July 25 , 2012

th

Engineering Analysis for:

Conducted by Engineering Technology Students at :

Chester Whinery, Michael Kopetzky, Lukas Vaznonis, Brandon Haas, Eric Farmer, Jeramie Chlumsky

July 25 , 2012

th

INTRODUCTION
COMPANY OVERVIEW
Bentley Baths is a relatively small family owned and operated company located in Denver, CO. They specialize in Walk In style bathtubs. These tubs differ from standard tubs because they are equipped with an access door and a low floor. These tubs provide easy access in and out which allows the elderly and other less mobile people to maintain a safer and more independent lifestyle.

PRODUCTION OVERVIEW
The current lines of bathtubs are made mostly from a fiber glass composite. The shell of the tub is made of fiberglass and is supported by a wood or steel frame. The composite manufacturing process used is a wet layup of fiberglass mat, all done by hand. This hand laid process is cheap and efficient, and works well for Bentley Baths current production of 15-20 bathtubs per month. This low cost

manufacturing method allows Bentley Baths to compete with inexpensive Chinese

tub manufacturers, who sell their tubs for around $750-$900.

DESIGN AND PRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT

Bentley Baths wants to expand its production from 20 to 80 tubs per month. They have recently acquired a larger manufacturing facility and now need to increase the demand for their tubs in order to expand. Like most businesses Bentley Baths will use advertising in an attempt to gain more customers. They plan on using a

marketing strategy that demonstrates a clearly superior product. For Bentley Baths
to provide this superior product a lot of research must be done in order to design the most durable, accessible, and easy to use tubs at an affordable price. They are currently developing a prototype tub and the engineering focus has been on two primary design goals, lowering the bottom of the entry door while maintaining or increasing structural integrity. In order to make this prototype tub a success a lot of engineering analysis will be necessary. The information contained in the remainder of this report summarizes the research done in the areas of composite material

selection, layup process, finite element analysis, and dimensional analysis.

July 25 , 2012

th

TUB DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND
Measurement analysis was a key function in this team project, without any engineering drawings created by Bentley Bath Co., the newly designed tub was roughly hand dimensioned. This process is surely not the expert way to do it, but it did suffice for the small analysis report made by the team.

METHODOLOGY
As the team conferenced on what process to take, the team personnel making the drawing in Solid Works decided to measure everything from the top point of the tub in order to make easy lines to sweep in the drawing software. First, the Top view was made, in which just lengths of different contours and extensions were measured. The drawing was made very rough and many pictures were taken in order to understand each little bath tub contour. Next, the different depths of the tub were measured, with this process; the team used the top surface of the bath tub and ran a construction square across the top, making sure it was level. Next, we took the tape measure and measured points of depth on the seat, floor, drain, contours in the seat, and the angles the walls were oriented. The main point of dimensioning was to have these points in a line, that way the drawing in Solid Works was easier to make by sweeping and connecting linear points in the tubs drawing. As the team focused on the high stress points within the tub, the door frame was the main part to key on.

AREAS OF CONCERN
Bentley Batch Co. wanted to redesign the entrance to the door as stated in the Design Development section above, the key being lowering the required step-up into the tub. This feature would not only increase the users ease in getting into the tub, but place a stress riser right where the consumer steps in.

July 25 , 2012

th

TUB DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS (CONTINUED)

The tub frame was not dimensioned being that the wood was cut by hand and had no real process control. Getting the thickness of the plywood underneath the tub entrance was not applicable, but it was approximately two inches in thickness.

RECCOMENDATIONS
The teams recommendation is to get a professional to laser scan the final tub, or get a CMM (Coordinate Measuring Machine) to get every contour and precise dimension again once the final product is produced. Overall, the team simply used a measuring tape to dimension the tub. Another recommendation for Bentley Batch Co. would be to do some research analysis on whether or not the tub frame would support the lowest entrance level possible without compromising the tubs strength at this point. This is of course just an analysis on the frame, the thickness of the composite, as well as the best composite material lay-up for the flooring will also be talked about further in this report. As the tub was successfully dimensioned, the team wanted to give some recommendations, some stated above, but mainly for Bentley Bath Co. to be able to take this tub and widely manufacture it, once the final tub product is produced, the tub will need to have a controlled process to guarantee part interchangeability

with the door, and any other special features such as jets, heaters, and hoses.

