: year-long usage In-stream: April to November Life of Product2+ years Mobility Streamside: minimum weight, handles for carrying In-stream: transportable in small plane Visibility Camouflaged to reduce human interference and preserve natural beauty

7. Constraints Easy to reconstruct (high school students) Minimal cost and high quality Design/build schedule Usable for both stream water and river water usage

8. Deliverables 2 models 2 streamside units 2 collapsible in-stream units

9. Design Options Main variable: internal divider arrangement ◦ Single channel vs. dual-channel ◦ Straight vs. slanted ◦ Short vs. long dividers Comparison using SolidWorks FlowXpress ◦ 10 cubic inches per second ◦ Same divider height, thickness ◦ Same base part

10. Long dividers Mid-length dividers Short dividers Mix of short and long dividers Two-channel: straight Two-channel: slanted Single-channel: slanted Flow Model Comparison

11. Best Two Long dividersMixed-length dividers Pros Fairly uniform velocity Similar to existing design (known to work) Cons Little room for fish to congregate Flow has little variation Pros Regions of varied flow Consistent flow in lower region Cons Stagnation regions may impede oxygenation, collect debris

12. Combined Design Advantages Long dividers provide consistent flow through WV boxes Short divider creates a space for fish to congregate before exiting Stagnation area is downstream of WV boxes: oxygenation less of a problem Selected Design

13. Combined Design Potential problems Stagnation area may collect debris and sediment Flow may be too uniform in beginning section: may not simulate stream well Selected Design (Cont.)

14. Selected Design (cont.) Placement of 24 Whitlock-Vibert boxes

15. Model Testing Initial testing on the model showed even at the pump’s maximum flow rate and added gravitational head the model was not able to achieve the desired velocity within the model. Added gravitational head was one foot. A larger pump is needed, once the target velocity.2 ft/s is achieved dissolved oxygen, filter ability, and basic durability testing will commence. Pump Condition Velocity (ft/s) ½ Rate.01 Full.01 ½ Rate with Added Head.03 Full with Added Head.05

16. Project Costs Stream-side Model Prices estimated from materials purchased for the models MaterialProjected Cost Acrylic Sheeting (23ft 2 )$76.59 Silicon Caulking (x3 tubes)$18.87 Filtration System$20.97 U-Channel Wall Attachments$120.00 PVC Couplings (x2)$5.00 Whitlock-Vibert Boxes (x25)$93.75 Refrigerator$0.00 (Donation – Howard Hughes) Total$335.18

17. Project Schedule DateWork To Be Completed December 3Final Design Completed January 21Build Selected Design February 25Design Testing and Modifications March 4In-stream Model April 1Project Completion April 8Finish Presentation April 15Finish Poster and Polish Presentation April 26Design Expo