eco shell marathon senior design initial progress presentation

SHELL ECO-MARATHON CHALLENGEELECTRICAL SYSTEM OF SOLAR VEHICLE

ECE TEAM 30

Asaf Erlich, Mingming Liu, Conjee Yeung, Alexey Leontyev, Andrey Shum

OVERVIEW

INTRODUCTION

STATUS REVIEW

DECISION METHODOLOGY

TECHNICAL DIAGRAMS

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION

OVERVIEW

Objective: is to be able to build a vehicle that can travel the

longest distance using the least amount of energy

o Gasoline, Electric, Diesel, Hydrogen, Biofuel , Solar

Key: Efficiency, not speed

Goal: is to apply creativity in designing sustainable

transportation to achieve the highest possible fuel efficiency.

INTRODUCTION

HISTORY

Started in 1939

The winner of the first Eco-Marathon achieved 50 mpg

TODAY

Over 400 students and 70 teams across the United States participate

Last year, the winning team achieved 2,487.5 mpg! Record was 10,705 mpg (2003, UK)

http://www.shell.com/home/content/ecomarathon/americas/for_participants/faqs/

TEAM GOAL

Design and Build a Solar Powered Vehicle to compete in The Shell

Eco-Marathon Competition

Collaborating with two Mechanical Engineer Mechanics (MEM)

Teams to design and construct the vehicle

MEM Team 1 (Structural) are responsible for chassis design,

analysis, and construction

MEM Team 2 (Aerodynamics) are responsible for body design,

analysis, construction, paint and touch ups

ECE Team (Electrical) are responsible for power train design,

testing, and evaluation of all required electrical components

INTRODUCTION

Changes from Proposal

The primary goal of the project is to design, test and evaluate

the electrical system for a solar vehicle. Meeting the race

constraints will no longer be our deliverable.

New alternative of motor is used instead of the one that was

described in the proposal.

INTRODUCTION

Competition Overview

Shell Eco-Marathon is an annual competition to determine the most fuel efficient vehicle.

Held in Houston, Texas.

Date: April 14-17.

Divided into two vehicle groups: Prototype (3-Wheel) and Urban Concept (Four-Wheel).

Further divided into classes based on fuel type: Diesel, petrol, LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas), electric, hydrogen, ethanol, Biofuels, gas to liquids, and Solar.

Requirement: Vehicles must be capable of running a 10 mile track at a minimum average speed of 15 mph.

Fuel will be measured at the beginning and at the end of the race.

INTRODUCTION

http://www.shell.com/home/content/ecomarathon/americas/for_participants/americas_rules/

Electrical Power Constraints of Solar Powered Vehicle:

Must have two joule meters to measure generated and

consumed power (provided by competition).

Supply voltage must not exceed 48 volts.

Supply Current must not exceed 50 Amperes continuous and

150 Amperes Peak.

Battery Monitoring System (BMS) must be equipped.

Vehicle without driver must not exceed 140 kg (309 lbs)

Vehicle must be capable of seating 1 person

Shell Eco-Marathon Guidelines

INTRODUCTION

http://www-static.shell.com/static/ecomarathon/downloads/2011/global/SEM_Rules_2011_Final.pdf

Electrical Component Requirements:

Two front headlights.

Two rear red lights.

Two front/rear red brake lights.

Front/rear turn signals.

Emergency/Hazard lights.

Horn (purchased through Shell).

Emergency shutdown mechanism to isolate battery and motor.

Electrical components must be fused in transparent box.

Eco-Shell Marathon Guidelines

INTRODUCTION

http://www-static.shell.com/static/ecomarathon/downloads/2011/global/SEM_Rules_2011_Final.pdf

Objective of the Electrical Team is to build a powertrain that

includes:

An Array Of Solar Panels/Cells used to charge the battery.

An Accumulator (Battery/Capacitor) to power the motor,

controller, and other electrical components of the vehicle.

A Motor Controller to drive the electric motor.

An Electric Motor to provide mechanical power and propel the

vehicle.