July 25 , 2012

th

DIMENSIONAL SPEC DRAWINGS

Specification drawings are a foundational part of any manufacturing process. The prototype nature of the design as constructed by Bentley Baths was not accompanied by any dimensional specification, so these drawings, available in the appendix should prove a valuable starting point for further design changes. When these measurements were taken the tub was still undergoing design changes, which will likely effect the final dimensions of the tub and enclosure, though as long as the master mold does not change, the fiberglass shell portion of these drawings should provide a reasonably accurate representation, and could be used for estimating costs for differing production methods.

July 25 , 2012

th

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY
Once the dimensioning was complete and 3d model had been made the model was subjected to 3 worst case loading conditions in Autodesks Multi-physics software. The shell of the tub remained and the wood and foam reinforcement material were replaced with 1 dimensional spring constraints to simulate the reinforcement materials qualities. The wood constraints were given a stiffness of 300 [lbs/in] in

edgewise compression, and the 2 part foam constraints added an additional 13.8
[lbs/in] where applicable. All the models were tested with full hydrostatic loading.

The model was fit with a coarse mesh which represented roughly 4 nodes for each two inches square for a total of 4100 nodes, and about 40000 degrees of freedom in the model. This size was chosen to facilitate rapid modeling time, and reasonable accuracy.

RESULTS
Complete results and the accompanying data are available in the appendix of this report, though by way of summary the tub performed well under the tested conditions. No section exceeded the 18,000[psi] ultimate strength of the material, and a rough safety factor of 4 was maintained throughout. A total maximum Von Mises stress of 4551 [psi] and maximum deflection near .06[in] were recorded in the Hydrostatic + Standing test, where a 300[lb] load was applied over a 10[in ] spot on the floor in addition to the water loading.
2

RECOMMENDATIONS
The models demonstrate that it would be advisable to strengthen the base of the door

frame and the rear top of the door frame as they demonstrate high stress
concentrations, though neither is in jeopardy of failure based on these tests.

FATIGUE AND TENSILE TEST RESULTS

TEST SAMPLE PROPERTIES
The layup sequence of each of the three samples are as follows: Sample 1 was seven layers of mat; Sample 2 was one layer of mat and fifteen layers of woven; Sample 3 was three layers of mat followed by one fabric, then three layers of mat followed by one fabric for a total of eight layers. The samples were laid up at room temperature on a flat aluminum mold treated with PVA. The samples were then allowed to cure at room temperature for at least twenty-four hours before they were removed from the mold. Once cured the samples were cut to 8x4 to fit the bending jig.

SAMPLE TESTING
Two tests were performed on the samples. First, a fatigue test was used to investigate the strength of the samples as they were subject to cyclical loading conditions. Second, a tensile test was performed to determine the ultimate strength of the material as it was pulled apart. The test setup and the results for each test are outlined below.

FATIGUE TESTING
The first test was the fatigue test. This test was performed by applying a cyclical load to the center of the sample while the sample was supported at two of its edges. The picture below gives a visual depiction of the test setup.

FATIGUE AND TENSILE TEST RESULTS (CONTINUED)

FATIGUE TESTING (CONTINUED)
Each sample was loaded with a 32.1 lb force 7500 times, which would represent use of the tub once per day for 20 years. The duration of each cycle was approximately eight seconds. The deflection of the sample was measured and recorded automatically. The deflection increased over the course of the test as the sample developed interior fractures. Below is a graph that shows the deflection of each sample as a function of loading cycles.

Taking data from each test and comparing the increase in deflection for each sample shows that the all-mat sample had a 20.6% increase in deflection, the woven fabric displayed a 6.8% increase, and the mix sample increased by 16.4%. Initially the Mat sample showed the greatest stiffness, followed by the Mix sample while the woven fabric had the lowest stiffness initially deflecting 0.08[in], though their resistance to deflection over time was reversed.

