You are on page 1of 28

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. The team considered different design concepts based on
research and customer input. The top three design concepts were scored based on a weighted
analytical hierarchy process and the best design was chosen. The team has prototyped and tested
the final design which is now ready for mass manufacture. 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 ------------- 11
4.6 Fabrication Processes for Mass Production --------------------------------------- 11
4.7 Industrial Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
4.8 Safety ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
4.9 Actual Construction of Beta Prototype --------------------------------------------- 12
5. Testing --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13
5.1 Test Procedure and Plan -------------------------------------------------------------- 13
5.2 Test Results and Discussion of Results -------------------------------------------- 13
6. Conclusion and Recommendations ---------------------------------------------------------- 14
7. References --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16
8. Appendices -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17
a. Project Management ------------------------------------------------------------------ 17
3

b. Theoretical Analysis ------------------------------------------------------------------ 18
c. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) ----------------------------------------------- 19
d. Concept Selection Matrix ------------------------------------------------------------ 20
e. Generator Performance Data -------------------------------------------------------- 21
f. Final Theoretical Analysis ----------------------------------------------------------- 22
g. Detailed Drawings -------------------------------------------------------------------- 23
h. Nozzle/Gear Test Data --------------------------------------------------------------- 27
i. Attestation of Work ------------------------------------------------------------------- 28

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 so 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 and the flow rate of water 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 and 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 2, showed that performance,
durability/ reliability and manufacturability were most important. The full AHP can be seen in
Appendix C.
6


Figure 2: AHP Results
3) Concept Development:

3.1 External Search:
The team compiled research to identify similar products. The Sylvania LED Ecolight converts
incoming water pressure into electrical power used 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 [2].

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

The team found patent US7919877B2 published on April 5
th
, 2011 relating to the faucet
generator. This design incoperates a rotor vane consisting of rotor blades, a magnet, a coil, and a
plurality nozzles to generate power. This invention makes the faucet generator small, efficient,
and reduces the flow impingment by the rotor blades [4].

3.2 Problem Decomposition
The problem was broken into four, smaller sub-problems so that smaller design issues could be
resolved. As seen in Figure 3, these sub-problems include: the inlet, turbine design and
waterproofing the generator. Each sub-
problem was then broken down into design
specifications that needed addressing. The
inlet was deconstructed into connection,
increasing velocity and position of flow.
Turbine design included ease of spin and
the ability to transmit torque to the
Figure 3: Black Box Model
7

Figure 4: Tri-Turbine Design
generator. Waterproofing the generator 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 voltage 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. However, this also increases torque required to spin the generator shaft. If the
angular speed of 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 fails, the device can still function properly.
However, the payoff for this design is its cost, and
complexity. Transferring energy from three turbines would
require three generators consequently increasing total cost
dramatically. If only one generator is used, a complex gear
8

Figure 5: Single-Turbine Design

system would be required to transfer energy to the generator;
resulting in a reduction in manufacturability and an increase
in cost.

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 damaging the generator increasing the lifespan of the
device. Compared to the tri-turbine design, this design is
small and inexpensive to manufacture. However if the turbine
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, the turbine will rotate in a direction perpendicular to the water flow. By changing the
design of the turbine the torque generated can be increased. Because of the 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.

Figure 6: Perpendicular-Turbine Design
9

3.4 Concept Selection:
The team used a weighted design matrix to decide on the final design. Each design was scored
from 1 to 5 in terms of the specifications chosen in section 3.2. 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 report, the design has changed from a box shape with a large housing incorporating
a round housing allowing less water to collect inside the 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 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
Figure 8: Components of the System
10

will include a 3/8-18 NPT 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 Figure 9. Individual drawings to show dimensions
and details of parts can be seen in Appendix G.
4.4 Final Theoretical Analysis:
A 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 was calculated as well as the
torque produced by this force. Once the torque was known, the angular velocity of the turbine
can be calculated. From this analysis, the angular velocity was found to be 72.96 rad/s allowing
the generator to 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. The full
analysis can be seen in appendix F.