INTRODUCTION

STATUS REVIEW

Top three options:

Solar arrays

Electric Motor

Battery

Simulation:

General Simulink Model of the powertrain

Basic PSpice circuit diagram

SWOT Analysis for Solar Cell


Strength Weakness

Much Less Expensive

DurabilityLess Efficient

Most Commonly

UsedWeather Conditions

Fragile

Opportunities Threats

Polycrystalline

Strength Weakness

Most Efficient

DurabilityExpensive

Most Commonly

Used

Most Experienced

Weather Conditions

Fragile


Monocrystalline

Brand Model TypeTotal Weight

(lbs)

Total Power Output

(W)Total Cost ($)

ALPS ALPS-85 Polycrystalline 88.18 426.3 $2,200.00

BP Solar BP3125J Polycrystalline 105.82 501.12 $2,296.00

ALPS ALPS-123 Polycrystalline 104.06 495.36 $2,540.00

Suntech SunTech65 Polycrystalline 109.35 520.128 $3,248.00

BP Solar BP3115J Polycrystalline 105.82 458.28 $2,136.00



Power Film P7.2-150 Amorphous Flexible 11.40 69.12 $5,755.20

Power Film PT15-75 Amorphous Flexible 12.86 143.99 $7,470.65

Power Film P7.2-75 Amorphous Flexible 12.86 67.32 $7,470.65

Considerations for Alternative Types of Solar Arrays


DECISION MATRIX FOR SOLAR ARRAYS

Brand Model Type Total Weight Total Power Output Total Cost Total

ALPS ALPS-85 Polycrystalline 3.8 7.6 5.0 16.3

BP Solar BP3125J Polycrystalline 2.4 8.9 4.9 16.2

ALPS ALPS-123 Polycrystalline 2.6 8.8 4.7 16.1

Suntech SunTech65 Polycrystalline 2.1 9.3 4.2 15.6

BP Solar BP3115J Polycrystalline 2.4 8.1 5.0 15.6



Power Film P7.2-150 Amorphous Flexible 10.0 1.0 2.3 13.3

Power Film PT15-75 Amorphous Flexible 9.9 2.4 1.0 13.3

Power Film P7.2-75 Amorphous Flexible 9.9 1.0 1.0 11.9

Scale

1- Heaviest

5- Medium

10- Lightest

1 – Lowest

5 – Medium

10 – Highest

1 – Highest

3 – Medium

5 - Lowest


Strength Weakness

Simple Design

Reliable Operation

Mounting Variety

Long Life

Variable Frequency

Source

Requires Expensive

Controller

Industrial Applications

Full Size Vehicle

Inability to Operate at

Low Speed

Overload Damage


SWOT Analysis for Electric Motors


Strength Weakness

Easy Design

Simple Speed Control

Simple Torque Control

High Maintenance

Physically Larger

Inexpensive Drive

Design

Efficient at Low Speed

Overload Damage


AC DC

CONSIDERATION FOR ALTERNATIVE TYPES OF DC MOTOR


Brand Model TypePower

(W)

Weight

(lb)

Torque

(Nm)RPM

Relative

Cost

FreeenergystoreHigh Speed

Hub Motor

Brushless

Hub1000 11.9 30 450 $600.00

Golden Motor MagicPie PM Hub 1000 16.53 27 2500 $293.00

Electric

Motorsports

EVT Hub

MotorPM Hub 1086 18 25.5 676 $750.00

Perm-Motor PMG-132 PM 7220 24.25 20.5 2200 $1,024.95

Koford5.07 inch

seriesBrushless 1000 9.7 40.7 2563 $1,200.00

MMP D40-675D-

48V 1215 25 30.5 285 $1,150.00

Torque Provided By MEM Team = 29.5 Nm

DECISION MATRIX FOR DC MOTOR


Brand Model Power Rating WeightTorque

RatingCost Total

FreeenergystoreHigh Speed

Hub Motor 1.0 8.7 10.0 7.0 26.7

Golden Motor MagicPie 1.0 6.0 7.0 10.0 24.0

Electric MotorsportsEVT Hub

Motor 1.1 5.1 8.0 5.5 19.7

Perm-Motor PMG-132 10.0 1.4 5.1 2.7 19.3

Koford5.07 inch

series 1.0 10.0 5.0 1.0 17.0

MMP D40-675D-

48V 1.3 1.0 9.0 1.5 12.8

Scale

1- Lowest

5-Neutral

10- Highest

1 – Heaviest

5 – Medium

10 – Lightest

1- Non-desirable

5- Neutral

10- Desirable

1-Expens.

