AguaClara Project Challenges Spring 2009

Team Leader: Nicole Ceci

• Unable to render {include} The included page could not be found.
• Unable to render {include} The included page could not be found.

• Design Team Challenges for Spring 2009

  Subteam Leader: Sara Schwetschenau

  Number of team members needed: 5 max

  Total: 3 to 5 people max
  Additional for Spring 2009: 1 to 3

  Important team member skills:

  CEE 3310, or equivalent Fluid Dynamics course
  CEE 4540 co-requisite
  Student must be comfortable with coding

  Challenges

  • Edit the flocculation program
    • Energy Dissipation Approach
  • Edit the sedimentation slopes program
    • Correct arbitrary assumptions - 1/3 velocity factor? Square ports? Number of ports per slope?
    • Automate slopes program to check for reasonable values
  • Update the Variable Naming Guide
  • Check AutoCAD dimensions
    • H.SedRectangle > B.Port Check to be added to Sedimentation Slopes Program
  • Adding pictures to programs pages

  • Take into account changing heights of baffles when sizing ports
  • Draw valve to drain flocculator

• Linear Flow Orifice Meter Challenges for Spring 2009

  Subteam Leader: Unknown

  Introduction for New Members

  In order to gain a firm understanding of the LFOM material it is necessary to review the posted material. The most important material is listed below

  • The intial concept paper abstract, introduction, and design. Available here
  • The LFOM Accuracy Experimental data, available here - This provides a practical view of the LFOM in operation
  • The mathcad code should be thoroughly reviewed, available here

  Number of team members needed: 1

  The LFOM team is a one person team, with a narrow focus. It may be benefical to combine the LFOM team with the Linear Chemical Doser because interfaces between the two systems will be very critical.

  Important team member skills:

  • Strong background in Mathcad or at least some aptitude with computer programming
  • Understanding of the fluids concepts would be beneficial, through courses such as CEE 4540 or CEE 3310

  Challenges

  • Currently the drill size is based on the diameter that is the best fit for the top hole, it would be interseting to see what the effect is on the error if different rows were used to determine the diameter. The very top hole has a relatively small flow rate based on other rows - there may be a critical row.
  • Also the point of failure experiment was conducted and the results were contrary to the expected hypothesis. Instead of the LFOM working to a certain flow rate and then failing the flow rates were linear but with a different slope than the predicted values, information is available on the experiment page. The perplexing results may be due to the fact that there we were not witnessing a point of failure, a flow rate at which a LFOM will fail, but a complete failure. If the pipe is sized too small to accomodate the flow rate which the orifice pattern is designed to support then the LFOM will fail for all flow rates. This hypothesis would agree with the results. It would be beneficial in future research to test the LFOM created above with a diameter of 1.5 inches with an orifice pattern designed to handle the maximum flow rate for the pipe, 62.5 L/min. It would also be interesting to apply a flow rate in excess of the 62.5 L/min and watch the system for evidence of failure.
  • Thirdly it is important to work on interface between the LFOM and the automated chemical doser.