FINAL REPORT

Water Powered Faucet Light

Team D:
Jack Wise
Jinghuan Tang
Garrett Rowe

6 May 2014
Executive Summary
Our design team was tasked with creating an attachment to a typical household faucet
that could generate electric power. After discussing the information found through research and
customer input, our team considered different design concepts. Out of many possible designs,
three were chosen. The concepts were then scored based on a weighted analytical hierarchy
process, and the best design was chosen. The team is now prototyping the final design. The
design concept is both plausible and profitable based on the research and calculations made by
the team.
2


Table of Contents:
Executive Summary ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1
1. Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
1.1 Problem Statement ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
1.2 Background Information --------------------------------------------------------------- 4
1.3 Project Planning ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
2. Customer Needs and Specifications ----------------------------------------------------------- 5
2.1 Gathering Customer Input ------------------------------------------------------------- 5
2.2 Weighting Customer Needs ----------------------------------------------------------- 5
3. Concept Development --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6
3.1 External Search -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6
3.2 Problem Decomposition ---------------------------------------------------------------- 6
3.3 Concept Generation --------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
3.4 Concept Selection ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 9
4. Detailed Design ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9
4.1 Modifications to Proposal Sections --------------------------------------------------- 9
4.2 Overall Descriptions -------------------------------------------------------------------- 9
4.3 Detailed Drawings -------------------------------------------------------------------- 10
4.4 Final Theoretical Analysis ----------------------------------------------------------- 10
4.5 Component and Material Selection Process for Mass Production ------------- 10
4.6 Fabrication Processes for Mass Production --------------------------------------- 11
4.7 Industrial Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
4.8 Safety ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
5. Testing --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12
5.1 Test Procedure and Plan -------------------------------------------------------------- 12
6. Conclusion -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12
7. References --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13
8. Appendices -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14
a. Project Management ------------------------------------------------------------------ 14
3

b. Theoretical Analysis ------------------------------------------------------------------ 15
c. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) ----------------------------------------------- 16
d. Concept Selection Matrix ------------------------------------------------------------ 17
e. Generator Performance Data -------------------------------------------------------- 18
f. Final Theoretical Analysis ----------------------------------------------------------- 19
g. Detailed Drawings -------------------------------------------------------------------- 20
h. Attestation of Work ------------------------------------------------------------------- 24

4

1. Introduction:

1.1 Problem Statement:
Team D was assigned the task of designing and prototyping a water powered generator that
attaches to a common home faucet to convert water power into electric power used to operate an
attachment. A working prototype will be built that must be inexpensive, easy to use, attractive,
and that demonstrates how the actual product will perform in a real environment. The product
must be designed to a list of constraints listed in section 2. This product is designed to not restrict
the customers view while they are using the faucet. . With over 114,800,000 households in
America, there could be a strong need for a product like this [1]. With a 5% customer interest in
the product; there is a market potential for over 5,740,000 units sold.

1.2 Background Information:
Group D runs a company that focuses on producing water turbines for micro-hydropower
systems of 100Kw or less, generally used by homeowners, farmers and ranchers. The company
focuses on renewable energy for typical households by using water to power the systems. By
helping to cut down unnecessarily wasted energy, with alternative energy means, Group Ds
company helps provide appliances with a more ecofriendly initiative. Customers will want this
product because it will help with household power consumption. The market for renewable
energy sources is ever growing and hydroelectric energy is a leading pioneer in this field and
more companies will be investing in the future.

1.3 Project Planning:
The team created a functional project plan, including six steps: planning, concept development,
system level design, detail design, testing and production. Planning was started by constructing a
Gantt chart, seen in Appendix A. The chart is a schedule of the next three months including all of
the necessary steps in the design process. . The team identified all customer needs, and
completed external research. Then engineering specifications could be assigned. . . Using
customer needs, engineering specifications and multiple design concepts a final design was
selected. This design will be prototyped and tested to eliminate problems.

