April 30, 2004



April 30, 2004

Egstractorz

Gauss Engineering

University of Idaho

Moscow, ID 83844

Email: me-egstractorz@uidaho.edu

Ron Hardy

University of Idaho

Moscow, ID 83844

Dear Mr. Hardy,

Attached is the final design details and analysis for the Anguous moth incubation and separation units. Included also is the process description, testing conclusions, and complete assembly and drawing package.

Mechanical Engineering and Biological Systems Engineering students have worked to achieve the optimum design for the incubation and separation systems with respect to your requests. Many critical steps have led to the success of the project: the quick creation of the original system and ability to study the live moth eggs, frequent communication and diligent group work, and biological and statistical laboratory testing to determine optimum egg retrieval.

This report is a summary of our findings and calculations completed during the Fall 2003 and Spring 2004 academic year. Included within the report are system designs, benefit analysis, cost analysis, detailed SolidWorks drawings, and manufacturing assembly instructions.

Thank you for your time and the funding of this project.

Sincerely,

Austin Bingaman

Carrie Nordby

Kyle Gutknecht

Krista Wabrek

Tofor Snider

Enclosure: Final Design Report

[pic]

Prepared for:

Ron Hardy

Luis Mazuera

Steve Beyerlein

[pic]

Design of an Anguous Moth Egg Incubator and Separator

Senior Capstone Design, 2003-2004

Prepared by:

Austin Bingaman, ME Student

Carrie Nordby, ME Student

Kyle Gutknecht, ME Student

Krista Wabrek, BAE Student

Tofor Snider, BAE Student

Executive Summary

The creation of a moth egg production system was to be designed and constructed as a capstone design project for senior level mechanical engineering and biological science students. Existing moth egg production methods required high labor and rendered inadequate production rates. The customer requested a moth egg incubation and separation system that will produce 500 grams of eggs every week that is at least 70 percent clear of foreign material.

Thorough analysis of existing incubation and separation methods, coupled with studies on the biological needs of the moth eggs, had led to the final incubator and separator design. High consideration in design was given to reducing cost of initial system and labor to operate incubation and separation units.

The final incubator design allows for expansion of incubation area to ten times the size of the client’s existing technology. Improvements upon previous methods are incorporated, along with the addition of desired features. Features include: 15000 square inches of moth egg infestation area, three doors for accessibility to screens, caster wheels for transport, construction from sturdy and inexpensive materials(steel, tin), top lid for infestation, corrosion resistant coating, 27 infestation screens, within budget, and high production rates. Construction of the framed screen for infestation is similar to previous technology. All materials used are available locally, and manufacturing requires ability to cut, weld, and bolt steel, aluminum, and tin.

Separator systems have been researched and thoroughly studied. Preliminary testing on biological material demonstrates the success of using vibrating screens to produce high egg purity with low losses. The Separator design solution attaches to the base of the incubation unit, and consists of an angled vibrating screen and an angled Teflon shelf. The system is completely automated, greatly decreasing the required manual labor (as compared to existing technology). Eggs are ultimately contained within a collection jar for easy accessibility, and final purity is nearly 80%.

The final solution was shown to be cost effective and efficient in required egg production. Design objectives were met and often, exceeded.

