Team Members:

1
TEAM 11 ULTRASONIC MIXER

• Team Members
• Katie Kaser - Introduction Concept Generation
• Moshe Solomon - Concept Selection
• Joanna Pirnot - Concept Development
• Lihong Xu - Budget
• Sponsor Fraunhofer USA
• Advisor Dr. Michael Keefe

2
(No Transcript)
3
Mechanical Mixers

• Size
• Cost
• Wear
• Contamination
• Maintenance

4
MissionDesign a non-mechanical mixer for
homogenizing powder injection molding feedstock
by April 1999

• Approach
• Identify wants and constraints
• Benchmark previous technology
• Generate set of concepts
• Select best concept
• Execute design via best engineering methodology

5
Customers

• Sponsor - Fraunhofer
• Mixer suppliers
• Misonix Inc.
• Ultrasonic consulting companies
• Advanced Sonic Processing Systems
• Anyone involved in powder injection molding

6
Wants Constraints

• Top 5 Wants
• Temperature Control
• Low Contamination Level
• Ease of cleaning
• Cost
• Produce measurable quantity

• Constraints
• Completion by April 1999
• Produce homogenous mixture
• Safety

7
System Benchmarking

• Mechanical Mixers
• High Shear Mixers
• Static mixer
• Pump/internal obstacle mixer (Sonolater)
• Ultrasonic Mixers
• Probe-type
• External sound source

8
Metrics

• Want
• Temperature control
• Low contamination level
• Handle variety of materials

• Metric
• Temperature control range
• Percentage contaminants
• Viscosity range

9
Functional Ultrasonic Benchmarking

• Functions
• Feeding
• Heating
• Mixing
• Cooling
• Ultrasonics
• Ultrasonic Generators
• Transducers

10
What did we learn?

• Ultrasonics is a significant source of heat
• Heating and mixing should be as concurrent as
  possible
• A system incorporating a probe is subject to
  contamination and wear on the probe
• More energy reaches the material to be mixed
  using a probe than transmitting through walls of
  a vessel
• Ultrasonics are capable of mixing solid powders
  in a polymer resin.
• On the macroscopic level a homogenous mixture was
  achieved

11
Target Values

• Metric
• Temperature control range
• Volume loading metal powder
• Ease of cleaning

• Target Value
• 0 to 200 degrees C
• 60
• Time to Disassemble

12
Critical Functions

• Feeding
• Heating
• Mixing
• Cooling/Removal

13
Concept Generation

• Rotating Mixer
• Opposing Sound Sources
• Probe-type ultrasonic mixer
• Separate heating/mixing chamber
• Hexagonal tube mixer

14
Concept 3 Rotating Mixer
15
High Intensity Ultrasonic Processor
16
(No Transcript)
17
CONCEPT SELECTION
CONCEPTS WANTS
METRICS TARGET VALUES 1 2
3 4 5
S S D R E S U L T S
SUITABLE TEMPERATURE AVOID CONTAMINATION DUE TO
ABRASION AVOID CONTAMINATION DUE TO AN EXTERNAL
SOURCE EASY TO CLEAN VARIETY OF
MATERIALS REASONABLE COST PRODUCE A
MEASURABLE QUANTITY OF MATERIAL REPEATABLE
PERFORMANCE PRODUCE FEEDSTOCK IN USABLE
FORM AVOID WASTE MATERIAL WHEN
CLEANING CONTROLED FEEDING MECHANISM
TEMPERATURE OF THE MATERIAL BEING MIXED
CONTAMINANTS IN THE PRODUCT CONTAMINANTS
IN THE PRODUCTS ABILITY TO DISASSEMBLE, CLEAN
BY HAND, KEEP WARM WHILE CLEANING VISCOSITY
COST MUCH LESS THAN A MECHANICAL MIXER OUTPUT /
HOUR RELIABILITY GEOMETRY OF
THE PRODUCT OF MATERIAL LOST OF MATERIAL
LOST
0 TO 200 DEGREES CELSIUS LESS THAN 3 LESS
THAN 3 0 TO 100 DEGREES CELSIUS 0 - 1000
Pa-s LESS THAN 5000 GEATER THAN OR EQUAL TO
5 LBS/HR LOW STANDARD DEVIATION IN
MIXING RESULTS PELLET OR SPHERICAL SHAPE LESS
THAN 5 0
1 5 2 5 5 5 5 5 2 4 5 5 5
4 3 4 3 4 4 2 1 3 4 2 3 3
4 4 4 3 4 4 2 1 3 4 3 4 3
4 3 4 2 3 4 2 1 2 4 2 3 3
5 4 4 3 4 4 2 1 5 4 5 4 4
18
Concept SelectionEvaluation of Wants (Scale 1-5,
5 being the highest score)

• 1st (probe type mixer) - 54 pts
• 2nd (opposing sound sources) - 40 pts
• 3rd (rotating mixer) - 43 pts
• 4th (separate heating and mixing) - 37 pts
• 5th (hexagonal tube mixer) - 49 pts

19
CONCEPT SELECTION
CRITICAL
FUNCTIONS

• FEEDING
• Automatic Feeder Unit
• Trough

• HEATING
• Double Walled Vessel with Inlet and Outlet
  for Water Circulation
• Heat Exchanger Fluid Pumping System

20
CONCEPT SELECTION
CRITICAL
FUNCTIONS

• MIXING
• 600 Watt Ultrasonic Probe
• Booster Horn

• REMOVAL / COOLING
• Teflon Stopcock
• Conveyor Belt
• Collecting Pan

21
Concept Development

• Demonstration (Video)
• Test Results
• Critical Functions
• Prototype vs. Target Values
• Modifications/Suggestions

22
Feeding

• Capabilities
• Automated feeder sufficiently transports powder
  to the mixing vessel

• Limitations
• speed of feeder
• Residual amount of material remains on the
  surface of the funnel and feeder tubing

23
Heating

• Capabilities
• sufficiently melts materials with a low melting
  point
• ex. Paraffin
• sufficiently removes excess heat produced by
  ultrasonic processor
• sufficiently keeps materials warm during removal

• Limitations
• the variety of materials (with a high melting
  pt.)
• ex. Polypropylene
• temperature range 0 to 100 degrees Celsius
• due to probe limitations
• the heating fluid (water) is incapable of temp.
  higher than 100 degrees Celsius

24
Mixing

• Capabilities
• Solids Loading
• Original Design
• 20 solids loading
• Shape of the vessel
• 35 solids loading
• Shape of vessel and Booster Horn
• 60 solids loading
• Product
• Satisfactory homogeneity
• microscope examination
• melting (consistency)
• capillary rheometer
• No degradation of polymer of deposits of powder

• Limitations
• Volume no greater than 50ml
• splashing occurs
• Amplitude of the Horn must be 65
• splashing occurs
• Variety of materials
• only soft materials, otherwise erosion of the tip
  occurs

25
Removal of Material

• Capabilities
• regulating flow of the material
• flick valve
• material is removed within 2 minutes
• no excess heat is required
• 96 of material is recovered
• prior to cleaning

• Limitations
• If the flow is too slow, material tends to
  solidify prior to exiting the vessel

26
Cooling

• Capabilities
• material does not solidify prior to contact with
  the conveyor belt
• Air cooling is a sufficient method of cooling
  feedstock
• the material is in a usable form

• Limitations
• conveyor belt must be set horizontally
• material flows too quickly
• speed of conveyor belt must be on the lowest
  setting
• material not cooled upon reaching the end of the
  conveyor belt

27
(No Transcript)
28
Modifications/Suggestions(addressing our
limitations)

• Feeding
• use spherical shaped powders
• Heating
• purchase an air cooling converter
• allows probe to safely reach higher temperatures
• use a fluid capable of reaching a higher
  temperature

29
Modifications/Suggestions

• Mixing
• purchase a larger vessel to increase the
  output/hour (no greater than 250ml batches -
  probe tip (1/2 diameter)
• purchase a larger probe tip - 1in diameter
  (capable of mixing volumes up to 1000ml)
• coat the tip of the probe with tungsten carbide
• this will reduce the erosion of the titanium
  tip

30

• Removal
• Apply heat to the nozzle area to eliminate faster
  cooling of material use heating gun
• Cooling
• Use longer conveyer belt current length
  insufficient for air-cooling of larger pelleted
  feedstock

31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
Budget
Budget
All Budgeted Material and Equipment
Expenditures Estimated Upgrade Cost Engineering
Development Time Conclusion
34
All Budgeted Material
Projected Production Cost 15520.99 Total cost
for the project 520.99
35
Estimated Upgrade Cost
Total upgrade cost 6670.99
50K to 70K
6700
36
Engineering Development Time
Fall 10 hr/person/week for 13 weeks Winter 4
hr/person/week for 4 weeks Spring 12
hr/person/week for 10 weeks (include testing
time 4hr/person/week for 6 weeks)
Total time 1064 hours
37
In Conclusion
. . . A great team gained experience from the
opportunity to use engineering theory in a
practical way, developing an innovative
technology solution meeting the specific
real-world wants of our industrial customer. . .