5


2) Customer Needs and Specifications:

2.1 Identification of Customer Needs:
The following customer needs were identified: high performance, low cost, attractive appearance,
easy and secure installation, vertically downward discharge, and minimal effect on flow rate..
Also, the total length of the whole device should be less than four inches, the device must be
self-contained, must function reliably and repeatedly in a wet environment, and have visible
internal workings.

2.2 Design Specification:
Considering the customer needs listed above, design specifications were developed. The
specifications are: performance, cost, appearance, size, durability, reliability, simplicity and
manufacturability. Engineering specifications were related to the customer needs in a QFD
shown in figure 1 below.

Figure 1: QFD Results
The device must generate at least 1.5V over a 10 Ohm resistor. The device may not add anything
into the water; the flow rate of water during use must be at least 50% of the original flow rate.
The total cost of the product must not exceed $50. The product must attach to a standard faucet.
The internal workings must be visible. The total length of the product must not exceed four
inches. The team used an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to weigh the importance of the
specifications against each other. The results from the AHP, displayed in Figure 1, showed that
performance, durability/ reliability and manufacturability were the most important specifications.
The full AHP can be seen in Appendix C.
6



Figure 2: AHP Results
3) Concept Development:

3.1 External Search:
Research was done to find competitors products similar to the fixture being designed. The
Sylvania LED Ecolight was found as a reference [ 2]. The Sylvania LED Ecolight simply
converts incoming water pressure into electrical power, and uses the generated power to
illuminate a ring of LED lights. A built-in sensor changes the color of the LEDs when the water
temperature changes, showing customers an approximate temperature before touching the water.

Another product that utilizes the energy from water is the TOTO EcoPower faucet [3]. This
device can store energy in a rechargeable battery and use this energy to supplya sensor system in
the faucet. Surplus energy from the water is stored in the battery in the system which is capable
of lasting up to 20 years.

The team found a patent related to the faucet generator including a rotor vane consisting of rotor
blades, a magnet, a coil, and a plurality nozzles to generate power [4]. The publication date is
Apr 5, 2011, with the publication number US7919877 B2. This invention made the faucet
generator small and efficient, and reduced the flow impingment by the rotor blades.

3.2 Problem Decomposition
The team broke the problem into four, smaller sub-problems so they could easily resolve smaller
design issues. These sub-problems include: the inlet, turbine design and waterproofing the
generator. Each sub-problem was then broken down into design specifications that needed to be
addressed. The inlet was broken down into connection, increasing velocity and position of flow.
Turbine design included ease of spin and
the ability to transmit torque to the
generator. Waterproofing the generator
Figure 3: Black Box Model
7

was broken down into connecting to the turbine, no rotational restriction and waterproof housing
design.

3.3 Concept Generation:
The team discussed possible solutions for each sub-problem. For the inlet, a nozzle could be used
to increase the speed of the water, increasing the force on the blades of the turbine thus
increasing the torque. This nozzle could also be used to redirect the flow towards the turbine if it
is not placed directly below the flow. However, if non-influenced flow provides adequate torque
on the turbine a nozzle would not be necessary.

To solve problems with the turbine, different designs were proposed. The turbine could be
designed with flat blades to take the full impact of the water when horizontal, cupped blades
which would also catch water as it spun or curved blades which would catch energy during spin. .

To overcome problems with waterproofing the generator the team reviewed several designs. One
idea is to design the turbine on one side of the stream and gear the shaft around an inside shell to
the generator far from the water. This design would prevent water from reaching the generator
but many gears would have to be implemented and increasing the size of the final product.
Another idea was to have the turbine and generator in separate housings next to each other with a
hole for the spindle extension to reach the turbine. This design would require no gears but may
let water in on account of the generators close proximity to the stream itself. Both of these
designs would not limit rotation to the generators spindle extension.

