B58DB Design and Manufacture 2 Group 24 Matthew Mann, Steven Mallon and Nasim Memmedov 27 November 2012

Outdoor Drier Report

Dryer Design

Group 24

Declaration All parties except the equal contribution that was done during the process of the writing of this bracket fabrication report and all other works that were necessary for completion as stated below.

Introduction/calculations/concept 3

Nasim Memmedov

Calculations /concept 2

Steven Mallon

Theory/calculations/concepts/ conclusion/format/drawings

Matthew Mann

Page 2 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

Abstract

The aim is to find out where a washing dryer fails and redesign it so that it can handle a worst case scenario. It was found the main arm sheared at the point it connects to the brace due to the moments occurred. As a way round the failure it was decided to make the arm a solid beam so that it could handle a high moment.

Page 3 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

Table of contents

I
II 1.

List of figures
List of tables Introduction 1.1 Outdoor drier 1.2 Goals 1.3 Considerations and limitations Design appraisal 2.1 Length of lines 2.2 Mass of washing 2.3 Wind force 2.4 Analysis of joints 2.5 Analysis of beam Concept 3.1 Concepts 3.1.1 Concept 1 3.1.2 Concept 2 3.1.3 Concept 3 3.1.4 Conclusion 3.2 Chosen concepts Conclusion References Appendices

4
5 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 9 9 11 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 15 16 17

2.

3.

4. 5. 6.

Page 4 of 17

Dryer Design I List of figures

Group 24

Fig 2.1

Line lengths M Mann Line loading M Mann Moments

M Mann

Fig 2.2

Fig 2.3

11

Page 5 of 17

Dryer Design I List of tables

Group 24

Table 2.1 Line lengths M Mann Table 2.2 Line loading M Mann Table 2.3 Moments
M Mann

11

Page 6 of 17

Dryer Design 1. Introduction

Group 24

1.1

Outdoor drier

Outdoor driers were designed as a way of drying washing outside without taking up the space of a standard washing line. It is made up of a central column with four main arms connected to a fixed bottom bracket and four brace beams that connect the main arms to the central column via a moving bracket. The washing is loaded onto the 11 lines on the drier when it is in its fully opened state. Due to the design of the drier being compact there has been failures in many of them leading to the need for redesign. 1.2 Goals Find where the drier fails Redesign the area so that it does not fail 1.3 Considerations and limitations

The drier should still be able to function as it does with the ability to fold away and to rotate and the mass should not increase significantly. Cost should also not increase by too much.

Page 7 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

2.

Design appraisal

2.1

Length of the lines

To calculate the area of the washing on each side of the drier the length of the lines must be calculated. Using the specification given a basic model of two arms was created, using SolidWorks 2011 as shown below (Figure 2.1), to calculate the length of each line. The sag in lines 1 and 2 was then taken as 10% [1] due to the weight of the washing.

Figure 2.1 Line lengths Line L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 2.2 Mass of the washing Span (mm) Actual Length (mm) 2305.17 2535.69 2128.39 2341.23 1951.61 1951.61 1774.84 1774.84 1598.06 1598.06 1421.28 1421.28 Table 2.1 Line lengths

Each of the four main beams has a force exerted on them due to the mass of the washing on each line. An average washing machine has a maximum load of 6kg dry washing [2]. When washing is wet it can absorb up to 5 times its mass. Assuming that two loads of washing can fit on the drier the mass taken for the washing is 30kg over the whole drier and 7.5kg per each arm. The heavier washing will be on lines 1 and 2 with the mass on each line decreasing and lines 7-11 to be taken as negligible. Assuming this the force on each line can be calculated (see appendix 7.a) and is shown below (table 2.2).

Page 8 of 17

Dryer Design Line L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 2.3 Wind Force Force Mass (kg) Force (N) W1 2.25 22.07 W2 1.75 17.17 W3 1.15 11.28 W4 0.95 9.32 W5 0.75 7.36 W6 0.65 6.38 Table 2.2 Line loading

Group 24

Force is exerted against the washing on line 1 by the wind. This force acts against the main arms as the washing is forced in towards in central column. The force due to wind is calculated using the equation:

The wind speed is taken as 20m/s as this allows for gusts at a time of strong winds. The area of the washing is calculated by multiplying the length of the line by the height from the floor to the line including 250mm clearance from the floor. This gives the area to be 3.677m2. At a temperature of 20C the density of air can be taken as 1.205kg/m3. [3]

2.4

Analysis of joints

Creating a free body diagram of one section allows the resultant forces in both the main arm and the brace. The angles for the triangle created by the central column, brace and main arm are as shown in appendix 7.b.

Figure 2.2 Joint analysis Taking moments around R, Bv can be calculated using clockwise as the positive direction.

Page 9 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

The force in beam B can be calculated by converting the component force.

Because the beam is in equilibrium the sum of forces can be used to calculate the reaction vertical force (Rv), taking down as positive.

Doing the same for sum of forces horizontal gives us the reaction horizontal force (Rh), taking right direction as positive.

The total reaction force at the central column can now the calculated using the component forces.

Page 10 of 17

Dryer Design 2.5 Analysis of the beam

Group 24

With all the forces in the beam calculated Macaulays Method can be used to calculate the bending moment in the beam and then the shear force though the beam.

