P16081: SYSTEMIC CIRCULATION MODEL SUBSYSTEM DESIGN REVIEW John Ray Fabian Perez Robert Kelley Mallory Lennon Jacob Zaremski

 Our goals for this review  Updates from Phase II Review (10 minutes)  CAD Schematic Analysis  Subsystem Analysis (25 minutes)  Risk Analysis (5 minutes)  Bill of Materials (BoM) (5 minutes)  Project Plans (5 minutes) Agenda

Goals 1. Introduce progress in engineering analysis 2. Address budget concerns 3. Demonstrate efforts to design for modification 4. Receive feedback 5. Create action plan

Finalized Objective Our goal is to deliver a functioning physical model of systemic circulation which, when used in conjunction with P16080’s heart pump, will be used as a teaching tool, allowing students to validate mathematical models of the circulatory system from Chapter 5 of “Quantitative Human Physiology” An Introduction by Joseph Feher. The model will ultimately enhance students' understanding of the circulatory system by enabling them to analyze the circulatory system under normal, exercise, and pathological conditions through the measurement of pressure and flow.

Updated Use Case

ER Metrics of Quality (1 of 3)

ER Metrics of Quality (2 of 3)

ER Metrics of Quality (3 of 3)

ER mapping to F.D. (1 of 2)

ER mapping to F.D. (2 of 2)

Functional Decomposition

Morph Chart (1 of 3)

Morph Chart (2 of 3)

Morph Chart (3 of 3)

Undecided Concepts Pressure PASCO versus Honeywell LabVIEW versus DataStudio Resistance External Clamp vs. Valve

Updated System Architecture

CAD Schematic

Main Components Barb tube fitting: cheapest, easiest connection Pressure release value: easy release valve Drill and screw into acrylic Ball pump: cheapest, easiest way to add air pressure Pressure tap into tubing

Pressure, P A Pressure, P C Pressure, P V v P16081 Pump Arterial Compliance, C A Venous Compliance, C V Flow Resistance LabVIEW

Subsystems Agenda 1 & 5 - Pressure 2 & 4 - Compliance 3 - Resistance 6 - Labview 7, 8 & 9 - Consult with P16080

Pressure Sensor Analysis 1. Flow Diagram 2. PASCO Sensors 3. Honeywell Sensors 4. Bill of Materials 5. Test Plan 6. Risks

Pressure Flow Diagram Analog Pressure Signal Digital Pressure Signal DAQ Amplifier Board Computer LabView Program AC Power Energy Information Pressure vs. Time Graph

PASCO Sensors Will need more than one computer for real time system analysis LabView for heart, DataStudio for circulatory pressures LabView needed for automatic resistance control ProsCons Already OwnedNo integration with LabView Differential Pressure Capabilities Special Pressure Taps Needed User Friendly manuals/PASPORT-Dual-Pressure-Sensor- Manual-PS-2181.pdf Maximum Sampling Rate1000 Hz Absolute Pressure Range mmHg Differential Pressure Range mmHg Resolution0.075 mmHg at 10 Hz Repeatability7.5 mmHg Tubing (Type)Polyurethane Tubing Size (Diameter)3.2 mm Tubing Length2.4 m Interface Data Studio (New one coming soon?) Source: PasPort Instruction Sheet ( A)

Honeywell Sensors Only one computer program needed for both heart and circulatory DAQ is already provided, but would need to build the circuit board/LabView Program ail/Honeywell/HSCMRNT005PGAA 5/?qs=%2fha2pyFaduhkciXVz6btF HLY3u79xkDhknp39AuPvmffYIGgr Gx0aQ%3d%3d ProsCons Integration With LabView More Expensive than PASCO AccuracyWill need a Sensor Board/DAQ Liquid Friendly TruStability Board Mount Pressure Sensors: HSC Series (HSCMRNT005PGAA5) Operating Gage Pressure Range0-258 mmHg Output TypeAnalog Pressure TypeGauge Operating Supply Voltage5 V Operating Temperature C Operating Supply Current20 mA Accuracy0.25% Liquid Media Capable?Yes Source: HSCMRNT005PGAA 5 Datasheet (Mouser.com)

Honeywell Sensors Dimensions uPvmffYIGgrGx0aQ%3d%3d

Pressure BOM Component ID Componen t SupplierSupplier IDQuanitity/DimensionsPrice/Unit Total Cost Notes P1Honeywell Board Mount Pressure Sensor Mouser Electronic HSCMRNT005PGAA5 2$45.78$91.56 May only need 1 (48.85) P2PASCO Sensor PASCOPS Free - Already Owned P3Pressure Taps PASCOME $16.00$96.00 Comes as a set of 6 Might be able to borrow for free (Rep mentioned it)

Pressure Risks 5TechnicalNot being able to generate required values 6TechnicalSeal on the pressure tap leaks 7TechnicalNot being able to calibrate within time constraints 9ResourceSystem components will be expensive 11Safety Electricity and water combination can cause dangerous conditions Owner: Jack