5-Neutral

10-Cheap

Strengths Weaknesses

Store Energy

Provide Power

Small/Portable

Lightweight

Easily Mounted

Life Cycle

Gets Hot

Time to Charge

Monitoring System

May Fail

Readily Available

Common Use

Variety of Voltages

Variety of Current

Series or Parallel

Capable

HighTemperature

Environment

Fire Risk

Short Circuit Risk

Capacity Overload

Loss of Charge


SWOT Analysis for Battery and Super Capacitors


Strengths Weaknesses

Store Energy

Long Life

High Rate of Charge

High Rate of Discharge

No Overcharging

Varied Voltage

Energy per unit stored

Electronic Control

Energy Loss

Dielectric Absorption

Readily Available

High Energy Density

Rapid Energy Release

Large Energy Release


CONSIDERATION FOR ALTERNATIVE TYPES OF BATTERY

Brand Model TypeVoltage Rating

(Volts)

Discharge Rate

(KWh)

Weight

(kg)

Energy

Density

(KWh/kg)

Cost ($)

Apple A1185 Li-Ion 10.8 0.061 0.454 0.134 $38.59

Apple B-APL-06-O Li-Ion 10.8 0.048 0.454 0.106 $76.00

NYCEWheels TOYO-USP SLA (Lead acid) 12 0.228 5.94 0.038 $54.95

Electric Scooter

PartsUB12180 SLA (Lead acid) 12 0.222 5.94 0.038 $54.95

Dell B-5908H Li-ion 11.1 0.072 1.36 0.053 $82.88

HP RQ204AA Li-Ion 7.2 0.018 0.5 0.036 $84.99


DECISION MATRIX FOR BATTERY

Brand ModelDischarge

RateWeight

Energy

DensityCost Total

Apple A1185 1.8 5.0 5.0 5.0 16.8

Apple B-APL-06-O 1.6 5.0 3.9 1.8 12.2

Dell B-5908H 5.0 1.0 1.1 3.6 10.7

HP RQ204AA 4.9 1.0 1.1 3.6 10.6

Electric Scooter

PartsUB12180 2.0 4.3 1.7 1.2 9.2

NYCEWheels TOYO-USP 1.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 8.0

Scale

1 – Lowest

3 – Neutral

5 – Highest

1 – Heaviest

3 – Medium

5 – Lightest

1 – Lowest

3 – Medium

5 – Highest

1 – Expensive

3 – Neutral

5 – Inexpensive


Vehicle Chassis Design In SolidWorks

TECHNICAL DIAGRAMS

Vehicle Body Design In SolidWorks

TECHNICAL DIAGRAMS

PSpice Circuit Model

Castaner, Luis (2002). Modeling Photovoltaic Systems Using PSpice. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons.

TECHNICAL DIAGRAMS

Simulink Model

TECHNICAL DIAGRAMS

Simulink Model

MATLAB R2010b, Matlab Solar Cell Demo. The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, 2000

