Week 8: Further Discussion on Design Iterations

This week, each member in the sub-team came up with 2 design iterations. The team is trying to focus on two design iterations created by Tan as well as a design suggested by Nicolas. First type is a shell shape, one of organic shapes, to create an aesthetic design. Paul has demonstrated how to create the shape using Solidworks during the weekly team meeting hours on October 10th Wednesday. The first one is the ideal design the team would like to build. Second iteration is design involving canary. Use cables to make holes on canary to keep the structure in place without using truss structure. Third design, which is brainstormed by Nicolas, focuses on the lightweight of the entire racking system. Wires or cables will be used in across its design, which has an arch shape. This will replace the truss structure as well as increase the ease of installation on top of the guideway.

Week 7: Design Sketch Iteration

This week, each team member of Full-scale solar team was assigned to generate two different design ideas of solar panels and its rack. The first design on the left has a half-sphere shape which requires flexible solar panels. It has space below the panels for the inverters or the batteries to be placed. The second design shows the flexible panels covering all around the rack to cover the inside of the rack as well as generate as much electricity as possible in any direction. Only downside of this could be the cost effectiveness.

On 10/4/2017 Wednesday, Dr. Du explained about the report guidelines and criteria for about an hour. This report will be due at the end of Fall 2017 Semester.

Week 6: Energy Calculation

Tan, Matthew, and myself have conducted energy calculations using the equation in the documents, 2016-06-13.BJF.EnergyCalculation.pdf and Case Study of a Solar Power Installation for an Automated Transit Network in San José.

The calculation was done using Microsoft Excel. Our calculated value was 3.51E+06 kWh or J (=3510000 kWh or J) while the value on the pdf file was 3.68E+06 kWh or J (=3680000 kWh or J). Our computed average trip time (t_s) was 4.794297 minutes which was approximately equal to value (=4.8 minutes) on the paper.

ρ (rho) value was unclear in the calculation. It was given as 1.275 kg/m^3 (air density) on page 5 of the pdf file. However, it was provided as motor efficiency on page 2 (Nomenclature) of the pdf file. Our calculation was done substituting the air density value 1.275 kg/m^3 into rho (ρ ) value.