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................i

1.0 Background Information………………………………………………………1

2.0 Problem Definition

2.1 Design Specifications for the Incubator..………………………………………….………1

2.2 Design Specifications for the Separator ..…………………………………………………2

3.0 INcubator Concept Considerations and Design Decisions

3.1 Construction and Analysis of Previous System: The Drum Incubator………………..….2

3.2 Design Solutions Considered: Wooden Funnel..……………………………………..…..3

3.3 Design Solutions Considered: Iron Door..………………………………………………..3

3.4 Design Solutions Considered: Multi Unit..……………………………………………….3

3.5 Design Solutions Considered: Cancan..…………………………………………………..4

4.0 Separator Concept Considerations and Design Decisions

4.1 Design Solutions Considered: Vibrating Separation..……………………………………4

4.2 Design Solutions Considered: Conveyor Separation..……………………………………5

5.0 Concept Selection/ Product Desicription

5.1 Incubator..…………………………………………………………………………………6

5.2 Separator ……………………………………………………………………………….....7

6.0 Evaluation: Analysis and Testing

6.1 Biological Observation and Testing…………………………………………………..…..8

6.2 Statistical Screen Angle and Purity Testing Analysis………………………………….…9

7.0 Economic Analysis……………………………………………………..……..….11

APPENDICIES

Appendix A. Incubator Assembly View and Drawing Package

Appendix B. Incubator Bill of Materials

Appendix C. Separator Assembly View and Drawing Package

Appendix D. Separator Bill of Materials

Appendix E. Egstractorz Timeline

Appendix F. Egstractorz 2003-2004 Budget

Appendix G. DFMEA Results

Appendix H. Egstractorz Team Member Resumes

1.0 Background

The Idaho Aquaculture Center desires to mass produce angoumois moth eggs because of their high protein content and possible success as salmon food. Because these moths were viewed as a pest, there was very little research involving their mass production. While entomological suppliers produce large quantities of moths and moth eggs, these techniques are highly guarded by the company for business purposes. As a result, known current methods of producing these moth eggs through incubation are inefficient and labor intensive.

The production of moth eggs is separated into subdivisions: incubation and separation. The incubator must accommodate the moth's specific biological system for the thirty day cycle of the moth. The separator must remove inert matter from the eggs and deliver them to a container for use. The former methods of incubation have resulted in the recovery of an inadequate amount of eggs, and previous methods of separation had required many hours of labor. Existing technology instated by the client will be redesigned to optimize egg production rates and minimize cost.

In order for the production of moth eggs to render success as an alternative fish food, the client must have the ability to produce a large quantity of eggs through a process of continual recovery. The objective of the Egstractorz team was to design and manufacture this system using existing resources, thorough analysis, and innovative concepts.

2.0 Problem Definition

The Idaho Aquaculture Center requests an efficient method of mass production of Angoumois moth eggs. The two main areas of design include the incubation of moth eggs and the separation of these eggs from unwanted material. An incubation unit will be designed using existing technology, elaborating on cost, manufacturing ease, volume of incubator and mass of eggs produced. Current technology was not suitable for the quantity and cost constraints required for the incubation of the Angoumois Moth. A separation system will be designed fabricated that can gently and consistently remove unwanted matter from usable media.

2.1 Design Specifications: Incubator

- The incubator must have a cost under $0.15 per square inch of screen area.

-  The incubator must have the capacity to handle 10 grams of initial infestation media

-  The incubator must have access to internal components for sanitation between cycles.

-  The incubator must have a component to collect wanted media, and this component must be removable.

-  The incubator should contain components that allow observation of the process without compromising containment.

-   The incubator should be able to produce 500 grams of usable media per week.

2.2 Design Specifications: Separator

-  The separator must be able to separate 500 grams of usable media from foreign media in 1 hour.

- The separator must use a dry separation technique.

-  The separator must be able to run for 4 hours without maintenance.

-  The separator must produce 70% pure usable media. 

-  The separator must accumulate the wanted media in removable container.

-  The separator should operate without supervision after initial start.

-  The separator should have accessible components for sanitation.

-  The separator should not harm any usable media.

3.0 Incubator Concept Consideration

The first main goal of the project was to design an incubator that met all the specifications. Since there was no current technology that could be observed and evaluated the concept background came from two areas. The first area consisted of researching current incubation systems involving small flying insects. Incubators researched had the basic features of what was needed but lacked the detailed characteristics of an incubator specifically designed for moth eggs. It was also necessary to construct the current technology to get a visual idea of a working system.

3.1 Construction and Analysis of Previous System: The Drum Incubator

The customer was very experienced with incubation systems and had all the necessary resources to construct a current technology model. Because of his strong background the current technology incubator was based off of what the client had previously used. After several meetings enough information was obtained to manufacture a working current technology model. The current technology model, or Drum incubator, was constructed of materials specified by the client and had approximately the same capacity as what the customer previously used.

The construction of the Drum was very beneficial. During the construction of the unit many potential manufacturing problems were recorded so that they could be considered in the next generation incubator. Likewise, things that worked well were also documented. For example, it was found that cutting the drum was time consuming and potentially dangerous, depending on what the container was used for. This pushed the next generation models away from 50 gallon drums. Once the Drum was built and evaluated for efficiency and accessibility, many problems arose. The shelving system was very insufficient because in order for removal it required the use of a ladder and ability to reach the bottom shelves was limited to persons with above average arm length. The cost of this unit was around $135 with an estimated time of construction around 12 hours.

3.2 Design Solutions Considered: Wooden Funnel

The first concept was named the Wooden Funnel. This design contained many of the same features as the Drum but addressed the key issue of space. The Drum incubator had a round containment unit where the wooden funnel consists of a square containment area. This eliminated much of the dead space around the shelves and enabled the unit to occupy a smaller floor space while maintaining its original capacity. The cost of this unit has also been reduced from the $135of the Drum to $68. This was beneficial to the customer and to the potential for mass production capabilities. Since the unit consisted of only square components and the funnel material was changed, the estimated construction time was dropped from 12 to 8 hours per unit.

3.3 Design Solutions Considered: Iron Door

The second concept was called the Iron Door. This design greatly increased the ease of use by adding a swinging front door and slide in trays. It also addressed the issue of space conservation. The funneling apparatus was removed and replaced with a sliding tray and, again, the components are all square minimizing floor space as well as adding the capability of being stacked. This concept also contained a sliding collection tray at the bottom for removal of media. The material that was going to be used in construction was steel and tin. This unit required a higher technical ability to construct, compared to other concepts, due to the use of welding and skill of the fabricator. The cost of this unit was reduced from $135 to $54.00 and has roughly the same capacity as the Drum. The time to fabricate one unit was estimated at 7 hours.

3.4 Design Solutions Considered: Multi Unit

The third concept was called the Multi-Unit. This concept was mainly a scalable model of the Iron Door. The Multi-Unit’s key feature was the ability to be scaled to a desired capacity. Some component features were sliding shelves, front flaps that could be opened, and sliding bottom trays. This unit eliminated the funneling and took advantage of the square design which gave it the capability of being stacked. The design material was pine lumber and visquene for the cover. The Multi-Units scalable size could lead to large size and weight and could be very difficult to move. The flap design might compromise the containment because it might not completely seal every use. This unit was scaled down in size to make the cost comparison relative to the capacity of the Drum. The cost was estimated at $35, with a fabrication time of 6 hours.

3.5 Design Solutions Considered: Cancan

The final was called the Cancan. This unit was very similar to the Drum except for the funneling component. The customer thought that the funnel design on the drum was to expensive and time involved so it was rethought in the Cancan. The result was a material change from Plexiglas to visquene. This decreased the cost to $64.15 and lowered fabrication time to 6 hours. This concept is the least radical and replicates the current technology more closely. It also contained critiques that the customer gave on the Drum incubator.

4.0 Separator Concept Considerations

The second objective of the project was to design a separation system with the design specifications given in the background section of this paper. The separator concepts evolved from the research of current separation techniques. The main areas viewed were areas involving the separation of heavy media from light media and large media from small media. The four types of separation that were considered were vacuum, rotary screening, cyclone and vibrating screen. Originally, the customer wanted a central separation unit that would have media manually brought to the separator. After several meetings with the customer, it was decided that the process should be interfaced with the incubator and should separate media before removal from the system. Since all previous concepts were for a central separation unit, they could no longer be used unless modified.