To transfer energy from the turbine to the generator the turbine could be geared to increase
rotation speed if more torque was required. The team could choose from a variety of different
gears based on space allowed and availability of gears. If gears were needed the spur gear design
would work best. If the torque imposed on the generator shaft is adequate gears will not be
needed.

Of the many ideas that were generated, three designs were investigated more thoroughly. The
first of these was design 1, Tri-turbine, which can be seen in figure 4. This design utilized three
separate turbines in the stream rather than one giving it the ability to generate larger amounts of
energy. Having three turbines also increases this designs reliability, even if one turbine is broken,
the device can still function properly. However, the payoff for this design is its cost, and
complexity. Transfer energy from three turbines, three generators are required, this will increase
total cost dramatically. If only one generator is used, a complex gear system would be required to
transfer all the torque to the generator; resulting in a reduction in manufacturability and an
increase in cost.

8







Figure 4: Tri-Turbine Design
Design 2, single-turbine, is a simple and efficient design with
one turbine that rotates with the flow of water. The housing
separates the turbine from the generator preventing water
from accessing the generator. This will keep the generator
from being water damaged and increase the lifespan of the
device. This design is small and inexpensive to manufacture
compared to the tri-turbine design. A downside to this design
is that it doesnt have a backup turbine, which means if the
turbine breaks or fails; the product will be unusable. This
design can be seen in figure 5.

Design 3, Perpendicular-turbine, can be seen in figure 6. It is
similar to the single turbine design; however, instead of having a
turbine that rotates in direction parallel to the flow of water, the
turbine will rotate in a direction perpendicular to the water flow.
By changing the design of the turbine the torque generated by the
turbine can be increased. Because of the change in turbine design
this design can be easily made less than four inches long.
However, since the turbine is rotating perpendicular to the flow of
water, a gear system will have to be implemented to transfer the
energy to the generator. Also, due to the changed turbine blades,
the water could splash more dramatically requiring more thought
in the waterproofing process.



3.4 Concept Selection:
To decide on a final design the team used a weighted design matrix. Each design was scored
from 1 to 5 against the other designs in terms of the design specifications chosen in section 3.2.
Figure 6: Perpendicular-Turbine Design
Figure 5: Single-Turbine Design
9

Also according to the AHP, each specification is given a weight, the most important criterion
being performance, weighing 18.83%, and least important criterion, size, weighing only 6.5%. .
The results can be seen in figure 6 below. The full weighted design matrix can be seen in
Appendix D.

Figure 7: Concept Selection Results
The single-turbine design will be developed. This design has the most potential and scored the
highest in the AHP. The Tri-Turbine and Perpendicular Turbine designs will be used as backup
designs if necessary.
4) Detailed Design:
4.1 Modifications to Proposal Section

Since the last proposalreport, the design of the system has changed . The previous design was
from a box shape with a large housing. The new design incorporatinges a round housing which
will have less space for allowing less water to collect inside the turbine housing. Another change
in the design was to house the generator
separately from the turbine to better
waterproof the generator. A more thorough
theoretical analysis has also been performed
on the system. Due to losses in the system, we
cannot run at the speed predicted. A gearing
system will be implemented to help
compensate for these losses but will also add
losses as well due to the increase in torque
needed to turn the shaft. Also because some
due dates were pushed back, the schedule
changed.
4.2 Overall Description:
The team developed a simple design that
would will be easy to manufacture but still
meet the cost and power requirements. An
exploded view of the device can be seen in Figure 8. The device will include a 3/8-18 NPT
Figure 8: Components of the System
10