Figure 2.3 Moments For clockwise moment being positive: ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( ) ( ) Using the equation above in excel (see appendix 6.A) gave a graph of the bending moment in the beam at different points so that this can then be used to find out the shear force in the beam.

Bending Moment
900 800 Bending moment (Nm) 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 0.7 1.005 1.13 1.225 Distance x (m) 1.38 1.505 1.63

Table 2.3 Moments

Page 11 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

The maximum moment can be taken as 820.5 Nm. To calculate the shear stress in the beam we can use the moment and the second moment of area.

Comparing this to the data sheet it is over the yield tensile strength which is given to be 96.5MN. This means that the beam must fail at 0.7m in from the central column.

Page 12 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

3.

Concepts

3.1

Concept options

3.1.1 Concept 1 The shear stress acts through the material of the beam and if the design is kept the same then the place that it fails is the thickness of the walls in the hollow beam. If this beam was solid then it would have a much higher second moment of area which would reduce the chance of it shearing. The drawback to this concept is that it would require more material although the amount of material that is currently used is not enough to handle a worst case scenario as given in the design appraisal. 3.1.2 Concept 2 The following concept adds a second support beam to the previous drier design that connects the top of the main arm to the top of the central column. It is the hope that the additional support of this beam will be enough to support the load on the lower extruding beam without it failing. Using the formula:

Where A= the length of the new beam B= the distance from the bottom joint to the top of the central pole C= the length of the extruding beam And theta = the angle between B and C

We calculate the length A= 1443.57mm Adding an extra support in would be able to support the extra bending moment but would possibly still need to have different dimensions to that as used in the rest of the dryer. This would increase cost due to the amount of material and would require a full redesign due to the way the folding in mechanism works. 3.1.3 Concept 3 Another possibility is to reduce the length of the main arm to 1.5m so that the forces are closer to the central column allowing the arm to incur a lower bending moment. The pitch of the cords would have to be decreased to 100mm to allow for the reduction in the arm and the span of the cords would also be decreased. This would mean the practicality of the dryer wouldnt be as efficient although having less washing would also decrease the force on the cords from the wet washing. Having less force on the cords would also reduce the moment on the main arm and stop it from failing. 3.1.4 Conclusion Looking at the different concepts the best option is to change the main arm to a solid bar instead of being hollow. Although this increases manufacturing costs it keeps the practicality of the dryer and means less redesign.

Page 13 of 17

Dryer Design 3.2 Chosen concept

Group 24

The chosen concept is to change the main arm so that it is still made of aluminium alloy 6061-T1 although the beam will be solid instead of hollow. This keep the design of the main arm the same and therefore all forces will be the same as calculated in the design appraisal although the integrity of the concept must be checked. As the moments will be the same the shear stress must be calculated, but first the new second moment of area must be found.

With this new second moment of area:

The yield stress is still 96.5MN as the same alloy is being used. As the shear stress is less than the yield stress the beam will not break. This method also allows for a safety factor due to the difference in the two of them.

Page 14 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

4.

Conclusion

In conclusion the dryer is unable to withstand the moments occurred from loading and wind when a high load is put on during high winds. This happens when the main arm shears at the point where it connects to the smaller brace. To overcome this, the dryer has been modified so that the main arm is made of solid aluminium 6061-T1 with the main design of the dryer staying the same. Although this increases costs it is seen as the cheaper and more efficient method as the functionality of the dryer is not affected and the ease of manufacture stays the same.

Page 15 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

5.

References

1. 2. 3.

(15th August 2012), Group Design Project 1 http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/zanussi-zwg6141p-washing-machine-white-19314412-pdt.html http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-properties-d_156.html

Page 16 of 17

Dryer Design

Group 24

6.

Appendices

6.A

Excel work sheet force value 1172.19 2017.86 22.07 17.17 11.28 9.32 7.36 6.38 919.25

M 0 820.533 562.60365 454.13615 370.4081 231.49865 118.3099 4.20115

x 0 0.7 1.005 1.13 1.225 1.38 1.505 1.63 1.63

force Rv Bv W6 W5 W4 W3 W2 W1 Fv

Formulas for M: M =($E$2*(B2-0)) =($E$2*(B3-0))-($E$3*(B3-0.7)) =($E$2*(B4-0))-($E$3*(B4-0.7))-($E$4*(B4-1.005)) =($E$2*(B5-0))-($E$3*(B5-0.7))-($E$4*(B5-1.005))-($E$5*(B5-1.13)) =($E$2*(B6-0))-($E$3*(B6-0.7))-($E$4*(B6-1.005))-($E$5*(B6-1.13))-($E$6*(B6-1.255)) =($E$2*(B7-0))-($E$3*(B7-0.7))-($E$4*(B7-1.005))-($E$5*(B7-1.13))-($E$6*(B7-1.255))-($E$7*(B7-1.38)) =($E$2*(B8-0))-($E$3*(B8-0.7))-($E$4*(B8-1.005))-($E$5*(B8-1.13))-($E$6*(B8-1.255))-($E$7*(B8-1.38))-($E$8*(B81.505)) =($E$2*(B9-0))-($E$3*(B9-0.7))-($E$4*(B9-1.005))-($E$5*(B9-1.13))-($E$6*(B9-1.255))-($E$7*(B9-1.38))-($E$8*(B91.505))-($E$9*(B9-1.63))+($E$10*(B10-1.63))

Page 17 of 17