Biofilm HarvesterALGAE HARVESTER

SRO TECHNOLOGIESTeam:Jennifer Van GalderBradley DeanRohit AbrolConnor DoyleLucas PissolatiDanilo Versiani

Industrial Partner:Vincent WongAdvisorsNick WongAlex YangFaculty Supervisor:Sandra BrancatelliJim Catton

April 8th 2015

Introduction

Problem - The algae growth from last years filtration system begins to die off if it is not harvested about once every two weeks.

Objective

Solution - Design and build a scalable and independent algae harvester designed on the basis of cost effectiveness, efficiency, and functionality.

Note: The components of the harvesting system have been left out of this presentation due to an NDA

➢ Issues○ Group○ Tools

➢ Modifications○ None from our final design

➢ Final Design○ Succesfull

Introduction

Summary of Results

OutlineIntroduction

Project

Problem

Current method of harvesting:➢ Manual removal of algae

Project

Solution:➢ Fully automated robot

CriteriaProject

Cost-effective

Safe

Effective

Maintainable

Independent

Project ManagementProject

Task Date Organization

1. Research September-01-2014 ❏ group meeting❏ problem discussion

2. Prototype Ideas October-13-14 ❏ Brainstorm❏ Separate into groups:

-mechanical, electrical

3. Final Design Selection November-01-14 ❏ Final prototype selection

❏ Further research

Design Evolution

Primary Design

Advantages & Disadvantages

Secondary Design

Final Prototype

ProjectProject

Preliminary DesignMotor

Counter Weight

V-Groove

Rail

Geared Pulley Beaded

Chain

Support

Blade

Advantage Disadvantage

➔ Easy to manufacture

➔ Cost effective➔ Efficient➔ Can be

automated

➔ Dependent➔ Inconsistent

algae harvesting ➔ Difficult to repair ➔ Requires

modification to existing filtration unit

Project

Project

Secondary DesignAdvantage Disadvantage

➔ Independent➔ Fully automated➔ Easily

maintained, replaceable

➔ Marketable➔ High grip wheels ➔ versatile

➔ Longer method to harvest

➔ Accumulation of error

➔ Robot’s weight➔ Complex

manufacturing➔ Turning radius➔ Wheels may

disturb the algae

Plastic Shell Body

Scraper

Tank Style Wheels

Control System

Final Design

Wheel Assembly

Body Assembly Control System

Note: Certain components are excluded from this image due to a non-disclosure agreement

Advantage Disadvantage

➔ Independent ➔ Fully automated➔ Easily

maintained➔ Replaceable➔ Marketable➔ Multiple

applications ➔ Versatile

programming ➔ No turning

radius

➔ Longer harvesting time

➔ Difficult to manufacture

➔ Higher manufacturing cost

➔ Weight

Project

Results

Technical description

Results

Body AssemblyFrame

Shell

Roller Ball Assembly

Project

➔ Components

➔ Connections

➔ Function

Wheel Assembly

DC Motor

KitWheel Enclosure

Servo Block Kit

Project

➔ Components

➔ Connections

➔ Function

Controls AssemblyDC Servo

Battery

Arduino

Sensors

Ni-MH AA2200mAh 8.4V

Metal Gear Motor

Motor Shield

Project

➔ Components

➔ Connections

➔ Function

Testing

Calculations

Initial Testing Prototype

a. Mass of algae:m = V x pV = 28.32 Litersp = 120 gram/liter

Mass is 3398.4 grams(7.49 Pounds)

Testing

Calculationsb. Torque per motorT = 100 x [(a x gsin) x M x r] e

N e = 65%

a = 0.5m/s^2 g = 9.81m/s^2 M = 50pounds r = 0.0762meters N = 2

Torque is 158.56 oz * in (1.198 Nm)

c. Power per motor

w = v r

v = 0.5 m/sr = 0.0762m

Power is 6.562 rad/s

Calculationsd. Battery Ratings for each drive motor

c = I x t

I = 1.225 Ampst = 2 hours

Battery rating is 2.45 Amp * hour

Testing

Equipment

Method

Results

Testing

Initial Testing

Prototype Testing➢ Full assembly testing

-Movement-Turning

➢ Vacuum-similar algae

Testing

Conclusion

Future Recommendation

Analysis

Final Thoughts

AnalysisConclusion

Cost-effective

Safe

Effective

Maintainable

Independent

Future Recommendations➢ Test vacuum➢ Continue testing to improve efficiency➢ Continue Improving code➢ Do a Circuit on a PCB➢ Add sensor to fix the angle position

Conclusion

Final Thoughts➢ Complex research, testing, and hard work➢ Final prototype:

-Constructed to completion-Tested

Conclusion