Figure 9: Solid View Assembly
11

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
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 viewing of internal workings [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 user [6].
4.6 Fabrication Process for mass production
The housing, walls and turbine 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
generator 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. The housing is transparent allowing
the user to see the internal mechanisms at work and is pleasing to the eye. All moving parts are
enclosed in housing, preventing the user from touching a component moving at 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.
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 have 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 ULs engineer will inform the company if the product meets the requirements
for the certification. A formal report will be given by ULs engineer based on the test result [9].

12

Figure 10: Turbine and Gear
connected to shaft
4.9 Actual Construction Process of Beta Prototype
Construction started with the intent of 3-D printing the shell that holds the
turbine and adapters together. However, due to the printers being out of
service, the team had to redesign the prototype with different materials.
The housing was built by laser cutting the shapes out of pieces of acrylic
and gluing them together with acrylic weld glue. The shaft was cut to size
using a band saw capable of cutting brass. The turbine and gears were
then superglued to their respective shafts to prevent slip during use, seen
in Figure 10. The inlet nozzle was printed using the MakerBot and then
sanded so it would fit inside the inlet adapter as seen in figure 11.
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 back
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 12.

Figure 11: Nozzle
Figure 12: Completed Prototype
13

5) Testing

5.1 Test Procedure and Plan

The team ran tests on the prototype to measure the angular speed of the generator shaft which
helped give an accurate prediction of the power output of the system. This test also helped the
team fine tune the design to acquire optimal performance during use. The team also ran a test
using different turbine designs and observed how the shape of turbine blades affects angular
speed of the shaft. From this the team determined which turbine design best converted the water
force into torque. The housing was then assembled around the shaft and the output voltage of the
generator was measured while the assembly was connected to a faucet. The voltage out with un-
nozzled flow, nozzled flow, and different gear ratios with and without a nozzle was also tested 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 needed a stopwatch, small weights and a
voltmeter. The voltmeter is connected to the generator to measure the output voltage over a 10
ohm resister.

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 lift a weight to a height of 23 cm.
After a few trials with the straight-blade design the team switched to the curved-blade turbine.
The design with a curved blade pulled weights up a small, but noticeable amount of time faster.

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. 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 gear in place on
14

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
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 76.2% of the inlet flow rate,
meeting the customer need.

6) Conclusion and Recommendations:
This product was designed to appeal to the average American household by being 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 acrylic, the inner mechanisms can be seen working. The
device is reliable and self-contained giving it the potential to last several years and will cost
under $50. The product can be easily assembled from inexpensive and easily manufactured parts.
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.
With more time and resources, group Ds faucet generator could be improved further to compete
with its competitors. The shell could be made with two separate faces which could be molded
and then glued together. This will not only make mass production easier, but also all of the parts
can be manufactured to lock in place ensuring proper alignment quickly. Less clearance could be
given in the shell for the turbine to spin forcing more of the water out and preventing flooding in
the device. During the alpha and beta prototype phase, acrylic was used heavily since it was
freely available and could be easily cut on the laser cutter. In a full scale production, better
materials could be used that would be more reliable and easily manufactured. After the upgrades
to the prototype are made, the economic viability of this design will improve greatly. Many parts
can be inexpensively produced using a molding process and an assembly line to assemble the
parts quickly and efficiently.
From this project, group D learned the difficulty in designing and manufacturing a new product.
At first we underestimated the time that would be needed to create a working prototype. A lot of
15

time was spent both in the learning factory making the parts of the products and in the computer
lab designing and fixing failures so that the product would meet the requirements.

16

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 Laboratories. 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/

17

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


18

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


19

Appendix C: Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP):



20

Appendix D: Concept Selection Matrix



21

Appendix E: Generator Performance Data

= Torque
= Efficiency

22

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


23

Appendix G: Detailed Drawings

24

25

26


27

Appendix H: Nozzle/Gear Test Data
Nozzle:

Diameter
In (in)
Diameter Out
(in)
Voltage 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



28

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. I also helped write and edit this
proposal. I composed the CAD drawings for the 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: May 6, 2014

Member name printed: Jack Wise Signature:

Member name printed: Garrett Rowe Signature:

Member name printed: Jinghuan Tang Signature: