* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download SD II - EDGE
Survey
Document related concepts
Transcript
Ian Frank Matt Walter Jesse Steiner Luke Spencer Mike Celentano Nick Balducci Team Lead Chief Engineer Electrical Engineer Industrial Engineer Electrical Engineer Mechanical Engineer Sponsor: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency P3 Design Competition Grant Aiding Organizations: SOIL & H.O.P.E. Affordably provide clean, reliable, high-quality lighting Establish a relationship with a sponsoring organization for field testing and product feedback Market: People in developing nations without clean/healthy lighting Key High Level Customer Needs/Engineering Specs Low Purchase Cost Light Module Cost < $40 Power Module Cost < $160 Long Operation Time Storage Capacity @ 100 Lumens > 4hrs Battery Lifetime > 3 years Base Unit Lifetime > 10 Years Universal Applicability Useable Temperature 4.5°C-38°C Survives 3 meter drop Water Resistant to IPX Std. 3 Value Added in Local Economy >25% Bike Charging Leads Trainer Generator Power Module Box LED/Diffuser Plate Power Switch Tin/Aluminum Can Charging Jack Handle Sponsoring organizations identified and working connections established to test prototypes and get user feedback Alpha prototype construction complete Current power module design fails under high power loading Circuit failure necessitates altered design to work under all conditions Current light module functional and is capable of 0.8W operation LED driver limits output power and as such the desired light is not currently possible Field testing on hold until a working power module can be provided •Life Cycle assessment completed in SimaPro •Proposed LED lighting system consists of 1 light module and 1/20 of a power module •Proposed system has less than 3% of negative environmental effects of the currently used kerosene lamps •This is largely due to the refining, shipping, and burning of kerosene Given the state of the project, it has not been possible to prove the product’s compliance with all engineering specifications Two main areas were identified for testing Discharge duration – to determine the battery life per charge Light intensity and distribution Additional testing was done to: Characterize the power generator at various speeds Determine the operational temperature of the LED at maximum power Determine exterior temperature of light module Determine if the light module needs additional shock protection When used as a reading lamp (on the stand) the light provided by the alpha prototype light module follows the distribution below •Light close to the center of the lamp is more than sufficient for reading •Further out, the light is still better than current kerosene lamps but is not as useful as it could be •Light module was monitored throughout a complete discharge cycle. •Special interest was paid to the voltage supplied by the batteries and the power supplied to the LED •LED Driver requires 3.4 V for operation •System shuts down when batteries drop to 3.4 V •Power supplied remained fairly constant throughout the discharge cycle Specs met by component specs Useable temperature range (0-50)°C Battery lifetime (≥3 years) Base unit lifetime (≥10 years) Color of light (CRI=75) Light Temperature (5,000-10,000K) No combustion Scratch Resistant Recyclability by weight (>75%) Components meet ROHS Specs met through design Particulate Resistant (sealed unit) Hook-up time (DC Jack) Start time (instant elec. current) Local value added & simple manufacture process Most parts can easily be assembled in developing nations Light module weight (<3kg) Specs met through testing Storage capacity (13 hrs) Light distribution (10 lux) – NOT MET! Electrical shock (none) Surface Temperature (within 5°C of ambient) Specs met through material and projected production costs Light module cost Power module cost Proposed micro-business model provides waste-stream & life cycle management Specs not tested for but with plan in place Water Resistance Drop Test Charge Time Supplies/Material Budget: $3,767 Concept/Benchmarking Exp. $350 Prototype Materials Exp. $1,770 Total Expenses to Date: $2,120 Remaining Supplies and Material Budget: $1,647 Surplus from Travel: $172 Surplus from Contractual: $320 Total Surplus: $2,139 Necessary for further development and field testing Did not receive stage II funding from EPA P3 Award Competition Planned Actual Itemized Total Itemized Total 2,883 2,883 2,883 2,883 Category RIT Indirect Cost (40.5% Rate) Travel to DC Vehicle Gas Hotel Food Misc 600 100 1000 500 800 Total 169 137.07 1554.25 776.13 191.8 3,000 2828.25 Supply Benchmarking Power Module Lighting Module Other Prototypes for Field Testing Total Contractual Poster Printing Prototype Shipping Total Grand Total 500 750 750 1767 349.98 975.98 794.11 3,767 200 150 2,120.06 30.10 350 10000 30.10 7,861.41 SUCCESSES Established a working relationship with two non-profit organizations with focus in Haiti Established the base technology for the light and power modules Base light module technology is a significant improvement over current kerosene lighting Design meets most specs Functioned effectively as a team throughout the course of the project FAILURES Power module is not fully functional Light module does not perform as highly as anticipated Unable to send the alpha prototypes to Haiti for field testing Unable to complete testing with system to determine compliance with specifications Suggestions for future work in the product line Solve issues with power module – protect module from overcurrent due to higher input Increasing lighting levels – LED driver limits light levels but it would be beneficial if the module could produce more light Send fully functional system (lights and power module) to Haiti for field testing Revise design of both modules based on the results of field testing and feedback provided by the end users