Screening was determined to be the most controllable method for separating the eggs from the media. This was determined by performing biological laboratory tests using moving air and vibration. Screen characteristics, such as size, were determined after obtaining moth eggs. Taylor screens were obtained so that tests could be preformed to see how the media responded to a vibrating screening. Data was taken and analyzed to get a better idea of the purity of eggs verses screen size. Visual inspection proved to be efficient, as well as weight analysis. From data and research, two separation concepts were derived.

4.1 Design Solutions Considered: Vibrating Separation

The first system consisted of vibrating screen. The funnel on the incubator would interface the separator diagonally along the separation tray with a flexible plastic connected to each system with bolts. The upper tray of the separator had a screen lining and would be mounted to a sub frame by dampers. This tray extended past where the funnel interfaced the separator and the bottom returns to solid sheet. This area beyond the funnel allowed a space for moth media to collect and be removed occasionally. The lower pan was a solid sheet that separated egg media would fall on to and slide into a removable collection tray at the bottom. The vibration in the system would have been supplied by a motor mounted under the upper tray.

4.2 Design Solutions Considered: Conveyor Separation

In this concept a hinged bottom door was at the bottom of the funnel that could be opened and would drop the media onto a conveyer. The funnel was simultaneously sealed with a sliding door above the hatch. The conveyer vibrates the media as it moves, all usable media is contained in the tray collection area. One major problem with this system is being able to vibrate the media as well as drive it forward simultaneously. This means that the gears or rollers would need to support horizontal loads as well as tangential loads. Also the trap door would require a system that could automate the sliding block to keep the system contained.

5.0 Concept Selection

5.1 Incubator

A summary of the incubator concepts are in the table presented below. This data was presented to the client and the Multi-Unit was chosen as the preferred design due to low cost and high capacity. Also, new criteria was presented by the client that design must meet. The incubator has ten times the capacity of the original Drum design, and integrated with the separation unit. Using the system of a “funnel” for egg collection is preferred by the customer (as used in previous technology, the drum incubator). The chosen material was analyzed for stress concentration with the tray in excess of 15 lbs each. The unit will contain three columns of shelves with nine rows of screening. Complete detailed view, as well as bill of materials and assembly instructions can be found in the appendix.

[pic]

Lid and Doors The front doors were placed on hinges to allow easy access and removal of the shelving components. The top of the incubator also has a hinged door, but is covered with a cloth to allow for ventilation throughout the incubator and protection from predators. The incubator frame and doors are constructed out of steel with shelving made of pine and fiberglass screening. Containment is assured around all of the doors and lid by lining with poly foam (maximum compression) weatherseal and with the use of black silicone.

Screens The screens are constructed similarly to previous design due to success and low cost of this existing technology. Screen frames are made of pine wood (as before) with fiberglass screen. A reinforcement bar is added to decrease deflection of the screens due to the increase in frame size. Screen area totals 15000 square inches. Screens are easily reproducible.

Material Selection and Protective Coating Steel is chosen as the frame construction material. This material has high durability, is inexpensive, can be welded with ease, and readily available locally. Tin sheets (around the perimeter of the unit) and cloth (for the lid) will enclose the unit to ensure containment. Materials were chosen due to their compatibility with the biological cycle, customer recommendations, and inexpensive cost. Paint was applied to the unit (after thorough cleaning and paint primer) in order to increase corrosion resistance due to high humidity/high temperature nature of this biological process.

Size and Orientation of Unit The Incubation unit was constructed to include ten times the screen capacity of previous technology. The unit was also designed to fit through a standard door for ease of moving. Doors and screens are accessible at a height that is convenient for the customer to access. Caster wheels are incorporated into the design at the base of each of the four legs for ease of movement of heavy unit.

Structural Assurance The incubator was designed in order to withstand added weight of screens, biological material, and additional forces that might be unforeseen. The material selected for cost and availability (steel) is shown to provide additional structural stability. Upon structural analysis using SolidWorks Cosmos, the maximum deflection of the entire incubator is shown to be a few thousandths of an inch fully loaded.

5.2 Separator

The final separation design, the Vibra-Screen, was developed to achieve appropriate media purity, low cost, and ease of use for operator. The design is angled with an attached vibration motor in order to sieve and collect eggs within a collection jar. The unit is attached at the base of the incubator.

[pic]

Frame Material Selection Aluminum was chosen as the material for the frame due to low weight of material, ability to be welded, cost, and availability. The separator framework was constructed from 6061 T6 structural aluminum. All joints were welded together, this makes the framework very ridged. This is necessary because vibration must transfer throughout the entire frame.

Screening Shelf Precision Screening was properly sized during laboratory experiments in order to achieve appropriate purity objectives. The Upper shelf is lined with a .03" opening  Nylon mesh. This is the area where the moths will lay the eggs on. The screen was attached to the upper shelf by sandwiching it between the frame work and a piece of 1"X.125" flat aluminum bar. The flat bar was then bolted to the frame work. By using this attachment method we were able to stretch the screen to the desired tension uniformly across the entire separator.

Air Vacuum System An adjustable air vacuum system is installed into the separator to remove un-usable media from the product. Unwanted media is collected in the upper shelf (using air vacuum system). In addition, the vacuum is used to separate dust from the media after it travels through the precision screening. The vacuum may be de-attached and cleaned.

Collection Jar A Collection jar is attached to the separator to collect useful media. The plastic container can be removed from the system by unscrewing the jar from the lid (lid remains attached to the unit). Media is transferred down with vibration, and funneled into the collection jar. The jar may be detached, useful media removed, and the jar may be cleaned.

Teflon Sheet Shelf Teflon film is chosen as the lower shelving material due to the material’s low coefficient of friction (ability of media to slide easily to collection units). This material is durable and will assure that the small media (eggs) will “slide” to the collection jars. The bottom plate was bolted to the shelving frame work. This allows the user to replace the Teflon and remove the bottom plate if maintenance on the frame is required.

Vibrating Motor The motor selected for the separation system is a 120 volt, 47lb, linear vibrating motor. The motor was attached to a timer in order to perform without complete operator imput. The motor and timer swich are mounted to the side of the shelving unit by a single .5" bolt. This mounting gives the user the ability to rotate the motor to achieve a better flow pattern.

Vibration Dampening Mounts The vibrations of the separator is separated from the surrounding incubator by specifically sized dampening mounts. These rubber attachments will reduce noise to floor and surroundings.

Plastic Enclosure and Containment Plexiglass, silicone, and plastic are used to fully contain separator from surroundings. Weatherseal is also implemented around the doors and lid to ensure a complete seal. Containment of live media is critical, and it is assured that incubator and separator are fully contained. A rubber flap at the low end of the precision screen allows the separator to be contained fully even when the motor is off.

Attachment to Incubator The separator is attached at the bottom of the incubator. Allowing the incubator and separator to be one unit decreases the manual labor involved in transporting media, as well as transporting the unit. Vibration dampening mounts assure that minimal vibration will be released to the incubator funnel.

Accessibility The separator is designed so all regions contained within may be accessed by an operator after customer requests for ability to brush out the separator. For the separator, plexiglass is hinged to the outward facing side for access to the lower Teflon shelf (accessible like a door) and also at the lower section of the precision screening near the vacuum exit. Containment is assured with additional strips of weatherseal and convenient latches.

6.0 Analysis and Testing

6.1 Biological Observation and Testing

Due to the biological nature of the design objectives, the moth species was researched and studied. In addition to the moth’s optimum humidity and temperature conditions for growth, it was found that the desired moth egg media was oblong, and less than half of a millimeter in length. Moth eggs were purchased from a national supplier, and testing ensued.

Experiments for separation of moth eggs included using air (as previous technology) and methods of sieving. Precision Taylor screens were obtained and used for testing. It was found that sieve size #30 obtained high purity (up to 70%) with minimal losses. It was also determined that sieving through multiple screens did not greatly increase purity rates of the media.

