2. CONSISTENTLY COOL BEER GROUP 1 ME 553 Group Members Matt Anderson, Jacky Henderson Gerald Lo, Kenya Maddox

3. PROBLEM STATEMENT  Problem: Beer, left in the line between the tap and keg, is discarded due to elevated product temperature and lack of taste.  Solution: Design attachment to keg and tap to eliminate wasted warm beer

4. TARGET MARKET  Launch markets:  Homebrewers/Avid beer drinkers  Microbreweries  Home brewers around North America will spend over $85 million on supplies and equipment in 2010. (http://www.byo.com/advertising)http://www.byo.com/advertising  Product Reviews reveal customer dissatisfaction with current products on market  “Kegerator does not provide cold enough beer” (http://reviews.bestbuy.com/3545/8193527/reviews.htm)  “Beer comes out of tap foamy because it is too warm”  “Entire length of beer line is not kept cold” (http://www.kegerator.com/Buyers+Guide:+Kegerator+Troubleshooting/BUYERS_GUI DE_KEG_TROUBLESHOOTING,default,pg.html)

5. CUSTOMER NEEDS The design functions were mapped to the product benefits. The map revealed that product functions had multiple benefits

6. LEAN QFD A first level lean QFD was completed in order prioritize product requirements. Functions that emerged with the highest priority were the desire for few components, a design that consistently cools beer and the use of non-toxic medium for cooling.

7. VALUE CURVE Current cooling systems were discussed and rated on key design elements. Ratings of key elements of the Team 1 design were graphed against those of currently available systems. Team 1 conceptual design elements consistently rated high in many of the categories.

8. DECISION PROCESS A function/sub-function map was used to determine design concepts for sub- functions. A morphology matrix was completed to flush out specific sub-function designs. Through the process of scoring using weights and ratings sub-function designs possibilities were eliminated and final list of sub-functions were specified.

9. TRIZ EVALUATION TRIZ was used to identify contradictions and eliminate trade-offs. Features identified as needing improvement include the following: temperature, device complexity, reliability, versatility, and loss of energy.

10. CONCEPT SKETCH Multiple concept sketches were completed, the figure (above left) represents the final concept and the figure (above ) shows the process flow of the cooling system.

11. FAN DESIGN A fan was chosen that will output 15 cfm of air In order to achieve the optimum temperature of 38°F the air in the kegerator will have to be cooled to 35.4 °F.

12. MODELING The fan moves the chilled air into the region of the warmer air. The beer is insulated by polyethylene tubing. The RTD and the thermostat work in tandem to provide feedback on the air temperature.

13. DFA Assembly Index Equation: [(number of parts) X (3 seconds)]/assembly time Ideal assembly index and part reduction score is zero.

14. COST

15. DESIGN PROS AND CONS PROS:  Completely addresses a target market (homebrewer)  Allows team to work out developmental issues prior to scaling up the design  Easily integrated into existing beer keg cooling systems  Uses off the shelf parts to reduce cost CONS:  Not easily scalable to microbreweries – may not be able to circulate large quantities of air at long line lengths  However, our other concepts may be more suitable for larger applications (i.e.. more sophisticated cooling lines)

16. PATH FORWARD  Optimize design through computer simulations using FEA  Design for cost  Common components, reduce fasteners, simplify geometry  Address design for easy adaptability for current keg cooling system owners  Build working prototype and test  Adapt design for medium sized applications (i.e.. microbreweries)