adapter to attach to a faucet. The water will flow through the adaptor and onto the blades of the
rotor. The force introduced from the water will push the blades down and in turn, spin the rotor.
The rotor is connected to the generator using a shaft which will be attached to both the blades
and the shaft of the generator to insure no slipping occurs. As the blades spin the shaft extension
will also spin creating electricity. The electricity will be used to power a small LED light
attachment. The generator and the blades will be separated by an acrylic wall so that no water
will be able to get to the generator. The entire system will be housed in a clear acrylic case
allowing the user to view the internal mechanisms during use. The dimensions of the assembly
will be 3.00 inches long, 3.00 inches wide and 3.00 inches thick. The housing will be D shaped
and have threaded adapters in the inlet and outlet so that other attachments, like a hose, can be
placed on the end of the housing. . The walls of the assembly will be sealed to the shell to
prevent any leakage. If any water does leak out there will be a shield in the generator hood to
catch the water so it cannot reach the generator.
4.3 Detailed Drawings
The final assembly will consist of a shell around the
turbine, walls to hold the turbine in, and a shaft to
transfer angular speed to the generator, the generator,
and a hood over the generator to hold it in place. A
solid model of the predicted appearance can be seen
in Ffigure 9. Individual drawings to show dimensions
and details of parts can be seen in Appendix G.
4.4 Final Theoretical Analysis:
TA theoretical analysis was performed on the system to predict performance during use. From
the flow rate found during the proposal phase of development the speed of water when it hits the
turbine blade was calculated. From here the force on the blade could bewas calculated as well as
the torque produced by this force. Once the torque was known, the angular velocity of the turbine
could can be calculated. From this analysis, the angular velocity was found to be 72.96 rad/s
allowing the generator to return produce approximately 0.5 V. So to ensure that the system will
produce at least 1.5 V during use the generator shaft and turbine shaft will be geared at a 4:1
ratio. This will increase the speed of the generator shaft and overshoot the voltage requirement;
however there will also be losses due to the increased torque of the gear. By designing with a
higher gear ratio it will account for the loss due to torque and still produce a voltage of at least
1.5 V. This The full analysis can be seen in appendix F.
4.5 Component and Material Selection Process for Mass Production
The device has a total of eight components. The housing is made by joining two walls and a shell
together with acrylic glue. The turbine is connected to the generator by a brass shaft, and covered
Figure 99: Solid View Assembly
11

by a PVC case. The turbine and housing are cut from acrylic. Acrylic was used for most of the
device because it is light, inexpensive and easily cut to shape. The material is waterproof and
translucent allowing for visualization viewing of internal workings while providing a strong,
waterproof build [5]. The shaft is made of brass, because it is strong and corrosion resistant. The
hood that covers the generator will be made of PVC, a waterproof and inexpensive material.
PVC is also a good insulator, helping to prevent any unexpected electric shock to the
householder, making the device saferuser [6].
4.6 Fabrication Process for mass production
The housing, walls and turbine will will be cut with a laser cutter. The advantages of laser
cutting include a high level of precision, better edge quality than traditional machining process,
and less material deformation [7]. The shaft will be threaded through the walls, turbine and shell;
the walls will be glued to the shell so the turbine is completely enclosed in the housing. The
gGenerator will be connected to the shaft and the hood will be placed around it.
4.7 Industrial Design
The design of the product is simple and efficient. Having only eight components, the device is
easy to manufacture. The device is self-contained, needing no battery replacement and can be
easily attached to a faucet rendering the product easy to use. It has a simple design with no
unnecessary parts. The housing is transparent allowing the user to see the internal mechanisms at
work and the design has a simple design that is pleasing to the eye. A high level of safety has
also been built into the design. AllAny moving parts isare enclosed in housing, preventing the
user from touching something a component moving at a high speed. The electric component is
shielded to prevent water damage or shock and further enclosed in a PVC hood, which insulates
from electric shock in case of failure. Thus, the product is very safe.
4.8 Safety
To provide customers a reliable and safe product, it needs to meet certain certifications. UL
(Underwriters laboratories) certification is one of commonly accepted standards; it performs
safety tests and provides safety related certifications, validations and inspections [8]. It is also
one of several companies that has been approved by OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health
Administration). Obtaining a UL certification will show the customer that the product is safe.
The process of applying for a UL certification is started by filling out an online form, after the
submittal process is completed; a request will be send to a specific location for inspection. Once
the test is over, the project engineeringULs engineer will inform the company if the product
meets the requirements for the certification. A formal report will be given by the project
engineerULs engineer based on the test result [9].
4.9 Actual Construction Process of Beta Prototype
12

Construction started with the intent of 3-D printing the shell that holds the turbine and adapters.
However, due to the only accessible 3-D printers available being down for the entirety of
construction the team had to re-think materials to be used. The housing was built by laser cutting
the shapes out of pieces of acrylic and gluing them together with weld glue. The shaft was cut to
size using a band saw capable of cutting brass and then the laser cut, acrylic turbine was
superglued in place to prevent slip during use as can be seen in Figure . The inlet nozzle was
printed using the MakerBot and then sanded so it could fit inside the inlet adapter as seen in
figure . The gears were superglued to their respective shafts to prevent slip during use, seen in
figure . The components that hold the generator in place were redesigned after the detail design
report was written because the prototype was not generating enough power. Once gearing was
implemented the team redesigned the back of the device to guarantee no moving part was
exposed. This was done by laser cutting layers of acrylic to hold each gear and shaft until only
the butt end of the generator was exposed. These components were also weld glued together. The
back of the generator was then housed in an acrylic box composed of 5 laser cut pieces of acrylic,
glued together. The final assembled device can be seen, from front and back angles, in figure .
5) Testing

5.1 Test Procedure and Plan

The team will runran tests on the prototype to measure the angular speed of the generator shaft
which will helphelped give an accurate prediction of the power output of the system. . This test
will also helped the team fine tune the design to acquire optimal performance during use. The
team will also ranrun a test using different turbine designs and observed how the shape of turbine
blades affects angular speed of the shaft. From this the team can seedetermined which turbine
design best convertsed the water force into torque. Once the turbine shape is determined theThe
team will then assembled the housing around the shaft and measured the angular velocityoutput
voltage of the generator shaft while connected to a faucet. The team then tested the voltage out
with un-nozzled flow, nozzled flow, and different gear ratios with and without a nozzle to
determine the best combination for the design. The team also tested the outlet flow rate after the
design was finalized. To perform these tests the team neededs a stopwatch, small weights and a
voltmeter. The voltmeter can be is connected to the generator to measure the output voltage over
a 10 ohm resister.to give an estimate of output power.

5.2 Test Results and Discussion of Results

Results of Turbine Shape Tests:
The team ran this test on two shapes of turbine, one with flat blades and one of the same size
with slightly curved blades. To perform this test the team placed the turbine and shaft under a
stream of water and timed how long it took for the system to pull a weight up a height of 23 cm.
After a few trials with the straight-blade turbine the team switched to the curved-blade turbine.
13

The design with a curved blade pulled weights up a small, but noticeable amount of time faster.
The design with curved blades will be used.

Results of Nozzle Tests:
The team ran this test on three different sized nozzles to determine which would provide the
most force on the blades causing the fastest spin. Each nozzle was printed on the MakerBot and
was designed in a way that they were interchangeable. To perform this test, the team loaded a
nozzle into the inlet adapter on the device and connected it to the faucet. Then a 10 resister
was connected to the generator and the voltage out was measured with a voltmeter for each run.
Each nozzle was tested on full faucet flow for 30 seconds and the average voltage out measured
by the voltmeter was recorded for each run. Each nozzle was tested four times. After the
experiment it was clear that the nozzle that took the diameter from 0.30 in to 0.18 in was
providing the most force with an average of 1.13 V out. The full results from this experiment can
be seen in Appendix H.

