FAKULTI KEJURUTERAAN MEKANIKALBACHELOR OF ENGINEERING (HONOURS) MECHANICAL (EM220)MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN 1(MEC531) (EMD5M3A)PHASE 1 REPORT

LECTURERS NAME: EN.YAKUB BIN TALIB

GROUP MEMBERS: 1)DANIAL BARR BIN ABDUL AZIZ (2010270214) 2)NOORADINAN BIN NOORDIN(2010409088) 3)FARITH BIN JASMI(2011985677) 4)MUHAMMAD ASYRAF BIN AHMAD(2011116869) 5)MUHAMMAD FARIED BIN ABDUL RAZAK (2011799785)

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32.0 Main Body ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4 2.1 Identifying problems------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 2.2Gathering information----------------------------------------------------------------- 5 2.3Concept generation------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 2.4 Concept evaluation------------------------------------------------------------------ 7 3.0 Conclusion ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 14

Introduction Hovercraft, as we know them today, have been around for about half a century, since the 1950's, but have somehow never managed to get into the mainstream use of transportation. This has been for various reasons. Its inability for precise maneuvering control and its relatively high maintenance and noise levels compared to the automobile have been sufficiently difficult to overcome to keep the air cushion vehicle at the fringe of modern transport. It also came along well over fifty years after the automobile was accepted as the standard means of transport in its many guises as car, truck, recreation vehicle and so forth.The fact that hovercraft technology was classified as secret after World War 2 also didn't encourage it into the mainstream of vehicle construction companies. And even after it became declassified in the 1960's problems with wear and tear of the rubber skirt, salt intake by the fans and other technical difficulties all contributed to keep the hovercraft and other air cushion vehicles in the domain of specialized vehicles and hobbyists. Furthermore, the inability of governments to classify the air cushion vehicle - it's neither a car nor a boat, apparently, although it is usually considered a boat didn't make it easier for general acceptance.That is not to say that its independence from established roads and the need for a smooth road surface is not one of these reasons as well. It is easy to imagine that road construction companies as well as (local) governments, law enforcement agencies and the military would be against such a vehicle. But is it justified?In our overcrowded road systems strict order and driving regulations are necessary. Having everyone drive in vehicles, like hovercraft, that can go just about anywhere would not only complicate traffic tremendously, it could also cause irreversible damage to our already struggling environment. The many hovercraft clubs around the world prove that this air cushion vehicle is only beginning its rise to popularity, and the ready availability of plans and materials to construct your own hovercraft show that there is a growing interest in this modern technology the world over.The last ten years has seen a significant increase in the construction and use of air cushion and WIG-craft with many of the old difficulties solved or greatly improved. Modern air cushion vehicles are more trustworthy, more controllable, are fuel-efficient and eco-friendly and often low-cost compared to the automobile.And even if you can't get a full-sized hovercraft for your personal enjoyment, there's no need to go without this fun pastime. Model sized hovercraft are very popular as a remote control hobby.

But that is only one side of the argument. Modern cars, especially the all-terrain vehicles that are so popular nowadays, have almost the same ability as do hovercraft; to go most anywhere outside the road system. And so do motorcycles and other off-road vehicles. More than that even because where hovercraft have difficulty, as with slopes, ATV's and motorcycles do not.Trillions of dollars could have been saved on expensive road surfaces and maintenance worldwide if hovercraft had been adopted as the standard transport vehicle instead of the car. But again, the road construction companies would have been against such a development. And they do have a powerful voice in many places. Hovercraft work perfectly well on grass, imagine if all the highways and roads we have were made of grass instead of concrete and asphalt? Just add a simple attachment at the bottom and we'd be cutting the grass as we travel over it. Hovercraft also have difficulty on steep slopes, something which a wheeled or caterpillared vehicle has less or no problem with. But if as much money was spent on research and development of hovercraft as is being spent on regular road vehicles, these problems too would have been a thing of the past long ago.Either way, hovercraft enthusiasts have not given up their struggle to make this vehicle a popular one, even if only for recreational use and, since a decade or two, hovercraft have been widely used by the military and commercial companies such as boat ferries, rescue vehicles and park ranger transport, to name but a few.