To optimize the use of the incubator and to decrease waste if wheat and infestation media, biological testing was conducted. The objective of testing was to determine the optimum ratio of eggs used to infest a certain amount of wheat. To run such tests, 3 small-scale incubators were constructed. These incubators were made out of nine inch pie tins with holes punched in the bottom (the size of pin holes) to allow for the movement of air, moth eggs, and larvae.

Each incubator was infested with varying amounts of eggs. Previous technology used 10 grams for infestation, so testing was performed using a percentage of this mass. For the small-scale experiment, three infestation rates of 200% (20 grams), 50% (5 grams), and 100% (10 grams) of infestation media per barrel area of wheat were used. The actual amounts used for infestation of the small scale incubators where 1.6971 grams, .426 grams, .8503 grams respectively. Soft white winter wheat was used as the food source for the incubators. To prepare this media for infestation it was placed in the incubation trays for 1 week and placed in the environmental chamber to allow for re-hydration.

The incubators where allowed to run for thirty-seven days. To analyze how many moths where produced, the moths where separated from waste material. Moths produced were counted (from weighted sample). The number of moths produced by each incubator is as follows:

• 20 grams infestation (200% of the previous technology) produced 8274 moths.

• 5 grams infestation (50% of the previous technology) produced 4341 moths.

• 10 grams infestation (100% of the previous technology) produced 6309 moths.

Data was scaled back to 100% infestation rate, and graphed to a logarithmic model (shown in Figure A), which is the model commonly used to model the growth of a biological object in relation to a limited food source. As the amount of eggs increase, the food source becomes depleted, and therefore, additional eggs infested have no effect on moth production. The relationship between the amounts of eggs infested to the limited amount of food creates an asymptotic graph. It is suggested that further testing includes infesting and testing 20g of eggs per barrel area of wheat.

[pic]

Figure A: Moth Egg Production Model

6.2 Statistical Analysis

A project was performed concurrently with a Mechanical Engineering Senior Laboratory class in order to statistical determine the optimum screen angle.

7.0 Economic Analysis

High consideration in design was given to reducing cost of initial system and labor to operate incubation and separation units. The final cost to create the incubator and separator (materials only) is $1250. This is equivalent to $0.03 per square inch of screen incubation area, which exceeds the initial objectives set forth by the design team and customer. The complete Egstractorz budget for the 2003-2004 academic calendar may be seen in Appendix F. A synopsis of the cost to reproduce the delivered design can be seen in Table 1. This analysis includes projected fabrication costs, as well as material and hardware costs.

|Cost to Reproduce Design |

|Incubator | | |  |

|Materials |  |  |$180 |

|Hardware |  |  |$80 |

|Separator | | |  |

|Materials |  |  |$220 |

|Hardware |  |  |$409 |

|Professional Services |Hours |Rate | |

|Fabrication |60 |$60.00 |$3,600 |

|Grand Total |  |  |$4,489 |

Table 1. Economic Analysis for reproducing design.

An economic analysis of value of the Egstractorz Capstone Design Project, including design and fabrication time, is shown in Table 2. This table includes analysis of projected labor costs (engineering designers and fabrication time).

|Economic Value of Project |

|Drum Incubator | | |  |

|Materials |  |  |$150 |

|Incubator | | |  |

|Materials |  |  |$180 |

|Hardware |  |  |$80 |

|Separator | | |  |

|Materials |  |  |$220 |

|Hardware |  |  |$409 |

|Professional Services |Hours |Rate | |

|Engineering |120 |$75.00 |$9,000 |

|Laboratory Testing |12 |$75.00 |$900 |

|Fabrication |80 |$60.00 |$4,800 |

|Grand Total |  |  |$15,739 |

Table 2. Economic Analysis including theoretical Egstractorz labor fees.

-----------------------

Flexible Plastic

Flow

Collection Tray

Figure 1

Screen

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download