Redd TeamDesign Project Review
Cailin Penberthy, Nora Sedgwick, Parker Burton, Ruth Reeber, Ujjwal Shrestha
NeedsResearch salmon habitat to gain
an understanding of specifications
Optimize incubator design (streamside and collapsible in-stream)
Needs (Cont.)Create a model to test the designIncorporate project learning into
designIncrease egg survival rate
Project Learning: ResearchInterviewsExisting incubatorsGeneral research: biological
needs of salmon and troutMaterials
Project Learning: ProcessResearch salmon and
obtain requirements from client
Visit with Scott (Cold Water Research
Laboratory)
Create multiple models
Simulate models in SolidWorks
Build and test best design
SpecificationsTemperature 37.4 to 48.2 °FDissolved Oxygen 8ppm or higherTurbidity Less than 200 NTUpH 7 to 8Velocity Range 0.2 to 0.79 ft/sDepth 0.5 to 0.9 ftTurbulence Less than 4 ft-lb/ft3/sEnvironmental Concerns No material leaching or contaminationUse Duration
Streamside: year-long usageIn-stream: April to November
Life of Product 2+ years
MobilityStreamside: minimum weight, handles for carryingIn-stream: transportable in small plane
Visibility Camouflaged to reduce human interference and preserve natural beauty
ConstraintsEasy to reconstruct (high school
students)Minimal cost and high qualityDesign/build scheduleUsable for both stream water and
river water usage
Deliverables2 models2 streamside units2 collapsible in-stream units
Design OptionsMain variable: internal divider
arrangement◦Single channel vs. dual-channel◦Straight vs. slanted◦Short vs. long dividers
Comparison using SolidWorks FlowXpress◦10 cubic inches per second◦Same divider height, thickness◦Same base part
Long dividers
Mid-length dividers
Short dividers
Mix of short and long dividers
Two-channel: straight
Two-channel: slanted
Single-channel: slanted
Flow Model Comparison
Best TwoLong dividers Mixed-length dividers
Pros• Fairly uniform velocity• Similar to existing design
(known to work)Cons• Little room for fish to
congregate• Flow has little variation
Pros• Regions of varied flow• Consistent flow in lower
region
Cons• Stagnation regions may
impede oxygenation, collect debris
Combined Design
Advantages• Long dividers provide consistent flow through WV boxes• Short divider creates a space for fish to congregate before
exiting• Stagnation area is downstream of WV boxes: oxygenation less
of a problem
Selected Design
Combined Design
Potential problems• Stagnation area may collect debris and sediment• Flow may be too uniform in beginning section: may not
simulate stream well
Selected Design (Cont.)
Selected Design (cont.)
Placement of 24 Whitlock-Vibert boxes
Model TestingInitial testing on the model showed even at the pump’s
maximum flow rate and added gravitational head the model was not able to achieve the desired velocity within the model. Added gravitational head was one foot. A larger pump is needed, once the target velocity .2 ft/s is achieved dissolved oxygen, filter ability, and basic durability testing will commence. Pump
ConditionVelocity
(ft/s)½ Rate .01
Full .01½ Rate
with Added Head
.03
Full with Added Head
.05
Project CostsStream-side Model
Prices estimated from materials purchased for the models
Material Projected CostAcrylic Sheeting (23ft2) $76.59Silicon Caulking (x3 tubes) $18.87Filtration System $20.97U-Channel Wall Attachments $120.00PVC Couplings (x2) $5.00Whitlock-Vibert Boxes (x25) $93.75Refrigerator $0.00 (Donation – Howard
Hughes)Total $335.18
Project ScheduleDate Work To Be CompletedDecember 3 Final Design CompletedJanuary 21 Build Selected DesignFebruary 25 Design Testing and ModificationsMarch 4 In-stream ModelApril 1 Project CompletionApril 8 Finish PresentationApril 15 Finish Poster and Polish PresentationApril 26 Design Expo
Top Related