Identifying ProblemsBackgroundA hovercraft, also known as an air-cushion vehicle or ACV, is a craft capable of travelling over land, water, mud or ice and other surfaces both at speed and when stationary. Hovercraft are hybrid vessels operated by a pilot as an aircraft rather than a captain as a marine vessel.The first practical design for hovercraft derived from a British invention in the 1950s to 1960s. They are now used throughout the world as specialised transports in disaster relief, coastguard, military and survey applications as well as for sport or passenger service. Very large versions have been used to transport hundreds of people and vehicles across the English Channel whilst others have military applications used to transport tanks, soldiers and large equipment in hostile environments and terrain.Despite their versatility, hovercraft have surprisingly enough found very little use in the civilian sector. Instead, it has primarily seen use in the military field or in search and rescue operations, while the only remotely civilian applications are for ferrying people to and from remote locations such as in Alaska.Other than the aforementioned applications, hovercrafts have also seen use as a recreational or hobby vehicle. However, they only cater to a select group of enthusiasts as the kits required to build them are rather costly, and require significant handicraft skills to construct. Though there exists cheap production models, those are rather crude compared to their kit-based counterparts. As a result, they have only seen limited use in said field.The purpose of this project is to see how we can design a cost effective hovercraft, at least for recreation purposes, with more refined characteristics which would be easy to produce and would appeal to the general public. The following report will detail the steps we have taken in Phase 1 to research and analyze the various design methodologies that we could apply to our hovercraft design.

Problem StatementAs mentioned before, current civilian use hovercraft have several problems which prevents their use from becoming widespread. Hence, before we are to begin our deliberation on the design issues, we will first identify the problems inherent in current production model hovercraft.-Inconvenient to operate;Many of the cheaper production model recreation only have one engine which directly powers the thrust fan, with the lift pressure being siphoned from the thrust stream, this simultaneously decreases performance and limits the size and payload capacity of the craft, allowing only one person to ride it at any one time. This causes it to lose some of its versatility. In addition, this system also means that the craft is unable to remain stationary without deflating its air cushion.

-Expensive;Recreational hovercraft in general, production models or kit based constructs, are rather expensive. For kit based constructs this is partially justified based on its more refined features, however, in the case of the production models, this is somewhat unjustified as the craft produced are rudimentary, yet, due to low demand, prices get ramped up over the materials and finishing.-low maneuverability;Most of the production models are controlled only by basic control surfaces. This, combined with the low friction of the air cushion, means that they become more prone to skidding and sliding when turning.

ObjectivesIn light of the problems stated in the previous statement, we have set several objectives to achieve through this phase of the design process. These are namely;-to improve the overall cost efficacy of the design-to improve performance by revising the drive train and related power systems, and integrating the designs found in more advanced hovercraft into the design.-to improve maneuverability by utilizing better control surfaces/methods in the design.

Scope of ProjectThe scope of this project encompasses the entirety of the design of a hovercraft. By breaking down the hovercraft into its primary components, we intend to redesign it from the ground up as a more cost effective yet capable recreational vehicle compared to its predecessors. We will determine, through the proper selection methods, which alternative would serve as the best candidate for the related component and formulate a preliminary design. This would serve as our foundation for the second phase.

Significance of projectThe significance of this project is that the redesign of this recreation purpose hovercraft would make it accessible to more of the public, or so we hope. In that sense, the hovercraft might be able to be brought out of its once niche role and be made more available, much like cars or motorcycles. But more importantly, this project serves as a testbed on which we, as students of the engineering discipline get to test and refine our designing abilities in preparation for our working futures.

Gather Information A.References http://www.academicjournals.org/ijps/pdf/pdf2011/2Sept/Amiruddin%20et%20al.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hovercraft http://iet-journals.org/archive/2013/march_vol_3_no_3/85272135453771.pdf http://hovercrafthomepage.blogspot.com/p/hovercraft-design-calculator.html http://www.hovercollege.com/industrial/hovercraft_skirt/index.htmhttp://cheaphovercrafts.tripod.com/id2.html http://www.seas.columbia.edu/mece1/Team%20LevTech/Site_files/Hovercraft%20and%20Airboat%20Engines,%20Propellers,%20Fans,%20Supplies.htm http://www.hovercraftconsultants.co.uk/products/asp/prodtype.asp?prodtype=63&ph=cat&keywords=&recor=&SearchFor=&PT_ID=&PT_MasterCategory=n http://www.ehow.com/info_8747604_materials-use-make-hovercraft-skirt.html http://www.seair.com/hovercraftdetails.htm http://cheaphovercrafts.tripod.com/id3.htmlHomemade http://www4.ncsu.edu/~clpadget/hoverblog.html http://amasci.com/amateur/hovercft.html

B. Journals

A.K .Amiruddin , S.M. Sapuan and A.A Jaafar ( 2011, September 2) International Journal of the Physical Sciences Vol 6(17) ,Development of a hovercraft prototype with an aluminium hull base. Carlos Camoesas (1991) Hovercraft Design Journal P. FitzPatrick (2009) Hovercraft Club of Great Britain (S.E.Branch) , The Principle of hovercraft design . T.J.R.Longley T Eng(CEI) AMRAeS (1999, May) An Integrated System of Control For Hovercraft Using Differentially Acting Elevons . P. FitzPatrick (2009) Understanding and Selecting Lift Fans. The Right of L.yun and A.Bliault(1999, August) Theory and Design of Air Cushion Craft . Okafor, B.E. , Department of Mechanical Engineering, Fed. University of Technology., Owerri-Nigeria (2013, March 3) , Development of a Hovercraft Prototype.

C.Articles

DAILY MAIL REPORTER (2012, August 25 ) The 21st century hovercraft: Designers create sports car-inspired design Mary Bellis (n.d) Hovercraft. Rashel Dan , (n.d) A Design Plan For Building A Hovercraft That Works Natasha Gilani, eHow Contributor (n.d) , Hovercraft Design Basics

D. Patents

Ian Desberg (2010, November 10) Patent no . D0646198 MerchSource, LLC. Matthew James Del Duke,Justin Discoe,Chow Ming Lau,Chun Wah Lee,Robert Paul Spalinski(2006, April 25 ) Patent no . US7032698 B2 , UNITED STATE . Albert Blum,Hartmut Stiegler (1996 , April 10 ) Patent no . EP0644839 B1 , EP0644838 B1 . Olof Bjorn-Ake (1989 , May 9) Patent no . US4828058 A , UNITED STATE .

Concept Generation

SkirtNylonConventional rubberReinforced rubberDrive train1 I.C motor for lift and 1 electric motor1 I.C motor power lift and propulsion where power divided by transmission2 I.C motor power the lift and propulsion1 I.C motor to power propulsion and lift where the lift directed from fan to the skirt by a flow pipePropulsion2 ducted fanNozzleChassisWoodFibreglass woodFibreglass kevlarMarine grade aluminiumControl systemMechanical control systemElectronic analogue systemHovercraft

Morphological chartFunctionDesign 1Design 2Design 3Design 4

1.Drive train1 I.C motor power lift and propulsion where power divided by transmission

1 I.C motor to power propulsion and lift where the lift directed from fan to the skirt by a flow pipe

2 I.C motor power the lift and propulsion

1 I.C motor for lift and 1 electric motor

2.ChasisFibreglass woodTreated WoodFibreglass KevlarMarine grade aluminium

3.PropusionAir distributed with two ducts c/w one fan1 Ducted FanNozzle2 Ducted Fan

4..SkirtingReinforced RubberNylonConventional Rubber Synthetic Canvas Cloth

5.Control SystemElectronic Analogue ControlMechanicalFlyby wireElectronic Analogue Control

Concept EvaluationsPUGH CHARTPugh Chart Comparison Criteria and Values

DESIGN 1DESIGN 2DESIGN 3DESIGN 4

Criteria+++N-

ManufacturabilityUsed a high quality of componentUses moderately numerous and complex componentsUses few, simple componentsUses a low quality of material

SafetyPositively contributes to a user safetySafety to usedIt can be risk after a several time of usageIs a source of risk

PortabilityIs lightweight or facilitates movementLightweight Heavy or bulkyHeavy

Need/MarketCurrent solutions are non-existent or unpopularHas a market but is not a necessityNiche marketDo not follow a market requirement

ReliabilityA good protection from outside force and not easily break Moderately in good conditionGood reliability for a chassis but not for it skirting materialGood reliability for a chassis but not for it skirting material

LifeLongest it operational system operation compare to othersLess than design 1 but longer than design 2 and design 3Moderate operational system cycleShort operational system cycle

CostLow cost for the part Moderate for it costHigh costHigh cost

DECISION MATRIX EVALUTION (for each part)Drive TrainCriteriaCost Performance Ease of construction/Maintenance

Weightage

Types788TOTALSKETCHING

1) 1 Engine power propulsion & Lift+N+15

2) Internal Combustion engine power lift and Electric motor power propulsion_++9

3) 2 Internal Combustion engine power lift and propulsion_++9

4) Internal Combustion engine power lift &propulsion power divided by transmissionN++16

ChassisCriteriaCostDurabilityAvailabilityEase of fabrication

Weightage

Type7868TOTALSKETCHING

1)Wood and Fibreglass++++29

2)Marine grade aluminium-+-N-5

3)Fibreglass and Kevlar-+-+3

4)Treated wood+N++21

Propulsion SystemCriteria

Cost

Performance

Maintenance

Reliability

Weightage

Type7868TOTALSKETCHING

1)One ducted Fan+N++21

2)Two ducted Fan-+-N8

3)Air distributed with two ducts c/w one fan++N+23

4)Air distributed with nozzle c/w one fan (multi directional nozzle)-+-+16

SkirtingCriteria CostAvailabilityDurability

Weightage

Types779TOTALPICTURE OF MATERIAL

1) Conventional Design(Reinforced Rubber)+++24

2) Nylon_++16

3) Conventional Rubber++_14

4) Synthetic Canvas Cloth ++_14

Control SystemCriteria

Cost

Availability

Reliability

Weightage

Types768TOTALSKETCHING

Electronic AnalogueControlN++12

Fly-by-wire digital control system--+7

Mechanical

++N12

Conclusion

Our initial design, as visible in the sketches included, will be built based on the results of the decision matrix. The criteria with the highest evaluations will be utilized in the preliminary design and will also be the basis upon which the following phases are conducted.

The vehicle will be powered by a single engine, with a transmission system dividing the output to the thrust and lift systems. Its body will be built out of a wood and fibreglass composite, which helps to keep the cost down while at the same time helps the unit withstand sun and rain. It would also help to reduce the overall weight of the craft. Its propulsion system will consist of a single ducted fan whose thrust will be vectored out through nozzles, allowing a more diverse application of control surfaces with which the craft can be controlled, thus increasing maneuverability.Its skirting will use a conventional but durable rubber, which would be easier to source. Its control system however, will consist of two possible contingencies, a pure mechanical system, or ae electronic analog control system. Both scored evenly on the decision matrix and both are reliable enough for the task, hence, both will be kept un der observation until further study of the basic plan eliminates uone in favour of the other.

With this preliminary design, we hope that our objective can be fullfilled. With that we would like to put the first phase of our design project to a close.