Results of Gear Tests:
The team ran this test on four different gear ratios to determine which would provide the fastest
spin transferred to the generator shaft. To perform this test, the team placed each turbine in place
on their respective shaft and then the device was connected to the faucet. Then, a 10 resister
was connected to the generator and the voltage out was measured with a voltmeter for each run.
Each gear ratio was tested on full faucet flow for 30 seconds and the average voltage out
measured by the voltmeter was recorded for each run. Each gearing pair was tested four times.
After the experiment it was clear that the 3:1 gear ratio spun the generator shaft the fastest with
an average of 1.80 V out. The full results from this experiment can be seen in Appendix H.

Results of Flow Rate Test:
To perform this test, a bucket was placed under the faucet to be used and filled to a certain level
clearly marked inside the bucket. The team timed how long it took the faucet to fill the bucket to
this line and then connected the device. With the device connected, the time to fill the bucket
was observed and compared with the time without the device connected. The experiment found
that with the device attached to the faucet the outlet flow rate is 80% of the inlet flow rate.

6) Conclusion:
This product was designed to appeal to the average American household by being an ecofriendly
and inexpensive. It fulfils the customer needs in a simple and elegant design. The design is small
and attaches easily to an existing faucet. Water can easily be kept out of the generator housing
and when manufactured with translucent plastic, the inner mechanisms can be seen working.
from any angle. The device is reliable and self-contained giving it the potential to last several
years. It saves energy and will cost under $50. The product can be easily assembled from
14

inexpensive and easily manufactured parts. Testing will need to be completed in order to
optimize performance. Although there are existing patents for a faucet generator, this product
does not infringe on any of them given its unique design. The product is not only feasible but
marketable and with only a fraction of the potential market, this product stands to make a
substantial profit.


References:
[1] Total Number of U.S. Households - Statistic Brain. 2013 Statistic Brain Research Institute,
publishing as Statistic Brain. 2/28/2014, http://www.statisticbrain.com/u-s-household-
statistics/
[2] Sylvania Water-Powered Directional Showerhead and LED Light Combination Makes
Showering Safe and Energy Efficient (No Batteries or Wires). 2014 SMARTHOME
TM
.
2/29/13, http://www.smarthome.com/46214/Sylvania-LED-Ecolight-Water-Powered-
Shower-Light-72450/p.aspx
[3] Self Sustaining Faucets. 2013 TOTO USA, Inc. 2/29/14, http://www.totousa.com/Green
/Products/EcoPowerFaucets.aspx
[4] Faucet Generator, US 7919877 B2. 2012 IFI CLAIMS Patent Services. 3/1/14,
http://www.google.com/patents/US7919877
[5] Myer, Ezrin, Plastices failure guide: cause and prevention Hanser Verlag, 1996. ISBN 1-
56990-184-8, p. 168.
[6] Properties of PVC(polyvinyl chloride) sheet. 2012 Quingdao Jitai Plastic Machinery
Co.,Ltd. http://www.jt-extrudermachine.com/pvc_polyvinyl_chloride_sheet.htm
[7] Advantages of Laser Cutting 2014 LaserMicronics.
http://www.lasermicronics.com/services/laser-cutting/advantages.htm
[8] Underwriters Labratories. 2014 UL LLC. http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/
[9] Product Submittal Process FAQ. 2014 UL LLC.
http://www.ul.com/global/eng/pages/offerings/perspectives/newtoul/productsubmittalpro
cess/

15

Appendix A: Project Management

Jack Wise: Team Leader, Design Sketcher, Writer
Garrett Rowe: Team Recorder, Turbine Designer, CAD Artist, Writer
Jinghuan Tang: Team Researcher, Writer


