Power System for the Better Water Maker P14418

● Background ○ Problem Statement and Project Plan ○ Customer Needs and Engineering Requirements ○ Constraints and Design Drivers ○ Project Risk Assessment ● System Analysis ○ House of Quality Results ○ Functional Decomposition ○ Pugh Analysis ● Individual Concepts and Architectural Developments ○ Concept and Schematic ○ Risk Assessment ○ Initial Cost Estimate ○ Test Plan ● Feedback

The Better Water Maker was developed to disinfect water in nations with high mortality rates due to poor water and sanitation systems. The goal of our team is to provide a low cost, efficient power generation system for the Better Water Maker that does not tire the user, while it is fun and easy to use.

Primary needs ● Generate adequate power ● Is not tiring ● Reduced cost ● Maintain durability

● Generate 25 Watts ● Can be used for at least 5 minutes ● Costs less than $150 ● Lasts for at least 180,000 gallons of water

Key Design Drivers Functionality, Reliability, Cost, Usability, Manufacturability Durability, Efficiency Constraints Cost, Size, Weight, Strength of User

Four highest weighted needs: ● Ease of Repair ● Cost ● Unit Life ● Effort Required

Acquire Water Hook up Battery Communicates Readiness to User Plug in BWM Dispense Water

Assumptions: ● 30W Solar Panel ● Surface Area: m^2 ● Efficiency: 18% ● 2-axis rotation ● Clear-sky analysis ● BWM requires W

Solar Insolation by Region

● 8AM to 4PM availability ● Shade drastically reduces power

● Reliability ○ Weather ○ Time ○ Shading ● Theft ● Battery ○ Shipping ○ Cost ○ Safety ○ Life ● Additional Controls ● Cost ○ Component

● 30W Monocrystalline Solar Panel 18V- $71.06 ● 2-Axis Stand- $20-$30 ● AC Converter- $20 ● Wire extension- $10 ● 12V lead acid battery - $30 Total Cost: ~ $150 ● May end up outside budget, but the system will provide power for any device.

● Use multimeter to verify the power. ● Measure the power if a cell is shaded. ● Collect data on battery charging capability. ● Test ability of a child to use from start to finish. ● Obtain a survey from users on its ease of use.

● Recumbent Bicycle ● Direct- or Chain-Drive ProsCons ● More power in legs than arms ● Less tiring than current design ● Higher efficiency than current ● Possibility to reduce amounts of motors ● Might add cost ● High forces on seating structure ● More complicated setup than current design ● Less portable than current

Pedals Mounted on Crankshaft Pedals Mounted on Separate Sprockets Seat Backrest Bucket 2x4 Current Generator Leg-powered Concept: Schematic

● Large forces in system ● More complicated setup ● Reduced component life ● Complex seating requirements

Feature Seat Crank and Motors LEDs Wires, Chain, and Sprocket Function Accomplished Place User Generate Power Communicate to User Transfer Power

● Crankset - $10-20* ● Pedals - $4* ● Chain - $10 ● Keyed Shaft - $10 -17* ● Sprocket - $ Chain Drive - $ *Direct Drive - $

● Have volunteers test for comfort ● Measures forces on seat and pedals ● Can run for 5 minutes or more ● Run generator while attached to a voltmeter ○ Ensure voltage is limited correctly

Swing Single Jump Platform Double Jump Platform

● Solenoids create heat o Proper heat sink ● Springs could break o Properly constrained ● Solenoid plunger must be correctly aligned o Prevent improper movement ● Oscillations may be erratic o Use bridge rectifier

Feature Casing/Spring Enclosure Solenoid Springs Rectifier Function Accomplished Place User Generate Power Facilitate Power Generation Regulate Power

● Springs - $3-10 each ● Solenoid - $15-30 each ● Rectifier - $ ● Plywood casing - $5-10 per setup ● Rope/chain - $0.70/ft Swing - $30-68 Single Jump Platform - $26-63 Double Jump Platform - $52-123

● Test the components for each output individually o Verify with expectations ● Test the ergonomics of the setup to determine whether it requires less effort than the original design ● Bring children in to set up and use the apparatus ● Use DOE tools to validate the testing results

● Solar Concept: o Has great potential, even beyond BWM, but has high risk in reliability and cost. ● Leg-Powered Device o High reliability in combination with low cost and OTS components make this a desirable concept. ● Spring Concept o Unknown reliability of power; this will need more anaysis before moving forward, but it has great potential to be fun and easy to use, as well as low in cost.

P/N: 7052$3.84 OD: 1in Length: 3inMax. displacement: 1.2in k: 51lb/inMax. load: 60lb P/N: 12556$5.31 OD: 1in Length: 4.45inMax. displacement: 1.2in k: 53lb/inMax. load: 64lb P/N: 7056$8.96 OD: 1.219in Length: 4inMax. displacement: 1.2in k: 99lb/inMax. load: 118lb P/N: 11860$8.66 OD: 2.125in Length: 5.38inMax. displacement: 4in k: 5.5lb/inMax. load: 22lb P/N: S-3159$13.20 OD: 2.875in Length: 3inMax. displacement: 1.4in k: 15lb/inMax. load: 20lb P/N: D-1306$5.73 OD:.375in Length: 3inMax. displacement: 0.9in k: 42lb/inMax. load: 38lb

P/N: S-16-50$27.73 Pull-type18W Long Pulse25% Duty Cycle Max. on-time: 50sActuation Length: <1.6in P/N: S-10-50$22.40 Pull-type16W Long Pulse25% Duty Cycle Max. on-time: 20sActuation Length: <1in P/N: S-10-50$22.40 Pull-type8W Intermittent50% Duty Cycle Max. on-time: 75sActuation Length: <1in

P/N: 625-2KBP02M-E4$0.58 Current: 2AMax. current surge: 60A Peak reverse voltage: 200VSingle Phase Bridge-style P/N: 625-PB4006-E3$3.02 Current: 4.4AMax. current surge: 400A Peak reverse voltage: 600VSingle Phase Bridge-style P/N: 512-GBPC3510$3.05 Current: 35AMax. current surge: 400A Peak reverse voltage: 1000VSingle Phase Bridge-style

ProsCons ● Possible elimination of pump (5+W) ● Less effort required ● Can be OTS ● Needs more structural support due to higher center of mass ● Need to use pump to regulate flow or use gate valve and throttle valve ● Users need to lift water into funnel

Pros: - Solar panel will reduce load on user - Redesign of current system may be minimal - Reduced learning curve for current users

Cons: - Cloud cover and night- time eliminate the improvement - Solar panels are susceptible to theft