TENSILE TESTING
The second test was a tensile test. This test was performed using the same machine as the fatigue test only the force applied in this case was a pulling force instead of a compression force. Each of the three samples were cut to resemble an hour glass. The reduced midsection helped to provide a predictable separation point. The samples were then clamped by the jaws of the machine and pulled apart.

FATIGUE AND TENSILE TEST RESULTS (CONTINUED)

TENSILE TESTING (CONTINUED)
The maximum load was recorded. The cross section of each sample was divided by the maximum load in order to compare the strength of each sample as a function of its cross sectional area. The results of this test showed that the mat sample withstood an 18 ksi load before failing, the fabric failed at 36 ksi, and the mix failed at 25 ksi. While both the Mat and Mixture samples broke through evenly, the Woven sample maintained some structural integrity, and the fibers were never broken, though the sample would no longer accept loading.
(Complete data sets and charts are available in the appendix.) The term ksi is used to represent thousand pounds per square inch.

[Woven Sample]

[Mat Sample]

[Mix Sample]

COMPARATIVE COST ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND & COST MODELS
Bentley Baths have been using E-Glass 1.5oz fiberglass mat and polyester resin for the production of their bath tubs. This is a very common composite mixture in the industry and is a quick and rather cost effective method of production. At this point in time Bentley Baths are using a wet lay-up process. There are certainly more efficient production methods; however the ultimate trade-off is production cost versus final profit. Presumably, at their current production rate of approximately 20 bath tubs per month, wet layup is sufficient and we will be providing a cost comparison based on combinations of different reinforcement materials and the amount of resin used. The goal of Bentley Baths is to produce the most durable and highest quality bathtub at the lowest production cost. Considering the time span of this research, samples were made in contrast to the current composition used by Bentley baths to match the thickness. These results are an elementary reference and shall be interpreted and used to further experiment with lay ups and their results. Three test samples were made. The first is a sample based on the thickness of material at the floor board and seat, as these areas will see the most fatigue and deflection in

their lifetime. For cost analysis the final weights of the fabrics and resins are used and
will be compared by percentage with reference to the original. The original sample consists of 7 layers of E-Glass fiberglass mat and polyester resin. The second sample is 1 layer of 1.5oz mat, and 15 layers of .94oz twill woven E-glass fabric. The Third sample is 2 layers of woven and 6 layers of mat. All Mat (Current) $0.01 N/A $0.04 N/A $0.05 N/A 20.55% N/A 18.38KSI N/A 1 Mat / 15 Woven $0.08 450% $0.01 -63% $0.09 75% 6.81% -67% 35.99KSI 96% 6 Mat/ 2 Woven $0.02 57% $0.03 -24% $0.05 -2% 16.40% -20% 25.17KSI 37%

Fiber $/[in2] % Difference in Cost Resin $/[in2] % Difference in Cost Composite Cost % Difference in Cost Fatigue Deflection % Difference in Deflection Stress to Failure % Difference Stress

COMPARATIVE COST ANALYSIS (CONTINUED)

COST SAVING POTENTIALS
As seen in the chart, the cost varies from layup to layup and in some areas cost is increased, while in others decreased. The sample consisting of (1 mat layer and 15 woven) layers comes in with the highest cost at $.091 per square inch, followed by the all Mat layup at $.052, (6 Mat and 2 Woven) at $.051.

Since only 3 samples were made, outliers must be strongly considered. The data found shows that at nearly identical cost, the mixture of 6 Mat and 2 Woven layers surpasses the original layup of 7 mat layers quite well with respect to cost. The samples tested went through 7500 cycles to test fatigue life, and deflection is listed as a difference from cycle 1 to cycle 7500. The (6m2w) layup had an impressively higher resistance to fatigue, at 20% less than the (7m). Its stress to failure was also an impressive 37% higher than (7m).