TECHNICAL DIAGRAMS

Simulink Model

TECHNICAL DIAGRAMS

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Asaf ErlichTeam Lead

Alexey LeontyevCorrespondence

Conjee YeungLiaison

Mingming LiuPublicist

Andrey ShumTreasurer

Dr. FontecchioAdvisors

Dr. Layton

David HoMEM Team Lead

TEAM ROLES

Asaf Erlich

• Simulink, Programming and Script Development

Conjee Yeung

• Matlab Expertise and Battery Expertise/Researcher

Alexey Leontyev

• Power Systems and Motor Expertise/Researcher

Mingming Liu

• Matlab Expertise and Solar Panel Expertise/Researcher

Andrey Shum

• Power Systems Expertise

• System Analyst

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

TECHNICAL ROLES

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

INDUSTRIAL BUDGET

Wages

Category Expense Cost/Unit

Total

Units Total Cost

Initial Design Project manager 40 200 $ 8,000.00

Electrical Engineer(4) 35 200 $ 28,000.00

Construction Project manager 40 300 $ 12,000.00


Technician (2) 25 300 $ 15,000.00

Testing Project manager 40 40 $ 1,600.00


Documentation Project manager 40 40 $ 1,600.00


$ 98,400.00

Materials/Equipment/Overhead

Expense Category Costs

Electrical

Components

Solar Panels $ 4,000.00

Motor/Controls $ 3,000.00

Batteries $ 6,000.00

Wires $ 200.00

Nuts/Bolts/Screws/Fasteners $ 150.00

LED, Gauges, Switches $ 500.00

Equipment Multi-meters $ 200.00

Ammeter $ 200.00

Joulemeter $ 200.00

Hand Tools $ 750.00

Software Pspice $ 500.00

MatLab/Simulink $ 500.00

Microsoft Office $ 300.00

$ 16,500.00

Estimated Overhead Costs 50%

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

OUT OF POCKET BUDGET

Part Est. Price How to Obtain Sponsorship Budget Hess Garage

Lights - Garage X

Wiring - Garage/Budget X X

Connectors/Switches - Garage/Budget X X

Joule-Meters/Monitoring Devices - Provided X X

Battery/Monitoring $1000 Budget X X

Solar Panels $2200 Donation X X

Rectification System - Build X X

Motor/Controls $1,000.00 Donation X X

Total $4,200.00

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

GANTT CHART

Tasks

20

-S

ep

-1

0

27

-S

ep

-1

0

04

-O

ct -

10

11

-O

ct -

10

18

-O

ct -

10

25

-O

ct -

10

01

-N

ov -

10

08

-N

ov -

10

15

-N

ov -

10

22

-N

ov -

10

29

-N

ov -

10

06

-D

ec -

10

13

-D

ec -

10

20

-D

ec -

10

27

-D

ec -

10

03

-Ja

n -

11

10

-Ja

n -

11

17

-Ja

n -

11

24

-Ja

n -

11

31

-Ja

n -

11

07

-F

eb

-1

1

14

-F

eb

-1

1

21

-F

eb

-1

1

28

-F

eb

-1

1

07

-M

ar

-1

1

14

-M

ar

-1

1

21

-M

ar

-1

1

28

-M

ar

-1

1

04

-A

pr

-1

1

11

-A

pr

-1

1

18

-A

pr

-1

1

25

-A

pr

-1

1

02

-M

ay -

11

09

-M

ay -

11

Design

Preliminary Research

Matlab/Simulink Block Diagram

Decision Matrix

Completed Power System

Design

Calculate the Power Required

Determine the available Power

from Solar Panels

Ensure the system will

complete the required

objectives

Construction

Gathering Components

Connect From Motor To Battery

Add Solar Panels

Finish Construction Finishing

Touches

Debugging/Testing/Prepping

Competition

Model Simulation in Simulink

Circuit Simulation in PSpice

Ordering Parts

Construction

Testing

Competing in Shell’s Eco-Marathon Challenge On April 14th 2011!

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

FUTURE STEPS TO TAKE

CONCLUSION

The final product will be a vehicle

power train that will be safe,

lightweight, cost-effective, and meet

the requirements to compete in the

Shell Eco-Marathon Challenge 2011

in Houston, Texas

Questions?

0 1 2

3

4 5 6 7

8

MONTHS

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

PROJECT CASHFLOW ANALYSIS

Sponsorship

Drexel

Donations

Parts/Supplies

Parts

Maintenance

eco shell marathon senior design initial progress presentation

Documents

vehicle mem team

vehicle groups

lbs vehicle

shell ecomarathon competition

fuel efficient vehicle

goal design

solar key

body design