Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Members: Ryan Foringer John Mill Curtis Williamson Stephen Heisler Customer Needs Functional decomposition Project Plan System Architecture PFD Aqueous and Surfactant Tank Oil Tank CIP Emulsion Reactor Purifier Coater System Architecture P&ID System Architecture Equation Overall Reaction: aS aq bOl cEaq Molar Balance: dnS nS t 0 nS t tf a1 dt dnO nO t 0 nO t tf b1 dt dnE nE t 0 nE t tf c1 dt “S” denotes Surfactant “O” denotes Oil “E” denotes Emulsion “a,b,c” parameters denote the stoichiometric values Risk Assessment ID Risk Item Describe the risk briefly 1 2 3 4 5 Chemicals don't mix Chemicals don't flow properly Chemicals don't form emulsion Mixing device doesn't function Testing Facilities Not available TECHNICAL RISK ASSESSMENT Effect Cause Likelihood Severity Importance Action to Minimize Risk What is the effect on What action(s) will you take any or all of the (and by when) to prevent, project deliverables if reduce the impact of, or the cause actually What are the possible causes transfer the risk of this happens of this risk L*S occurring Project is not possible, Surfactant not added, agitator customer needs not not working, materials not met compatible Project is not possible, customer needs not met valves not opened correctly Project is not possible, customer needs not incompatible chemical met combinations Project is not possible, Incorrect Mixing configuration, customer needs not shear too much for blade to met handle, no power Cannot test chemical combinations, process configurations closed, booked 1 1 1 1 2 Owner Who is responsible for following through on mitigation? 3 Prevent; ensure compatibility of chemicals, Ensure 3 functionality of agitator Ryan 3 Reduce: ensure functionality 3 of valves Stephen 3 Prevent; ensure compatibility 3 of chemicals Curtis 3 Prevent; thorough testing/analysis of mixing 3 options John 2 Prevent; schedule testing ahead of time to ensure 4 availability John Engineering Specifications Surfactant HLB value Cost per Unit MW (g/mol) Density (g/mL) Cocamide MEA 13.5 SLS 40 SDS Laureth 4 9.7 PEG-60 Almond Glyceride 15 Oil HLB value Cost per Unit MW (g/mol) Density (g/mL) C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate 13 Olive Oil 7 ODE Avacado Oil 7 Specification Source Importance Units Initial Value Computed Value Design Value Oil Tank ? 3 L 0.5 Oil Inlet ? 2 cm 2 Oil ? 1 L 0.2 Aqueous Tank ? 3 L 2 Aqueous Inlet ? 3 cm 4 Water ? 1 L 1 Surfactant ? 1 mg 100 Reactor ? 1 L 2 Reactore Outlet ? 2 cm 4 - Status Pough Charts Measure Particle Size Description Criteria weight Cost 3 Safety 1 Complexity 2 Accuracy/Precision 3 In-line Capability 3 Easy to Maintain 1 + Net Score Tyndall Effect with Lasers Optical Microscope SEM/TEM Microscope Calibrated Shear Rate Design 1 Design 2 Design 3 Design 4 1 0 -1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 0 -1 1 7 4 3 11 3 3 9 2 4 1 -6 9 Pough Charts Method of Mixing Description Criteria weight Cost 3 Safety 1 Complexity 2 Accuracy/Precision 3 Easy to Maintain 1 + Net Score Shear Mixer Design 1 -1 0 0 0 1 1 3 -2 Sonicator Magnetic Stirrer Propeller Blade Homogenizer Design 2 Design 3 Design 4 Design 5 -1 1 0 -1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 -1 1 -1 0 1 -1 0 1 -1 4 6 4 3 3 3 0 6 1 3 4 -3 Pough Charts Flow Control Description Criteria Cost Safety Complexity Easy to Maintain + Net Score weight 3 1 2 1 Gravity Feed Hand Pump Electric Pump Pressurized Tanks Design 1 Design 2 Design 3 Design 4 1 1 1 -1 1 1 1 -1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 0 0 7 6 6 0 0 1 0 6 7 5 6 -6