Fake Trucks Inc. provided us with data from their current pumps, filters, models, and wind tunnel. This project sounds easier said than done due to the various cabs models, filters, and pumps to look into. Not to mention that cost is a huge impact and here at Hydro-Cannon LLC. we want the best price for our customers. We prioritize our customers' needs while still giving them quality service.

Once the data was analyzed, we came to the conclusion that model B cab with a VOLVO-D13 pump along with the Polymer Blend Fine Thread filter by Amsoil will result in the best performance for Fake Trucks Inc. Not to mention that this combination will meet their budget as it is the most cost-effective option.

Based on our calculations, we chose cab model B due to its lowest max power loss at just 25.2 hp and max power required at 437.2 hp. The VOLVO pump was chosen due to its best efficiency while operating at a flow rate consistent with the needs for our design and providing the necessary head lift for our system. This pump had the best intersection between the system and filter head compared to the wind tunnel recommendation we concluded. The filter however did not affect our efficiency as it only accounted for a small portion of our Ktot value. With that being said, we concluded that a cheap filter was desired, but that would just lead to bad performance in terms of the filter efficiency value; so we settled for a medium option so that our customer had better quality but still within a reasonable price range. Considering our recommendations, the total for Fake Trucks Inc. comes to be $165,900,000.00

From the exchange of emails with Fake Trucks Inc., they were able to tell us that the base power requirement is 412 hp. From this, we were able to add each of the power loss values we calculated from the wind tunnel data. This refined power requirement was more of a realistic depiction of the power requirements because it factored in wind resistance. They also sent multiple data files that were merged into the main excel sheet. From there, excel was the primary source of calculations and analysis.

Assumptions:

• Constant air pressure of 14.7 psi during wind tunnel experiments

• The specific gas constant of air is .3704 (psi*ft^3)/(lbm*Rankine)

• Properties of Oil SAE 30:

  • Density: 1.77 slugs/ft^3

  • Specific Weight: 57ln/ft^3

  • Dynamic viscosity: 8.00E-03 lb*s/ft^2

Steps Taken:

After all the data had been organized, the first calculation made was the drag coefficient [1] for each cab model using the data provided. With the cab model dimensions, they were assumed to be in inches. From these values, the force caused by drag could then be found using the density of air by temperature with [2]. In our particular case, we used the assumption that density is constant with a value of 14.7 psi along with an R-value of .3704 (psi*ft^3)/(lbm*Rankine). From here, the next step was to calculate the drag force using [3]. There were a total of 3 power requirements calculated: min (F, V), max (F, V), and average (F, V). The average was not used, however, it was calculated for good measures. After the drag force was calculated, a power calculator was then created to compare all three models. The power calculator uses the velocity and force from the models in which then the min power loss/required, max power loss/required, as well as the average power were all calculated in the units of hp. From the exchange of emails with Fake Trucks Inc., they were able to tell us that the power requirement is 412 hp. This value was added to our overall analysis as this value corresponds to their current active fleet of 18-wheeler trucks.

After those values were calculated, a Matlab file was then used to find the optimal Liter/hour flow rates by plugging each “maximum” and “minimum” value. This flow rate was then converted to units of cubic feet per second.

Now that all this data has been calculated, we moved forward with the pump analysis. This allowed us to decide which pump would suit best for Fake Trucks Inc. For each pump, there were multiple calculations involved. In order to find the most suited pump, there had to be some curve fitting plots involved. Within these plots, values of the efficiency, head of the pump, and head of the system were calculated. To start off, the actual head was calculated using [4] while the head of the pump was found using [5]. From here, the Ktot was needed in order to find the head of the system, [6]. Ktot [7] in this case is the total system resistance which meant that we incorporated values from both the filter and delivery system components. Within each plot, there are three curves to be analyzed. The dashed gray line is the system curve, plotting the data from the system head against the flow rate for each pump. The system head loss for any flow rate is the sum of friction head loss and the total static head in the system. The dashed orange line is the efficiency curve, plotting each pump's efficiency against its corresponding flowrate. This specific curve will identify the peak efficiency known as Best Efficiency Point (BEP). The dashed blue line is the pump curve, plotting each pump's actual head provided against the corresponding flow rate. This curve is to identify the pump performance based on the system. The vertical green line shows the optimal operating point provided from the .m file and wind tunnel data.

Results:

Once our plots were made for each pump, the Best Efficiency Point (BEP) was found. Since each pump had its own plot, we were able to conclude that the VOLVO pump is the most suited for Fake Trucks Inc. as this plot had the best intersection between the system and filter head compared to the wind tunnel recommendation we concluded. The second closest would be pump 2 as this interestingly comes really close, but still not as close as pump 3. As for the filter, our calculations concluded that the Ktot did not have an effect on the efficiency as it only made a small change within the value. With that being said, we concluded that it does not matter which filter we pick. That leads us to choose filter number 4 as the best option due to its high efficiency of .87 while still costing $5 less than filter number 1 with an efficiency of .85. As for the cab model, the one chosen has been model B as it has the lowest max power required at 437 hp. The second closest result was model A with a max power required of 440 hp.

Figure 4: Filter diameter from 1 in to 0.75 in to make pump 2 better.

• Change of elevation can be considered as this may affect values.

• Keeping actual values instead of creating a curve fit line. By doing this, our pump values could change drastically.

• Possibly include skin friction by utilizing the L value from the model dimensions.