web.cecs.pdx.eduweb.cecs.pdx.edu/~far/Past Capstone Projects/2010/Rain... · Web viewThis capstone project involves addressing these deficiencies, by designing, prototyping, and testing

1

WATER PENETRATION TEST APPARATUS

ME 493 Final Report – Year 2010

Portland State University

Industry Advisor/Sponsor

Bryan HayesMorrison Hershfield

Group Members

Andy ParkLuke Defrees

Andrew WilliamsBrian Pinkstaff

Academic Advisor

Dr. David TurcicPortland State University

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A small division of Morrison Hershfield, an engineering consulting organization, performs tests

on exterior windows, curtain walls, skylights, and doors for water penetration. It does so

through the use of a spray rack, which is designed to evenly spray water at specified flow rates

(standard ASTM E1105-00) onto each test specimen. Because this standard does not outline

any required design elements other than symmetry, there are potentially unlimited design

possibilities to meet these flow rate requirements. The spray rack that Morrison Hershfield

currently utilizes has a number of design flaws and performance deficiencies that limit

productivity, and produce questionable results.

This capstone project involves addressing these deficiencies, by designing, prototyping, and

testing an original, fully-operational spray rack that meets these standards, and satisfies the

constraints set forth by Morrison Hershfield. At the start of this project, these constraints were

defined in a PDS document, along with a timeline outlining the goals for completing different

stages of the project. This report evaluates the overall success of the project by examining

whether each of the constraints specified in the PDS were met.

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary…………....………………………………………………………………………... 2

Introduction and Background.……..………………………………………………………..……... 4

Mission Statement.............................................................................................. 5

Main Design Requirements……………………………………………………………………………. 5-8

Final Design….…………….…………………………………………………………………………..…….. 8-11

Evaluation of Design.……….…………………………………………………………………….….….. 12-15

Conclusion…….…………………………………………………………………………………….…….….. 15

Appendices......................................................................................................... 16

A. Assembly Components............................................................................................... 17-21B. Justification of Final Design........................................................................................ 22-34C. Operation Manuals……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 35-36D. Product Data Specification Table............................................................................... 37-38E. House of Quality………................................................................................................. 39F. Part Drawings………………............................................................................................. 40-48G. Bill of Materials.………….............................................................................................. 49-52H. ASTM E 1105-00

Standard.......................................................................................... 53-57

4

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Morrison Hershfield’s building science

consultants test the resistance of installed

products such as windows and doors to water

penetration. The tests are performed using a

spray rack, which is a labyrinth of piping

containing strategically placed nozzles that

project water uniformly against a test

specimen. An example of a spray rack can be

seen in Figure 1. The amount of water

applied to a test specimen must meet the

flow requirements outlined in the ASTM E-

1105 standard, which details the constraints

for successful water penetration tests.

Figure 1. Typical spray rack device used in water penetration tests.

In order to meet the flow requirements, the

spray rack must be calibrated every six

months. Calibration is done using a catch

box, as seen in Figure 2. Each of the four

corners of the rack are calibrated by placing

the catch box in front of the nozzles and

simulating a spray test for a long enough

period of time to gather a measurable

amount of water. The flow acquired from

each corner must be within the range stated

in the ASTM standard.

Figure 2. Catch box currently used by Morrison hershfield to calibrate their spray rack.

Upon completion of a test, the installed test

specimen is thoroughly inspected for water

leakage. If any leakage is discovered,

appropriate action is taken to determine the

party at fault. Although the current spray

rack apparatus used by Morrison Hershfield is

not calibrated properly, it is the only system

available for their building science

consultants. This is one of the primary

reasons our group has been asked to improve

upon their current device. Other significant

design considerations that have been

addressed by the customer include:

5

modularity, material integrity, and portability

of the rack itself. These product conditions

and performance criterion have been

examined and presented in the team’s

Product Design Specification table in

Appendix D.

MISSION STATEMENT

The Water Penetration Test Apparatus Team

will design and prototype a spray rack system

to exceed the performance and usability of

Morrison Hershfield’s current testing device.

In addition, an easy to use catch box will be

designed and fabricated in order to meet all

of the calibration and testing standards

outlined in the ASTM E 1105-00 document.

Finally, this project will be completed on

time, meeting appropriate deadlines, and

within the budget requirements outlined by

Morrison Hershfield.

MAIN DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

In order for this project to be considered

successful, it must meet the following

requirements:

• Meet flow rate requirements of ASTM

standard E 1105-00

• Improve portability and usability of previous

design

• Ensure safety and structural integrity of

design

• Nice aesthetics and professional

appearance

• Is completed within Morrison Hershfield’s

budget

ASTM E 1105-00 Calibration Standards

Meeting the calibration requirements

verifies that the water penetration testing

device performs properly. The key elements

of functionality include a uniform spray

pattern and meeting a target spray rate. As

stated in the standard, the water spray

system shall deliver water uniformly against

the exterior surface of the test specimen at a

minimum rate of 5.0 US gal/ft2-hr. The

acceptable tolerance for the device ranges

from 4-10 US gal/ft2-hr.

Improved Portability and Usability

The ease of use of the water penetration

testing device relies upon required

manpower, setup time, and transportation.

The device should be assembled, transported,

and operated by one person unless it is being

6

used in suspension which would require two

people. The assembly or disassembly of the

spray device should take a maximum of 5

minutes. Most of the parts need to be stock

and easily replaceable in case they break or

malfunction. Finally, it is important that the

device is able to be transported via a compact

passenger car, eliminating the need for a

truck/utility vehicle.

Structural Integrity

The structural integrity of the water

penetration testing device maintains that it

will withstand the stresses acting on it during

operation. The spray device must be

structurally sound when standing on the

ground or in suspension. This ensures the

safety of the users and other individuals

within the proximity of the device during

operation. The device also needs to withstand

the rough handling and abuse of a

construction environment while maintaining

functionality. Because the device will be

regularly exposed to water, all the device

parts need to be corrosion resistant.

Aesthetics

The water penetration testing device should

have a neat and professional appearance.

Other key details include hardware that is

consistent in appearance throughout the

rack.

Top-Level Alternative Conceptual Solutions

After brainstorming possible design ideas, the

team evaluated three final design solutions.

A circular rack, flexible tubing rack, and a

square modular rack were compared to the

current Morrison Hershfield model in the

scoring matrix in Table 1 below. The square

modular rack accumulated the highest score.

Table 1: Decision matrix for 3 possible design solutions.

PDS Criteria Mor

rison

Her

shfie

ld

Squa

re M

odul

ar R

ack

Flex

ible

Tub

ing

Rack

Circ

ular

Rac

k

Portability 3 4 5 5

Ease of Use 3 4 3 4

Maintenance 2 4 2 4

Durability 2 4 2 2

Calibration 1 5 3 3

Adjustable Spray Range 3 4 3 3

Safety Features 3 4 4 4

ASTM E1105 3 5 3 4

Manufacturing 4 5 2 2

Cost 4 4 4 2

Total 28 43 31 33

% of Possible Score 43 86 62 66

1 = low, 5 = high

7

Circular Test Apparatus

The circular test apparatus, shown in Figure 3

below, has the following advantages:

• Easily disassembled: the piping can be un-

threaded from the center hub to be broken

down into an easily carried bundle.

