P.V. PANEL WIND LOAD EFFECTS F EBRUARY 2011 Arman Hemmati, Brady Zaiser, Chaneel Park, Jeff Symons, Katie Olver Design Review #3 TEAM 12

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Overview Refresh Wind-Tunnel Experimental Progress CFD Progress What’s Next 1

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Refresh – Where did we start? 2 Ideal angle of inclination is 51° Too much weight for the roof? Wind-Tunnel testing – Experimental Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) - Computational

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Refresh – Where were we? 3 Best model for the wind tunnel testing Screw-Bolt MDoF Model Why? - Intuitive Design - Robust & Simple Measurement Method Drag Plate & Load Cells Availability & Simplicity CFD convergence issues discussed

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Refresh – Schedule and Budget 4

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Wind Tunnel – Spec. & Set-backs 5 Wind tunnel dimensions: Target area = 20% (total area) Status: Functional – It is currently being used by Tail fin group. Wind Speed – Still unclear how to obtain the correct speed (May use a device!) Availability of the Tunnel – Time conflict with other groups 20% cm 76.2 cm

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Experimental Progress – Prev. Design 6 Feasibility issues related to the previous design

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Experimental Progress – Current Design 7

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Experimental Progress – Machining 8 Incremental Bar Slider Connection Plate 0.5” Threaded Support Nut

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC Experimental Progress – Machining 9 Main Connection Nut Upper Hinge PV Panel Lower Hinge

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC CFD Progress – Expectations 10 1.Establish a functional and feasible model a)Rooftop boundary layer b)Panel – Rooftop separation distance c)C.V. size (inlet and outlet buffer zones) 1.Confirm the credibility of the model a)Pressure Coefficient (Cp) b)CD /CL ratio 2.Parameter variation study a)Panel – Rooftop separation distance b)Panel angle of attack c)Wind speed / Reynolds Number d)Number of panel in series

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC CFD Progress – Dummy Run 11 Open Channel Flow: Geometry – Horizontal Open Channel Simple Physics – Laminar flow Wall (No Slip) Outlet Inlet Velocity (m/s) Height (m)

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC CFD Progress – First Trial 12 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: - Laminar Flow - V in = m/s (1) Inlet (8) Outlet (2) Wall (No Slip) (3) Wall (No Slip) (4-7) Wall (No Slip) Pressure (Pa)

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC CFD Progress – Rooftop Slip Condition 13 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: - Turbulent Flow (k-  ) - V in = 29.0 m/s Wall (No Slip) Wall (Slip) (3) Outlet (8) Outlet (1) Outlet

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC CFD Progress – Pressure Coefficient 14 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: - Larger C.V. – Behind the plate - Away from the roof (No Slip) Cp (Dim. Less)

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC CFD Progress – Pressure Coefficient 15 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: - Longer inlet in front of the plate 10 m Cp (Dim. Less)

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC CFD Progress – Current Model 16 2D Flow around a Flat Plate: -No Roof (Open all sides) -Mesh Refinement (No Effect) Outlet Inlet V in = 29 m/s Cp (Dim. Less)

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC CFD Progress – Current Model (CFX) 17

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC What’s Next – Where are we going? 18 Experimental: Complete the testing model Familiarization with the Wind Tunnel Computational: Fully fix the Pressure Coefficient (C p ) issue Confirm the relationship between C D & C L ( ) Calculate the Forces

FEBRUARY Design Review #3: DeLoPREC