PRESSURE TEST PLAN 1. Prove Sensor Functionality a. Flow through a pipe with decreased diameter in the center b. Pressure taps at two points c. Measure the pressure drop 2. Calibration of the Sensors a. Obtain a full tank of known pressure b. Measure the pressure and correct accordingly

Subsystem - Compliance Tank 1. Flow Diagram a. Energy, Material, and Information I/O b. Interfaces 2. Cylinder or rectangular prism? a. Pros and cons b. Feasibility 3. Bill of Materials (Draft) 4. Subsystem Risks 5. Preliminary Ideas for Testing Plans

Pressure Flow AC Power AirHeightCompliance Pressure Transducer LabVIEW Pressure vs. Time Flow Pressure Forced Air Energy Material Information

Cylindrical Tanks Pros Fewer pieces Less interfaces to seal Cons Price limits diameter Interfacing with tubing and pressure taps

Rectangular Tanks Pros Flat surfaces easier to machine and interface Cons More pieces that need to be machined and sealed

Cylindrical Arterial Compliance Tank

Cylindrical Venous Compliance Tank

Rectangular Arterial Compliance Tank

Rectangular Venous Compliance Tank

Technical Risks - Compliance Tank

Resource & Safety Risks - Compliance Tank

Compliance BOM - Cylindrical

Compliance BOM - Rectangular 6-sided tank would be around $200

Compliance - Preliminary Testing Plans 1. Air tight seal a. pressurize, use soap, and look for bubbles 2. Generate chart to allow students to know which height corresponds to a desired condition - scale on box 3. Excel spreadsheet for liquid height and corresponding compliance values

Resistance Agenda 1. Flow Diagram 2. Valve and Resistance Analysis 3. Bill of Material and Alternative Bill of Materials 4. Risks 5. Test Plans

Resistance Flow

Valve and Resistance Analysis Resistance can be modeled after Ohm’s Law in that: R=ΔP/F where ΔP is the height difference and F is the mean flow rate. [

Valve and Resistance Continued For Valves resistance and friction can be modeled as: hf=(Kv^2)/2g Where K is the resistance coefficient, f is the Darcy friction factor, V is the velocity and hf is the Frictional Loss or Head Loss. Considering using a Gate valve for purposes of the design. ● Resistance will have to be tested manually ○ Test each resistor position and correlate them to the pressure output seen ■ Create a graph of resistor position vs pressure output

Valve Considerations Other potentials: Linear Actuator and Globe Valve

Resistance BOM SubsystemComponent IDComponentSupplier Supplier ID Quanitity / DimensionsPrice/UnitTotal CostNotes ValveV1 Bronze Gate Valve- Class 125, 3/4" NPT Female, Non-rising Stem McMaster Carr4619K141$27.96 May be alternated for linear actuator SubsystemComponent IDComponentSupplier Supplier ID Quanitity / DimensionsPrice/UnitTotal CostNotes Linear ActuatorLA1 25mm Diamter Actuator Exteded strew with motor Anaheim Automatio n TSFCA LW411$39.00 Can only apply 10 Newtons of Force. Globe ValveGV Low-Pressure Bronze Globe Valve, 3/4" NPT Female, EPDM Disc McMaster Carr4695K651$37.44 Meant for low pressure flows, overall length of 2 5/16” Current BOM Alternative BOM

Resistance Risks

Resistance - Preliminary Testing Plans 1. Calibration a. Make sure when impedance is 0 R=ΔP/F is obeyed. b. Make sure when impedance is at max there is no flow through the system after this point. 2. Calculate theoretical head loss through circuit and perform head loss experiment on the pipe and valve to confirm compliance to the theoretical model (initial set up for MSD)

LabVIEW

LabVIEW Considerations Waveform consistency Same parameters give same waveforms each time Interfacing with pressure sensors One program for both teams F. M. Donovan (1975) Design of a Hydraulic Analog of the Circulatory System for Evaluating Artificial Hearts, Biomaterials, Medical Devices, and Artificial Organs, 3:4, Arterial Venous

Preliminary Life Span Calculation Considerations: What will likely fail first? Is that part expensive? Is that part easy to replace?

New risks

Mitigated Risks

Risk Chart

Draft System Bill of Materials (1 of 2)

Draft System Bill of Materials (2 of 2)

Project Plan - what we achieved

Project Plan - deliverables for next phase

End of MSD I Deliverables 1. “Working” theoretical model 2. Finalized, completed and accurately priced Bill of Materials 3. CAD drawing 100% done 4. Test plan for design 90% complete 5. Theoretical risk list complete with ideas as to how to minimize potential effects 6. Understanding of deliverables for MSD II 7. Short list of contests this design could enter

Ways to Improve Efficiency 1. More organized direction for research of parts and materials 2. Better collaboration with P More organized group meetings

Goals for Phase IV 1. Choose the most efficient pressure sensor 2. Decide on dimensions for compliance tanks 3. Decide on internal versus external resistances 4. Interactions with P16080 LabVIEW Flow meter Interfacing

ASEE 123 rd Annual Conference & Exposition Abstract submitted on October 20 th, 2015 Abstract decision deadline: November 9, 2015