• For a 5 x 5 ft specimen, this design will meet

the uniformity specification.

• Extra piping can be threaded to the ends of

each pipe to test larger specimens.

Figure 3: Circular Apparatus Assembly

The following limitations of this design

include:

• If testing large specimens (up to 10 x 10 ft)

the extra piping will not meet the uniform

spray grid requirement. There will be

excessively large gaps between the pipe

ends.

• This device would be harder to fabricate

than a rectangular spray rack.

• Because this device can be completely

disassembled, parts may get misplaced.

• The lack of structure on the outer pipes

could result in severe damage if dropped or

impacted.

Flexible Tubing Apparatus

The flexible tubing design, show in Figure 4

below, has the following advantages:

• Assembly affords flexibility in transport.

• Cost of materials is very low.

• Overall weight is very low.

Figure 4: Flexible Tubing Assembly

The design has the following disadvantages:

• Manufacturing is expensive.

• Onsite assembly would be difficult.

• Calibration setup would be inconsistent.

Square Rack

The square rack, shown in Figure 5 below,

includes the following advantages:

• Easily adjustable to accommodate a variety

of different sized test specimens.

8

• Easy to manufacture.

• Horizontal water supply pipe fit with valves

capable of creating consistent pressure

throughout the rack.

• With the aid of quick release copper

couplings, rack can be broken down and

disassembled for portability.

Figure 5: Square rack assembly

The design had the following disadvantages:

• Heavier than other designs.

• Moderately high cost to fabricate.

Final Design

Our final design incorporates the advantages

from each design. The final design is simple,

cost effective, and calibrated. The horizontal

design eliminates the need for multiple valves

and pressure gages. The design can be semi-

permanently set, with no additional need for

adjusting valves and regulating flow after the

initial calibration. The hanging mounts,

vertical supports, wall spacers, and

telescoping stand were selected to be

manufactured at the PSU machine shop with

Aluminum T6061-T6.

The primary material is ¾ in. copper tubing

that is brazed together and painted Morrison

Hershfield colors. The overall structure meets

industrial grade requirements for stress and

reliability. This design allows simple

monitoring and adjustment of flow rates if

the rack were to fall out of calibration.

Portability is also maximized with quick

release copper couplings, easily disassembled

side supports, and medium length horizontal

pipes.

FINAL DESIGN

Overview

The overall water penetration test system

constructed for Morrison Hershfield consists

of four main assemblies. These items include

the spray rack system, spray rack stand,

calibration stand, and calibration box. The

following sections describe each of these

parts in detail. Specific components

important to the functionality of the main

assemblies can be found in Appendix A.

9

Spray Rack

The spray rack system shown in Figure 6 was

designed to meet the requirements

presented in the PDS document. In order to

achieve equal flow rates from the top to

bottom sections of the spray rack, a single

vertical supply pipe was designed with two

flow regulating valves placed between the

three horizontal spray pipes. Appropriate

valves were selected such that the user can

throttle the system to obtain consistent flow

rates at all elevations then remove the valve

handle. This minimizes the risk of accidental

throttling while the system is on a job site,

and hence un-calibrating the system.

At the inlet of the vertical supply pipe a

pressure gauge is placed following the inlet

throttling valve. This characteristic was

designed to meet ASTM standards. When

water is introduced to the system, the user

can adjust the inlet throttling valve to obtain

the appropriate calibration pressure. The

horizontal spray pipes are connected to the

vertical supply pipe by quick release copper

couplings. Selection of the couplings was

made to allow disassembly of the entire spray

rack system. When disassembled, the rack

can be bundled together and transported to a

job site in a small passenger car. To give the

spray rack form and rigidity, aluminum

vertical supports were incorporated into the

design. The supports also restrict rotation of

the horizontal spray pipes at the quick release

coupling connections.

Figure 6: Front view of the final spray rack system.

Small orifice (0.05 in.), 120 deg full cone spray

nozzles were selected to meet the necessary

flow rates outlined in the ASTM standard.

Appendix B shows the necessary calculations

used in nozzle selection. Placing the nozzles 2

ft. apart on the horizontal pipes and 2.25 ft.

vertically, the spray pattern achieves

approximately 30% of overlap between all

adjacent nozzles when the spray rack is

spaced 12 in. away from a test specimen.

Significant spray overlap is necessary to

ensure wetting of all parts of a test specimen.

Telescoping window spacers were designed

to allow proper spacing between the spray

10

rack and a test sample. The telescoping

tubing allows for spacing between 10 and 18

inches. By spacing the rack 18 in. away from

a sample, the water coverage area can be

increased from 33 - 53 ft2 when compared to

12 in. of spacing. Increasing the distance

from the rack to the specimen requires an

increase in system pressure in order to

maintain proper water flow rate

requirements. Hanging mounts were

designed for easy suspension of the spray

rack with either ropes or the spray rack stand.

Spray Rack Stand

The installed products that Morrison

Hershfield test range from ground level to

multi-story, high rise buildings. Specimens on

the second floor and higher must be tested by

suspending the rack from ropes. Products at

ground level and on the first floor of a

building can be tested using the spray rack

stand illustrated in Figure 7. In order to reach

heights of up to 9 ft. above the ground, thick

walled aluminum telescoping tubing was

selected as the main structure of the stand.

The horizontal tube is held in place by two

sandwiched plates that secure it in the same

plane as the telescoping tubing. Eye bolts

allow for the use of industrial strength

carabiners to make the connection between

the spray rack stand and the hanging mounts

of the spray rack system. The stand can also

be used during calibration to hold the rack

securely on the ground. Because the stand

will be used for these multiple elevations, a

pivoting system was designed at the base to

allow shallow angles of the stand during

calibration and large angles when the stand is

used to elevate the spray rack. Installed on

the bottom of the base plate is a thick rubber

slab to ensure large frictional forces to hold

the stand in place on surfaces like cement or

concrete.

Figure 7. Spray rack stand assembly.

Calibration Stand

During calibration of the spray rack system,

the calibration box and graduated cylinders

must be placed on a stand to reach the

required locations detailed in the ASTM

standard. The stand designed in Figure 8

11

accomplishes this task by incorporating a

vertical pole held in place by a tripod base.

All materials of the stand were chosen to be

aluminum for corrosion resistance and weight

reduction.

The bottom plates of the stand are 0.25 in.

thick aluminum that are designed so the

vertical tube can protrude through the top

plate, and rest on the bottom plate. An

acrylic block is situated where the tube rests

on the bottom plate and forms a tight fit on

the inside of the vertical tube for further

restriction of sideways movement. This

configuration allows the vertical tube to be

removed from the base for compact storage.

The total height of the stand is 6 ft, which

exceeds the maximum height of the spray

rack system, allowing all possible locations of

the rack to be calibrated.

Figure 8. Calibration stand assembly.

Calibration Box

The catch box in Figure 9 is used to gather the

impinging spray from the rack during

calibration, and was designed according to

the ASTM standard. It is 2 x 2 ft. and

separated into four equal sections. The walls

of the calibration box are 4 in. wide to ensure

that all of the spray water is captured and

accumulates within the box. A hole is drilled

in the bottom corner of each of the four box

sections. Micro tubing can be installed in the

holes through the back of the calibration box

to displace the water from the collecting

areas to the graduated measuring containers.

To hang the rack on the calibration stand, an

I-plate configuration was designed. Two

small 0.25 in. thick plates are bolted 12 in.

apart on the back of the box. When the I-

plate is bolted to the two spacing plates, the

box can be fastened to the calibration stand

by two hose clamps. The full assembly can be

found in Appendix A.

12

Figure 9. Final manufactured calibration box.

EVALUATION OF DESIGN

After the final design was approved by

members of Morrison Hershfield, a prototype

of the final design was fabricated, and various

aspects of the design were evaluated

according to the product design

specifications.

Flow Rates

The ASTM E 1105-00 standard requires that

the spray rack be tested for flow rates at four

specific locations at the theoretical surface:

both the upper corners, and at locations

along the horizontal center, one quarter the

length of the total width from each side.

Figure 10 shows the four locations below.

With 1 ft2 sample areas, the range of

acceptable flow rates must be between 0.25

– 0.63 liters/min-ft2.

Figure 10: Locations for testing flow rates of the spray rack.

Each square represents 1 square foot, and each grouping of

4 squares represents how samples were taken.

After testing the rack at various internal

pressures, the minimum pressure required at

a 12 inch rack-wall separation for acceptable

flow rates across the entire spray surface was

found to be 25 psi. At 25 psi, the range of

flow rates were 0.25-0.49 liters/min-ft2,

meeting ASTM requirements at all four

locations. If the internal pressure of the

system were to fall below 25 psi, parts of the

spray surface may not receive acceptable

flow rates. At 20 psi, the flow rates at the

top corners fell below 0.25 liters/min-ft2, but

the center test areas did not. This is largely

due to the fact that there is minimal spray

nozzle overlap at the outermost sample

areas.

At an 18 inch rack-surface separation, the

spray rack effectively covered 61% more

13

surface area, but the required internal

pressure of the system rose to 30 psi. When

the pressure of this system fell below 30 psi,

it behaved almost identically to that of the 12

inch rack-wall separation system.

Portability

The portability of the new spray rack system

has fully satisfied the requirements of the

PDS. The rack can be assembled/

disassembled on site by one person in

approximately 5 minutes, which minimizes

the additional time needed to improve

portability.

Disassembled and bundled with Velcro straps

shown in Figure 11, the rack’s dimensions are

6 ft. long, with its largest diameter equal to

about 9 inches. The spray rack stand, used

for mounting at ground level applications, is a

6.5 ft long, which intersects perpendicularly

at one end with a 3 ft section of tube.

Figure 11: The spray rack disassembled and bundled with

Velcro straps.

The spray rack and stand were tested and

easily fit into a compact sedan (Nissan 200SX)

by one person. Rubber caps were also

attached to the ends of each member, shown

in Figure 12, so that forces of impact from

transportation and industrial handling will be

more effectively absorbed.

Maintenance

Although the spray rack has not required any

maintenance after the fabrication was

completed, the team does not foresee many

instances where potential problems could not

be easily maintained and serviced in the field

or at the Morrison Hershfield facility.

14

Copper was chosen as the piping material

with soldered joints. If a section of piping,

valve, or pressure gage were to be irreparably

damaged, the affected area can be cut out if

needed, and replaced with parts commonly

found at most hardware stores. If leaks occur,

the joints can be heated and re-soldered.

Brass nozzles and bushings, shown in Figure

12, were chosen with simple designs to

minimize corrosion, to be easily cleaned of

clogs, and easily replaced. These parts were

purchased online at the popular website

McMaster-Carr, where in the event a nozzle

or bushing becomes damaged, the part can

be replaced within a couple of business days

at minimum cost.

Figure 12: Rubber caps and brass nozzles and bushings were used in

the final design, which require little maintenance, and are easily

replaceable.

Setup/Operation

The setup and operation constraints of the

PDS were satisfied, maintaining or improving

upon the current spray rack used by Morrison

Hershfield. As mentioned previously,

assembling the rack can be routinely

performed in about 5 minutes by one worker.

The ground level stand is a single telescoping

tube, which can be controlled by one person.

Once assembled, the rack (without water)

weighs 24.3 lbs, which is far below the PDS

constraint of 50lbs, allowing one person,

instead of two for the current spray rack, to

setup and mount the spray rack at ground

level applications.

The total setup of the rack or mounting of the

rack to the installation at ground level takes

no more than 15 minutes, which satisfies the

PDS requirement. The team was unable to

test the suspension mounting time, due to

limited resources.

Although it is conceivable that the spray rack

be setup and mounted onto roof-suspended

applications by a single worker, the new

design was intended to be operated by two

workers; which is also required for Morrison

Hershfield’s current spray rack. This is due to

the increased degree and quantity of risk

inherent to suspending a spray device of this

size from a large building. Two workers can

15

ensure more stability and accuracy in

suspending this device, and can monitor each

other as well to ensure there are no crucial

oversights that may result in injury or even

death of people below.

The simplicity of operating the rack is

maintained, where only the internal pressure

of the system needs to be monitored. The

coverage area and expandability however are

improved. The current design used by the

project sponsor has a relatively small, fixed

coverage area. With the new design, the

spray rack has a larger coverage area, which

can also be expanded if necessary.

CONCLUSION

The team has designed, fabricated, and

tested a water penetration testing device that

meets or exceeds the requirements set forth

in the product design specifications.

Most importantly, our testing showed that

flow rates of the spray rack at an internal

pressure of 25 psi satisfy the ASTM

requirements. The rack is more easily

transported and covers a larger surface area

than the customer’s current apparatus.

Operation simplicity is maintained, where

only the internal pressure of the device at

steady state needs to be monitored. The

project was also completed in the timeline

specified, meeting acceptable deadlines, and

under budget by $300.

Brian Hayes of Morrison Hershfield has

viewed the prototype and was pleased with

the final design. He commented that all of

the major assemblies were more functional

and appeared more user friendly than their

current device. By meeting or exceeding the

requirements outlined in the PDS, the

customer, and the PSU capstone curriculum,

the design and prototyping of our water

penetration testing apparatus was a success.

16

appendices

17

APPENDIX A: ASSEMBLY COMPONENTS

The following components and parts were used in the main assemblies of the entire spray rack and calibration system.

Name: Spray Rack System

Main Assembly: Spray Rack System

Description: The spray rack system is used to uniformly spray water on installed exterior products.

Name: Nozzle Spray Pattern


Description: Spacing the spray rack 12 in. from the test specimen results in the illustrated water spray pattern. Nozzle spacing was selected to achieve approximately 30 percent of spray overlap for proper uniformity of spray onto the specimen.

Name: Quick Release Copper Coupling


Description: The couplings were selected to connect the horizontal spray pipes to the vertical supply pipe. Quick release couplings allow for disassembly of the entire spray rack system for ease of transportation.

18

Name: Disassembled Spray Rack System


Description: When completely disassembled, the spray rack system can be bound by Velcro straps and transported in a small passenger car.

Name: Telescoping Window Spacers


Description: The spray rack must be spaced 12 in. away from the test specimen to achieve the cover pattern presented above. Telescoping winder spacers allow the user to achieve this distance, and increase the distance to expand the spray coverage area.

Name: Hanging Mounts


Description: In order to suspend the spray rack by ropes or the spray rack stand, the hanging mounts must be used to relieve stress on the copper piping. The two part design allows for adjustment of the mount in horizontal and rotational directions by loosening the bolts and positioning in the correct orientation.

19

Name: Vertical Supports


Description: To give the spray rack rigidity, the vertical supports can be installed onto the horizontal spray pipes to eliminate rotation of the pipes at the quick release coupling connections.

Name: 0.05 in., 120˚ Full Cone Spray Nozzles


Description: The nozzles selected produce a flow rate of 0.4 GPM at 30 psi.

Name: Pivoting Stand Base

Main Assembly: Spray Rack Stand

Description: To achieve a range of angles necessary for the spray rack stand, the pivoting base was designed to allow the user to easily position the stand and rack where ever it needs to be placed.

20

Name: Calibration Stand Assembly

Main Assembly: Calibration Stand

Description: Stand used to hold the calibration box and container rack at heights governed by the ASTM standard.

Name: Calibration Stand Base


Description: To reduce sideways motion of the vertical tube, the acrylic block forms a tight fit against the inside of the square tubing. This allows eliminates the need for permanent fixing, and permits easy storage as two separate parts.

Name: Container Rack


Description: The container rack is used to hold the graduated containers by sliding the two horizontal square tubes through the handles of the containers.

Name: Calibration Box

Main Assembly: Calibration Box

Description: 2 ft. x 2 ft. box divided into four equal sections used to collect water during calibration.

21

Name: Calibration Box I-Plate


Description: By spacing the I-plate 0.25 in. from the back of the calibration box, two hose clamps can sufficiently hold the box to the calibration stand.

Name: Calibration Box Hose System


Description: To get the water from the calibration box to the graduated containers, the hose system consists of micro-sprinkler tubing and spigots.

22

APPENDIX B: JUSTIFICATION OF FINAL DESIGN

To validate the usability and integrity of our final design, the following tests, calculations, and

analyses were completed.

Spray Rack Deflection during a Water Penetration Test

Given: The water penetration testing device consists of a grid of nozzles. The nozzles are

placed in specific locations in order to meet the requirements of flow rate and coverage area

stated in the ASTM E 1105 standard. The rack is composed of one vertical ¾ in. copper pipe

connected to three horizontal ¾ in. copper pipes that house the nozzles. The copper pipe’s

outer radius is 0.4375 in. with a thickness of 0.065 in. In addition to the piping there are two

4.5 ft. aluminum members supporting each side of the rack with cross sectional dimensions of

0.25 x 1.5 inch. The rack is suspended from two mounts symmetrically located on the top

horizontal member of the rack, each spaced 1.5 ft. from the vertical centerline. The copper

pipes, when filled with water carry a distributed force of 0.11 lb/in, while the aluminum support

members carry a distributed force of 0.0375 lb/in.

Find: Given the loads impressed upon the spray rack, is the deformation in the spray rack

substantial enough to change the nozzle placement and alter the geometry of the rack enough

to undo the calibration specs?

Nozzle

Vertical Support

Copper Pipe

Suspension Location

23

Solution: A simplified model using ABAQUS software was used in order to solve the problem

with finite element methods. Rack was sketched and profiles implemented based on given

information about cross sections of the pipe and aluminum members.

The boundary conditions can be seen in the image above. There was no translation at the

hanging points of the rack. Displacement was allowed at every other location of the model. The

copper pipes that channel the water had a downward load of 0.11 lb/in and the aluminum

members had applied forces of 0.0375 lb/in.

Results: The image above shows the solution to the ABAQUS spray rack model.

The displacement of the rack varies from 0.003 to 0.03 inch. The greatest displacement occurs

where the suspension is made. The displacement at these points is approximately 0.03 inch

24

which is negligible compared to the overall dimensions of the spray rack. This small amount of

deflection will have no affect on the functionality of the rack during a water penetration test.

Shear Strength of Copper Tubing

Given: During a water penetration test, the rack is suspended by the hanging mounts. The

entire weight of the rack is 35 lbs when water is added to the system. The 0.5 inch thick

hanging mounts are attached to ¾ inch copper pipe which has shear strength of 42 MPa (6100

psi).

Find: Will the copper piping fail in shear due to the weight of the entire rack during a water

penetration test?

Solution: The hanging mounts are located symmetrically along the top horizontal spray pipe,

and split the weight of the rack during a test. When suspended, therefore, the force applied to

the pipe at the location of each hanging mount is half of the rack’s weight.

Wt = 35 lbs

FA = FB = Wt/2 = 17.5 lbs

The equation to calculate shear stress is:

τ = F/A

The necessary information to calculate the area of the applied shear stress is the width of each

mount and the diameter of the copper pipe:

Hanging mount width = W = 0.5 in.

Copper pipe diameter = D = 0.875 in.

Area of applied force = W x D = 0.5 x 0.875 = 0.4375 in2

25

Shear stress can then be calculated by employing the shear stress equation from above:

τ = 17.5 lb / 0.4375 in2 = 40 psi

Results: The shear stress developed where the hanging mounts are fastened to the copper

piping is 40 psi. The shear strength of the copper is 6100 psi which is much higher than the

stress impinging on the pipe at the hanging mounts. Shear stress developed by the hanging

mounts during a test, therefore, will not exceed the rack’s material constraints.

Stress Analysis of Hanging Mounts

Given: A ¾ inch diameter copper pipe spray rack with a weight of 35 lbs (weight includes

water, hardware, vertical supports, and valves). The pipe has a thickness of 0.065 inch. Mounts

are fastened on the top pipe of the rack, spaced 3 ft. apart uniformly from the vertical line of

symmetry. The material of the hanging mounts is T6061-T6 aluminum with a thickness of 0.5

inch. The dimensions for the profile of the mounts are listed below.

Find: Determine the Von Mises stress in the hanging mount, and determine the factor of safety.

Solution: C3D8I: An 8-node linear brick, incompatible mode elements.

Using a finite element software package such as ABAQUS, the analysis can be performed to

determine the static stress on the hanging mount. Taking advantage of symmetry, the

computation time was reduced and it allows for a more refined mesh for the same number of

elements.

26

Loading Conditions-

Total Rack Weight / 2 mounts = weight per mount = 35 lbf/2 = 17.5 lbf

Surface area of inside surface of hanging mount where the carabiner will be hooked = 0.07 in2

Pressure load 17.5 lbf / 0.07 in2 = 250 psi

Boundary Conditions:

Fixed Support (clamped section of mount to copper) no x, y, z translation or rotation.

Symmetry about y plane (y-displacement = 0, rotations about x and z = 0) (1/2 thickness = 0.25 inch).

Symmetry about the x plane, half width (x-displacement = 0, rotations about y and z = 0).

The model was setup with a hex sweep mesh of 2048 3D stress shell elements. The area of

maximum stress is just above the fillet on the left and right side of the triangle cutout. The Von

Mises stress and displacement magnitude are as follows:

27

Results: For the static loading analysis there is a large factor of safety, because the mounts

were designed to withstand an impact load. The ABAQUS stress analysis shows a maximum

Von Mises stress magnitude of 0.45 ksi with a factor of safety of 29 and a maximum

displacement magnitude of 4.489e-5 inches. These mounts are designed to be able to

withstand the stresses applied by the total weight of the rack, water, hardware, and vertical

supporting mounts under a static load.

Spray Nozzle Selection

Given: The spray rack system uses full cone nozzles that spray at 120˚. The nozzle supplier

offers many different sizes of orifice for this type of nozzle which operate efficiently at different

pressures. The nozzles of the spray rack are positioned along the grid as shown in the

illustration below. The spray system impinges onto a surface 12 inches away from the nozzles.

28

The surface needs to be sprayed at a flow rate of at least 5 gal/hr-ft2 (0.0833 gal/min-ft2), as

outlined in the ASTM standard. The diameter of the spray coverage at the test specimen is

equal to 3.46 feet. The figure is to scale. The box represents 90% of the actual spray area

covered by the nozzles.

Find: What is the minimum flow rate required out of each nozzle in order to meet the flow

requirement impinged on the box shown in the figure. Use this information to choose the most

appropriate spray nozzle selection for the rack.

Solution: Area of spray coverage = A = length*height = 6.75*6 = 40.5 ft2.

Total flow rate for this coverage area = 5 gal/hr-ft2 * A = 202.5 gal/hr (3.375 gal/min)

With the total flow rate necessary to meet the constraints in the ASTM standard, the amount of

water exiting each nozzle can be calculated by:

Total flow Rate / # of nozzles

(3.375 gal/min)/12 nozzles = 0.281 gal/min-nozzle

Because the area of the box is smaller than area covered by nozzles, the flow rate must be

adjusted so that it sprays the entire spray area at the minimum required rate; assume a 90 %

adjustment factor.

Required flow rate from each nozzle at 25 psi = (Flow rate/nozzle) / 0.90

(0.281 gal/min)/0.90 = 0.313gal/min.

29

Conclusion: An acceptable flow rate for each nozzle is approximately 0.31 gal/min. Based on

the supplier’s selection of nozzles, for an inlet pressure of 25 psi and a required flow rate of

0.32 gal/min, the recommended nozzles are 1/8 inch pipe size with an orifice diameter of 0.05

inch. These nozzles can produce 0.3 gal/min at 20 psi and 0.5 gal/min at 40 psi, making them

the most appropriate nozzles selection.

Horizontal Pressure Differences in the Spray Rack

Given: Uniformity of spray rates is required along the horizontal spray pipes of the rack as

detailed in the ASTM standard. Junction and friction pressure losses that occur within the

piping will affect the spray rates as the flow moves further from the inlet water supply. A test

rack was made of a 6 ft. long, ¾ inch PVC pipe with drilled orifices simulating nozzle spray

diameters. The inlet water pressure was 40 psi and produced a flow rate of 3.2 GPM.

Find: Determine whether or not there is sufficient evidence of a difference in flow rates exiting

the orifices along the horizontal spray pipe.

Results: To test the differences in flow rates along the horizontal pipe, an experiment was

devised to complete the task. Four equally spaced small orifices were drilled into the pipe 9

inches apart on each side of the horizontal center. A graduated container was used to gather

water for 1 minute from each orifice. Two different trials of data were collected for each

orifice.

30

After sufficient data was gathered for the smallest orifice size, the hole diameters were

increased. The three orifice diameters tested were: 0.128 in., 0.161in., and 0.209 in. The

results of this data are presented in the ANOVA test below.

The following hypothesis and null hypothesis were developed to test the effects of pressure differences in the horizontal pipe:

Ho = The flow rates from each hole are equal as the distance from the horizontal center is increased.HA = Flow rates are significantly different as the distance from the center is increased.α = 0.05

ANOVA: flowrateout versus holediameter, hole, trial

Factor Type Levels Valuesholediameter fixed 3 0.128, 0.161, 0.209hole fixed 4 A, B, C, Dtrial fixed 2 1, 2

Analysis of Variance for flowrateout

Source DF SS MS F Pholediameter 2 0.00018567 0.00009283 5.94 0.038hole 3 0.00005326 0.00001775 1.14 0.407trial 1 0.00001603 0.00001603 1.03 0.350holediameter*hole 6 0.00023994 0.00003999 2.56 0.139holediameter*trial 2 0.00000744 0.00000372 0.24 0.795hole*trial 3 0.00001842 0.00000614 0.39 0.763Error 6 0.00009379 0.00001563Total 23 0.00061455

S = 0.00395360 R-Sq = 84.74% R-Sq(adj) = 41.50%

32

Conclusion: Multiple factors were tested, the most applicable being the hole vs. flow rate. Our

hypothesis test was designed with a level of significance of 95%. The P-value for the tested

factor was 0.407 which is much greater than 0.05. This result was similar for the other two

orifice diameters tested. With this high P-value, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and it can

be concluded that the difference in flow rates is insignificant as the orifice distance increases

along the horizontal pipe. Through the results of this test, it was determined that there is no

need for flow regulation along the horizontal spray pipes.

Vertical Pressure Differences on the Spray Rack

Given: A full sized test-spray rack was constructed out of

PVC pipes with holes drilled in the same locations as the

final design. Each of the orifices were drilled with a 0.209

in. diameter. Water was introduced into the system from a

standard garden hose tap with 40 psi of water pressure

available. The configuration and dimensions of the test-

spray rack can be seen in the illustration. When water was

spraying from each of the orifices, the spray streams

reached the locations detailed in the figure.

Find: For the differences in elevation between the top, middle, and bottom horizontal spray

pipes, find the internal pressure of the water behind each spray orifice.

Solution:

Variables used in the following calculations:t = time (s) h = vertical height (m) g = gravitational constant

v = velocity (m/sec) d = distance (m)

The time required for the water to fall the vertical distance is equal to:

t = ((2*h)/g)1/2

t = ((2*0.61 m)/9.81 m/sec2)1/2 = 0.35 sec

The velocity at the orifice exit is equal to

33

V2 = d/t V2 = 2.49m/0.35 sec = 7.06 m/sec

Using the Bernoulli equation, we can evaluate the pressure at points just before the orifice.

z1+P1ρg

+V 12

2g=z2+

P2ρg

+V 22

2g

Assumptions that can be made:

z1 = z2, V1 = 0, P2 = 0

With these assumptions the Bernoulli equation reduces to:

P1=V 22 ρ2

To calculate the pressure before the orifice at the lowest horizontal spray pipe (elevation = 2 ft.) the following example calculation is made:

P1 = ρv22/2

P1 = [(1000 kg/m3)*(7.06 m/sec)2]/2 = 24943.81 pascals

By converting pascals to psi we get:

24943.81 pascals*0.00014503774 psi/pascal = 3.62 psi

The equation used above to calculate the pressure just before exiting the orifices at an elevation of 2 ft was used to calculate the pressures for elevations of 4 and 6 ft. These results can be found in the table below.

h = starting height (ft)

h = starting height (m)

x = distance traveled

(m)

t = time to hit ground

(s)

velocity (m/s)

pressure in pipe at orifice

(pascals)

Pressure in pipe at

orifice (psi)

6 1.83 2.3 0.61 3.77 7094.12 1.034 1.22 2.45 0.50 4.91 12074.42 1.752 0.61 2.49 0.35 7.06 24943.81 3.62

Results: The pressure behind the orifices at the three different elevations are as follows: at a

height of 6 ft. the pressure was 1.03 psi, at a height of 4 ft. the pressure increased to 1.75 psi,

and at 2 ft. above the ground the pressure was 3.62 psi. The pressure in the bottom horizontal

spray pipe is approximately 3 times greater than the top spray pipe. This amount of

inconsistency requires throttling at the different elevations of the spray rack to achieve

uniformity of pressures within the system. To solve this problem, the final design uses two

34

throttling valves along the vertical supply pipe in order to eliminate pressure differences among

elevation changes.

Calibration Test Data

Required: The ASTM E1105-00 standard requires that three specific areas of the spray rack are

calibrated to ensure proper water coverage. These areas include both upper corners and the

quarter point of the horizontal center line. Calibration entails that the water gathered from the

calibration box exceeds 1.26 L/min total for the four areas, and is between 0.25 to 0.63 L/min

for any one section of the calibration box.

Procedure: To accurately calibrate the spray rack, the calibration box was positioned to the

correct location and spaced 12 in. from the rack. Water was applied to the system via a

standard garden hose tap. The flow was throttled at the inlet to three different pressures: 20,

25 and 30 psi. When water began filling the graduated containers, a stop watch was started.

The spray rack was turned off after 2 minutes of water impinging upon the calibration box. The

water collected in each graduated container was recorded and divided by 2 to obtain the

appropriate L/min measurement. After testing each of the three inlet pressures at all of the

three calibration locations the data was organized and can be found below.

Results: For an inlet pressure of 20 psi the lowest flow rate was in the upper right corner of the rack and

was 0.15 L/min, which is below the requirements of the standard. This inlet pressure does not

meet the minimum flow rate of the total four calibration box areas (1.26 L/min) either. The

spray rack does not meet ASTM standards at an inlet pressure of 20 psi, when spaced 12 in.

away from a test specimen.

Calibration data for an inlet pressure of 20 psi.

Captured Water in (L/min)Calibration Box Section

TotalCalibration Location I II III IV

Upper Right 0.34 0.44 0.27 0.15 1.19Upper Left 0.19 0.39 0.39 0.31 1.28

Quarter Point 0.28 0.31 0.41 0.44 1.44

35

When the inlet pressure was increased to 25 psi the acquired flow rates improved greatly. Each

individual section gathered enough water, and the minimum flow rate for the total of all areas

met the ASTM standard. At an internal pressure of 25 psi and 12 in. away, the spray rack

system meets the flow rate requirements.





Quarter Point 0.31 0.36 0.45 0.48 1.59

At an internal pressure of 30 psi all of the flow rates stayed within the tolerances of the ASTM standard.

Each individual area and the total of the areas met all the requirements. It can be concluded that at 30

psi and 12 in. of separation between the nozzles and the test specimen the spray rack meets all of the

constraints to conduct a water penetration test set forth by the ASTM E 1105-00 standard.





Quarter Point 0.32 0.38 0.50 0.50 1.70

36

APPENDIX C: OPERATION MANUALS

Overview

In order to complete a successful water penetration test to conform to ASTM standards, the

spray rack must be calibrated. At a test site, the rack must be assembled and set up at the

same settings used to calibrate the rack. The following instructions describe the necessary

procedures to assemble and calibrate the spray rack in order to complete a successful water

penetration test.

Spray Rack Assembly and Testing

Take all of the parts of the spray rack and lay them on the ground.

Set the three horizontal spray pipes in the general area that they will be connected to

the vertical supply pipe (i.e. set them 2.25 ft. apart vertically).

With the nozzles facing the ground, connect the quick release copper couplings of the

vertical pipe to the horizontal pipe inlets.

Maintain the form of the spray rack by placing it gently with the nozzles on the ground.

Fasten the aluminum vertical supports toward the outside of the rack configuration,

making sure that the top of the vertical supports (labeled in red) are located at the top

of the rack.

Install the water supply (garden hose) to the inlet of the rack, making sure that the con-

nection is tight to eliminate pressure losses due to leaks.

Remove the rack from the ground and set it upright, resting on the bottom of the verti-

cal supports.

Align the window spacers in their respective locations: two on the top horizontal pipe,

and one ¾ down the vertical pipe. Set the telescoping tubing at the required distance to

achieve 12 inches of space between the nozzles and the test specimen.

For specimens that are above the first floor of the building use ropes to suspend the rack

to the correct elevation.

For specimens on the first floor of the building, acquire the spray rack stand. Determine

the necessary height elevation needed, and set the stand at that height. Connect the

37

carabiners of the stand to the hanging mounts and raise the rack to the appropriate

height.

When the spray rack is located in the correct location, adjust the inlet throttling valve

until the pressure gauge on the rack reads the necessary pressure determined during

calibration to meet the required flow rates, begin the test.

Calibration of the Spray Rack System

With the spray rack assembled via the instructions above, use the spray rack stand to

hold the rack in place at ground level.

Position the calibration box vertically along the calibration stand by loosening the hose

clamps and sliding to the appropriate location. Follow this procedure for the graduate

container rack so that it is fastened just below the calibration box.

Place each of the calibration box hoses into the individual graduated containers by using

the Velcro tape.

Move the calibration stand and assembly to the calibration locations outline in the ASTM

standard.

Open the inlet throttling valve and allow water to impinge upon the calibration box.

When water begins filling the graduated containers begin timing the process.

After adequate water has been gathered in each container stop the timer, and turn off

the rack. Let the water drain from the box sections before making measurements.

Record the amount of water collected in each container and divide it by the time it took

to fill them, this method will result in obtaining a L/min measurement for each section of

the calibration box.

Validate that the flow rates from each section, and the total of all sections of the calibra-

tion box, fall within the required flow rates as outline in the ASTM standard.

Record the inlet pressure that the measurements were made, this is the pressure that

must be used when a water penetration test is carried out on a job site.

APPENDIX D: PRODUCT DATA SPECIFICATIONS TABLE

MH = Morrison Hershfield □ Low □□ Medium □□□ High

MH = Morrison Hershfield □ Low □□ Medium □□□ HighRequirements Customer Metric Target Target Basis Verification Notes Priority

Inst

alla

tion

Setup Complexity MH setup time (in hrs) < 5 min MH/SELF end user feedback setup should be

intuitive □□

Manpower required (ground floor setup) MH # people 1 MH/SELF end user feedback □□□

Manpower required (above ground setup)

MH # people 2 MH/SELF end user feedback □□□

Mat

eria

ls Frame SELF USD < 550 SELF yes/no corrosion resistant □□

Other SELF USD < 450 SELF yes/no corrosion resistant □□

Code

s and

St

anda

rds

ASTM E1105-00 MH/SELF gallonsft2*hour > 5 ASTM

requirement testing □□□

Com

pany

Co

nstr

aint

s

Budget SELF USD < $1500 MH yes/no needs to be approved □□

Coverage Area MH/SELF in2 14400 test area testing □□□

Mai

nten

a Serviceable in field MH yes/no yes SELF end user feedback □□Replaceable components

MH yes/no yes SELF end user feedback □□

Requirements Customer Metric Target Target Basis Verification Notes PriorityPe

rfor

man

ce

Reliability MH cycles ≥ 1000 cost effective testing 3 tests/week □□

Portability to site MHvehicle size required to transport

small pickup truck

easier/more cost effective to transport

end user feedback □□□

Portability to test subject MH lbs/outer

dimensions

average person

can carryefficiency end user

feedback □□□

Ease of Operation MH - - - end user feedback

easy to operate consistently with minimal training

□□□

Weight (heaviest component) MH lbs < 50 portability/

fatigueend user feedback □□

Service Life MH years ≥ 5 MH testing □□

Durability MH shock loading 10G SELF Abaqus

withstand industrial stresses, impact,

handling, transport□□□

Envi

ronm

ent Water MH surface

treatmentcorrosion resistant SELF end user

feedback □

Operation Temperature MH degrees °F 35-105 SELF testing □□

Suspension forces SELF factor of safety 10G consistent

operationend userfeedback □□

Safe

ty Frame Integrity MH factor of safety 10G SELF Abaqus □□□

Handling MH - - - - □□□

39

nce Repair complexity MH/SELF difficulty easy SELF end user feedback □□

Docu

men

tatio

n PDS self deadline 2/8/2010 PSU documentation □□

Progress Report self deadline 3/8/2010 PSU documentation □□

Final Report self deadline 5/31/2010 PSU documentation □□□

Timeline self deadline PSU documentation □□APPENDIX E: HOUSE OF QUALITY TABLE

Criteria Engineering

Customer Requirements

Impo

rtan

ce

Cust

omer

Cost

Wei

ght

Desig

n

Out

er

Dim

ensio

ns

Com

pone

nts

Performance 10 MH/user □□□ □ □□□□□ □ □□□Ease of Installation 6 user □□ □□□ □□□□ □ □□Ease of Operation 6 user □ □ □□□□□ □ □□□Portability (to site) 7 MH/user □ □ □□□□□ □□□□□ □□□Manpower Required 9 MH/user □ □□□□□ □□□□□ □ □Portability (to specimen) 9 MH/user □ □□□□□ □□□□ □□□□□ □□

Maintenance (unrestricted) 3 MH □□ □ □□□ □ □□□□□

40

Maintenance (field) 5 user □□ □ □□□ □ □□□□□

Service Life 2 MH □□ □ □□□ □ □□□□□ 10 = high MH = Morrison Hershfield Low/Negligible □ High/Critical □□□□□

APPENDIX F: PART DRAWINGS

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

APPENDIX G: BILL OF MATERIALS

HD = Home Depot MS = Metal Supermarkets AH = Ace Hardware

DATE

Appl

icati

on

PART

PRIC

E

#

TOTA

L

VEN

DOR

PURC

HASE

R

TOTA

L PU

RCHA

SE

3/7/2010 Test app 3/4 x 10 pvc $0.98 3 $2.94 HD Andy

$30.97

3/7/2010 Test app Dauber $1.31 2 $2.62 HD Andy3/7/2010 Test app primer $4.58 1 $4.58 HD Andy3/7/2010 Test app cement pvc $3.76 1 $3.76 HD Andy3/7/2010 Test app 3/4 cap pvc $0.35 6 $2.10 HD Andy3/7/2010 Test app 3/4 elbow pvc $0.69 1 $0.69 HD Andy3/7/2010 Test app 3/4 cross pvc $1.70 2 $3.40 HD Andy3/7/2010 Test app 3/4 tee pvc $0.33 2 $0.66 HD Andy3/7/2010 Test app 3/4 m adapter $0.33 1 $0.33 HD Andy3/7/2010 Test app sprink HD $9.89 1 $9.89 HD Andy

3/10/2010 Test app 3/4x10 pvc $0.98 1 $0.98 HD Andy

$6.19

3/10/2010 Test app 3/4 f adapt pvc $0.44 1 $0.44 HD Andy3/10/2010 Test app 1/2 elbow pvc $0.90 1 $0.90 HD Andy3/10/2010 Test app 1/2 elbow (type 2) pvc $0.69 1 $0.69 HD Andy3/10/2010 Test app 3/4 busing pvc $0.38 2 $0.76 HD Andy3/10/2010 Test app 3/4 'M' adapter pvc $0.33 1 $0.33 HD Andy3/10/2010 Test app 1/2x260 teflon tape $0.98 1 $0.98 HD Andy3/10/2010 Test app 1/2x24 pvc $0.79 1 $0.79 HD Andy3/10/2010 Test app 1/2 M adapter $0.32 1 $0.32 HD Andy4/1/2010 Test app 3/4 cap pvc $0.35 3 $1.05 HD Andy

$3.08 4/1/2010 Test app 3/4 tee sss $0.33 1 $0.33 HD Andy4/1/2010 Test app 3/4 cross pvc $1.70 1 $1.70 HD Andy5/8/2010 Rain rack Pipe Bushing 3/4-1/2" $2.37 12 $28.44 HD Andy $28.44

5/10/2010 Rain Rack Copper Tube 3/4" $15.53

3 $46.59 HD Andrew $264.93

51

5/10/2010 Rain Rack Copper Fem Adpt $5.81 12 $69.72 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack 3/4 Copper Tee $2.39 18 $43.02 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack 3/4 Copper Cap $1.11 6 $6.66 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack 8oz flux $6.43 1 $6.43 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack Copper Female adpt $3.54 1 $3.54 HD Andrew

5/10/2010 Rain Rack Pipe Cutter$10.2

6 1 $10.26 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack 3/4" valve $9.87 3 $29.61 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack Shark Bit Clip $1.54 2 $3.08 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack Shark Bite joint $6.92 3 $20.76 HD Andrew

5/10/2010 Rain Rack 1/2 lb solder$13.8

1 1 $13.81 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack Interior brush $1.95 1 $1.95 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack Exterior Brush $3.46 1 $3.46 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack Copper male Adapter $2.11 1 $2.11 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Rain Rack 3/4 Copper elbow $1.31 3 $3.93 HD Andrew5/10/2010 Misc Arch Aluminum Tube (6063) square 1x1x12, 1/16" $2.37 1 $2.37 McMaster Andy

$28.21

5/10/2010 Misc Arch Aluminum Tube (6063) square (3/4)x(3/4)x12, 1/8" $2.56 1 $2.56 McMaster Andy5/10/2010 Misc Arch Aluminum Tube (6063) square (3/4)x(3/4)x36, 1/8" $6.23 1 $6.23 McMaster Andy5/10/2010 Misc Arch Aluminum Tube (6063) square 1x1x3', 1/16" $5.29 1 $5.29 McMaster Andy5/10/2010 Misc Release pin W/lanyard, 3/16", 1.3" Usable length $3.92 3 $11.76 McMaster Andy

5/10/2010 Misc Brass Spray Nozzle, 3/8" NPT Male, 2gpm@40psi, 120 deg $10.19 12 $122.2

8 McMaster Andy

5/12/2010 Rain rack Butane $5.99 1 $5.99 4th Store Andy $5.99

5/17/2010 Calibration Box Aluminum Sheet (6061) 3x4' $68.3

6 1 $68.36 MS Andrew$258.49

5/17/2010 Misc. Aluminum Plate (6061) 1x2' $44.8

6 1 $44.86 MS Andrew

5/17/2010 Calibration Box Aluminum Square Tube (6061) 1.5x1.5x72$26.3

6 2 $52.72 MS Andrew5/17/2010 Misc Aluminum flat (6061) .1875x.75x72 $4.00 4 $15.98 MS Andrew

5/17/2010 Rain Rack Aluminum Tube Round (6061) .75x48, 0.049"$13.7

8 1 $13.78 MS Andrew5/17/2010 Rain Rack Aluminum Tube Round (6061) .625x48, 0.058 $19.2

9 1 $19.29 MS Andrew

52

5/17/2010 Misc. Aluminum Plate (6061) 1x1', 0.5" $43.5

0 1 $43.50 MS Andrew5/18/2010 Calibration Box 1/4 Barb $1.48 1 $1.48 HD Andrew $20.94

This box tabulated on previous page

5/18/2010 Calibration Box 3/4 cop cplg $0.87 2 $1.74 HD Andrew5/18/2010 Calibration Box Microtube $4.07 1 $4.07 HD Andrew5/18/2010 Rain Rack 15" velcro $3.96 1 $3.96 HD Andrew5/18/2010 Rain Rack 23' velcro $3.46 1 $3.46 HD Andrew5/18/2010 Calibration Box swivel $4.12 1 $4.12 HD Andrew5/18/2010 Calibration Box cop male adp $2.11 1 $2.11 HD Andrew5/19/2010 Calibration Box Graduated Pitcher $8.75 4 $35.00 Scientific Andrew $35.00 5/21/2010 Rain Rack Brass Nozzle, 1/8" NPT Male, 0.5 GPM @40 PSI, 120Deg $7.52 12 $90.24 McMaster Andy

$106.24 5/21/2010 Rain Rack Brass Hex Reducing Bushing 3/8" Male X 1/8" Fem $1.00 16 $16.00 McMaster Andy5/21/2010 Rain Rack Brass Nozzle, 1/4" NPT Male, 1 GPM @40PSI, 120Deg $8.02 12 $96.24 McMaster Andy5/21/2010 Rain Rack Brass Nozzle, 1/8" NPT Male, 0.7 GPM @40 PSI, 120Deg $7.52 12 $90.24 McMaster Andy5/21/2010 Rain Rack Brass Hex Reducing Bushing 3/8" Male X 1/4" Fem $1.49 16 $23.84 McMaster Andy

5/24/2010 Calibration Box JB Weld$19.4

7 1 $19.47 AH Luke $19.47

5/25/2010 Rack Stand Aluminum Pipe (6061) 1.25x72"$27.1

7 1 $27.17 MS Andy $64.33

5/25/2010 Rack Stand Aluminum Tube (6061) 1.25"x108", .125" thickness$37.1

6 1 $37.16 MS Andy5/26/2010 Calibration Box Combo Pack $1.41 1 $1.41 HD Andrew

$3.61 5/26/2010 Calibration Box Plastic Baggds $0.98 1 $0.98 HD Andrew5/26/2010 Rain rack 1/4x2" lag screw $0.46 1 $0.46 HD Andrew5/26/2010 Rain rack 1/4x2x1/2" H bolt $0.76 1 $0.76 HD Andrew5/27/2010 Calibration Box Rubber washer (4) 1/4" $0.83 2 $1.66 HD Andy $1.66 5/27/2010 Misc Shipping parts back $9.70 1 $9.70 USPS Andy $9.70 5/27/2010 Rain Rack Leg Tip, black rubber, 1" $0.69 6 $4.14 AH Andy

$117.85

5/27/2010 Rain Rack Aluminum bulk (used for supports) $6.50 6 $39.00 AH Andy5/27/2010 Rack Stand Eye Bolt $7.49 2 $14.98 AH Andy5/27/2010 Rack Stand 16 gauge 11/2 dia squar tubing pl $0.69 3 $2.07 AH Andy5/27/2010 Calibration Box Hose Clamp $4.79 2 $9.58 AH Andy5/27/2010 Rack Stand 2 1/2" snapper $4.19 2 $8.38 AH Andy5/27/2010 Rack Stand Spring Snap link $4.99 2 $9.98 AH Andy

53

5/27/2010 Rack Stand 1x8 glv nipple $3.79 1 $3.79 AH Andy5/27/2010 Rack Stand 1" Galv Tee $4.19 1 $4.19 AH Andy5/27/2010 Rack Stand nuts and washers $1.53 2 $3.06 AH Andy5/27/2010 Rack Stand nuts and washers $2.19 2 $4.38 AH Andy5/27/2010 Rack Stand Large Hex Bolt $7.15 2 $14.30 AH Andy5/30/2010 Calibration Box Stopwatch $7.99 1 $7.99 Fred Meyer Andrew $12.28 5/30/2010 Calibration Box Auto Epoxy $4.29 1 $4.29 Fred Meyer Andrew5/30/2010 Calibration Box Caster wheels $4.49 1 $4.49 HD Andy

15.175/30/2010 Rain rack Water Gage

$10.68 1 $10.68 HD Andy

5/30/2010 Calibration Box blk 5/8" leg tips $1.69 1 $1.69 AH Andy

$49.32

5/30/2010 Calibration Box Tip Leg vynl blk 1/2" $1.49 1 $1.49 AH Andy5/30/2010 Calibration Box Round pad 1.5" $3.29 1 $3.29 AH Andy5/30/2010 Rain rack 16 gage 11/4 dia squar tubing $0.99 4 $3.96 AH Andy5/30/2010 Rain rack Wet/dry 9x11 150 grit sandpaper $0.99 3 $2.97 AH Andy5/30/2010 Rain rack Standard 9x11 150 grit sandpaper $1.69 2 $3.38 AH Andy5/30/2010 Rain rack Spray paint gray primer $6.99 2 $13.98 AH Andy5/30/2010 Rain rack Spray paint olive $4.79 2 $9.58 AH Andy5/30/2010 Rain rack Spray paint smoke gray $4.49 2 $8.98 AH Andy

6/1/2010 School Capstone Poster$65.2

5 1 $65.25 Kinko's Andy $65.25

6/1/2010 Calibration Box Scrap glass (acrylic) $4.00 1 $4.00 AH Andy

$26.41 6/1/2010 Rain Rack Metric Fasteners $0.38 6 $2.28 AH Andy6/1/2010 Calibration Box 11 gage 11/2 dia square tubing plug $0.79 4 $3.16 AH Andy6/1/2010 Calibration Box Velcro strip 18" black $3.99 1 $3.99 AH Andy6/1/2010 Rain Rack Lacquer Gloss $6.49 2 $12.98 AH Andy

Grand Total $1173.53

Purchaser

Andrew$595.2

5

Andy$558.8

1 Luke $19.47

Returned for credit, not included in price

54

APPENDIX H: ASTM E1105-00 STANDARDS

56

57

58

59

Documents

web.cecs.pdx.eduweb.cecs.pdx.edu/~far/Past Capstone Projects/2010/Rain... · Web viewThis capstone project involves addressing these deficiencies, by designing, prototyping, and testing