This brings us to look at the sample consisting of (1m15w). The fabric cost is 450% higher than all mat, however since fabric uses far less resin, there is a 63% reduction in cost of resin. Resin is also the more expensive component, therefore when combined, the total cost of (1m15w) is 75% greater than (7m). Woven fabrics are stiffer than mats, however they consist of less resin, which introduces more flexibility. The deflection from cycle 1 to 7500 is 67% less than (7m) and the Stress to failure is an incredible 96% higher than all mat. At this point however, even with the impressive results, it is difficult to justify the +75% cost of (1m15w) as it yields little improvement over the (6m2w) with respect to the requirements of a bath tub. It may be justifiable however if a linear relationship is assumed between layers and stress qualities. Here

we can see the possible reduction in cost while maintaining the standards of the
original and currently used all mat layup. Given are a couple of many possible combinations to achieve a very close Stress to failure value. The approximate stress each layer of Mat withholds is 2.62KSI, each woven layer is at 2.22KSI. To our surprise, the woven fabric is only a bit weaker at just half the thickness. Since the original layup is all Mat and in total held up to 18.38KSI, this becomes our reference goal.

COMPARATIVE COST ANALYSIS (CONTINUED)

COST SAVING POTENTIALS (CONTINUED)
7 Layer Mat(Current) 18.38KSI 1 Mat 15 Woven 35.99KSI 96% 6 Mat 2 Woven 25.17KSI 37%

Stress to Failure % Difference Stress

Possible Composition

1 Mat 7 Woven 18.38KSI -1.20% $0.05 -9.60%

5 Mat 2 Woven 18.16KSI -4.60% $0.05 -19%

Stress to Failure Percent Difference Stress New Cost (Reinforcement+Resin) New Cost Percent Difference

Seen here is that while maintaining a very close stress to failure value, we can actually use far less woven fabric for a combination of (1m7w) and in the end save 9.6%. Another alternative is (5m2w), which provides a 19% cost reduction.

As mentioned above, we did not quite see a linear relationship between transverse stiffness and the amount of layers used. With that considered and the data seen earlier, the cost of a majorly woven fabric composite is not the best value for a bath tub even though it yields the greatest stress to failure and fatigue values in this case. For a product such as the bath tub, fatigue life is most important along with stiffness to provide a solid feeling product. The 5mat 2 woven layer composite is a great balance between cost, stiffness, and fatigue life. Since a bath tub will rarely be loaded

to a point of failure, we recommend using the (5m2w) layup. Our layup of (6m2w)
surpassed our expectations and we believe the layup order of

[M/M/M/W/M/M/M/W] helped tremendously with fatigue life due to being imbedded in the middle of the layup and on the outside, providing an allowable amount of flex and in the end, less deflection. Among cost benefits, we believe a bathtub with a woven backing also appears to be of much higher build quality and can be used as a selling point.

CONCLUSIONS
We learned a great deal with regard many aspects of composite engineering on this project, and it was a singular honor to assist in the development of Bentley Baths new venture, and would like to thank George and Edgar who provided invaluable assistance to us along the way.

MATERIALS AND COSTS

The material properties of the three different GFRP composites we tested showed that there is much that could be done with regard to mixing the material types to determine the most cost effective and strongest available composition. These results provide a foundation of research in this area, and while not complete, they certainly demonstrate that savings in labor, resin and reinforcement material can be had without sacrificing, and possibly even improving build quality.

DIMENSIONAL DRAWINGS / 3-D MODELING

Having accurate drawings for extremely complex shapes like this would be invaluable, and so though we have generated drawing that are likely adequate for estimation purposed and installation, we recommend having the tub laser scanned or measured by a coordinate measuring machine to ensure high accuracy, especially if high volume production machinery were to come into play.

FEA ANALYSIS
The analysis demonstrated that the design foundation is very strong and will likely withstand the rigors for which it was intended. More accurate measurements may provide more insight, though at present the smoothly curved shapes of the tub seem to have shed stress very well, and allowed for a more or less equal dispersion of both stress and deflection.

http://www.mscd.edu/et/