16

Appendix B: Theoretical Analysis

Faucet Info Value Units Equation
Pressure
50 psi

344737 Pa

Flow Rate
1.8384 gal/min

1.16E-04 m^3/s

Power 38.98 W =Pressure*Flow Rate
Resistance 10 ohm

Voltage 19.995 V =
Cost of Energy 0.0896 $/kW

Energy
143928 J = Power*time
0.03998 kWhr

3.62E-04 kWhr/gal


Generator Info Value Units Equation
Radius 0.15 in

Height 80 in

Resistance 10 ohm

Torque * Nm = mass*radius*gravity
Rotation Speed * rad/s = height/(2*radius*time)
Mechanical
Power * W = torque*rotation speed
Electrical Power * W = voltage
2
/resistance
Efficiency * %
= Electrical Power/ Mechanical
Power
* Values shown in Appendix E: Generator Performance Data


17

Appendix C: Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP):



18

Appendix D: Concept Selection Matrix



19

Appendix E: Generator Performance Data

= Torque
= Efficiency

20

Appendix F: Final Theoretical Analysis
Symbol Value Equation
Diameter of inlet
inlet
0.68 in
Area of inlet A
inlet
1.97 in
2

Flow rate Q 424.67 in
3
/s
Power from faucet Power 39.98 W
Water velocity at inlet V
0
215.59 in/s

Time to hit turbine t 0.005768 s

Water velocity at turbine V 18.059 ft/s

Area of turbine blade A
blade
0.258 in
2

Water Pressure on turbine P 23.9 psi

Force on turbine F 6.17 lb

Torque T 4.85 inlb
Angular velocity of turbine w 72.96 rad/s

458.42 RPM
Predicted output voltage* V
out
0.4 V

Angular velocity after 4:1 gearing w
geared
291.84 rad/s
1833.68 RPM
Predicted output voltage* V
out,geared
1.8 V

*Values predicted from generator performance data


21

Appendix G: Detailed Drawings

22

23

24


25

Appendix H: Nozzle/Gear Test Data
Nozzle:

Diameter
In (in)
Diameter Out
(in)
Volatage Out (V)
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Average
none none 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.21
0.3 0.225 0.81 0.80 0.82 0.8 0.8075
0.3 0.18 1.15 1.11 1.13 1.12 1.1275
0.3 0.12 0.65 0.64 0.70 0.68 0.6675

Gears: (With Nozzle)

Gear Ratio
Voltage Out (V)

Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Average

5:1 0.41 0.39 0.34 0.4 0.385

2:1 1.11 1.15 1.13 1.14 1.1325

3:1 1.82 1.81 1.77 1.80 1.8

4:1 1.41 1.41 1.38 1.42 1.405



26

Appendix I: Attestation of Work

Jack Wise: I was the team leader on this project. I helped keep the team organized and on task
throughout the design process, and helped set deadlines for smaller work so we could be ahead
of schedule. I drew all of the sketches for the design ideas and helped with brainstorming these
ideas. I helped tackle problems in designs and tried to come up with ideas that have not been
seen before. I helped Jinghuan with research and calculations, and helped Garrett translate our
ideas into the CAD drawings. I also helped write and edit this proposal. I composed the CAD
drawings for the detail design report, wrote and edited it and performed the theoretical analyses
on the system. I also helped build the beta prototype.

Garrett Rowe: I designed the turbine assembly in solid works. I also was the recorder for the
group in charge of meeting minutes. I created different charts such as the Gantt chart with
Jinghuan. Also, I helped Jinghuan with calculations for the project. I helped Jack with the
concept development and the brainstorming phase of the project. I also read over the proposal
and made corrections to the grammar and added additional material as needed.

Jinghuan Tang: I did the external research about similar products and related patent. I also
created AHP chart and concept selection matrix with Garrett and Jack. I helped Garrett with the
Gantt chart. I did calculation with Garrett and Jack. I also participated in the concept generation
discussion. I write some parts of the proposal, and keep adding new material into it, and make
changes when necessary.










By signing this document we all attest that it provides an accurate representation of our
individual efforts in the completion of this work. Date: April 22, 2014

Member name printed: Jack Wise Signature:

Member name printed: Garrett Rowe Signature:

Member name printed: Jinghuan Tang Signature: