You are on page 1of 14

Spring 2016 Lockheed Martin Engineering Design Project

The Pennsylvania State Univesity
Engineering Design 100
Xinli Wu
Team 1
Philip McGurk, Ben Solarz, Dom Falcone, Yilin Yang
April 29th 2016

Abstract:
Commercial heat exchangers have been available for quite some time, and have nearly
reached their peak efficiency due to the limited processes available to create them. However,
since the creation of additive manufacturing, or 3D printing, a whole new realm of product
manufacturing has been created. In this design project, we hope to improve the design of a
heat exchanger to make it more viable for 3D printing. By doing so, we hope to increase cost
effectiveness and ease of manufacturing.

1

Table of Contents:

1. Project Introduction(Yilin Yang).…………………………………………………………………3
2. Description of the Design Task(Dom Falcone).……………………………………………3
3. Design Process/Matrix(Phil McGurk)…..……………………………………………………..4
4. Prototype(Ben Solarz)………………………………………………………………………………10
5. Analysis(Phil McGurk)……………………………………………………………………………….12
6. Power Point Slides(Ben Solarz)…………………………………………………………………13
7. Tri – Fold Brochure(Dom Falcone)……………………………………………………………13
8. References(Phil McGurk)………………………………………………………………………….13

2

Introduction:
The following design project was sponsored my Lockheed Martin and was carried out by
each Edesign 100 class. This project represents the work of group 1 in Edesign Section 009.
Each group was asked to select one of six projects and challenged to redesign the given object
in a way that would be more viable in additive manufacturing. Our group collectively decided
on the redesigning of a commercial heat exchanger as the topic of our project.

Design Task:

Problem Statement: Heat exchangers are a very commonly used object in the
age of technology. However, to date, the most commonly used method of
manufacturing heat exchangers takes months to complete. This incurs a much
higher expense on heat exchangers due to production time. Our sponsor,
Lockheed Martin, needs a redesigned heat exchanger that works effectively and
is viable for 3D printing.

Mission Statement: Our group worked on the task of redesigning a heat
exchanger. Through redesigning, we hoped to produce a model that could be
inexpensively and quickly made through additive manufacturing. By doing so,
Lockheed Martin could sell heat exchangers faster, and for a less expensive price.

3

Design Specifics:
o Redesign a heat exchanger for additive manufacturing
o Chose a proper material for use in the heat exchanger based off of cost
and build time
o Keep size factor the same and keep design mates as is
o Create a more efficient inner flow geometry while keeping inner surface
area constant

Design Process:

Project Management: (Fig. 1)

4

Concept Generation:

o Provided Reference Model
Original Design – Small thin sheets placed parallel to one another
(Fig. 2)

o Front view of potential designs
Concept 1 – Square and triangle design (Fig. 3)

Concept 2 – Inner rectangle design (Fig. 4)

5

Concept 3 – Squares patterned line corner to corner (Fig. 5)

Concept 4 – Squares with normal line corner to corner (Fig. 6)

Concept 5 – Square cell design (Fig. 7)

6

Concept Selection: (Table 1 Design Matrix)

Section Criteria
Ease of manufacturing
Cost of materials
Able to match inner surface area
Amount of Internal area
Prescision needed to make
Sum 1's
Sum 0's
Sum -1's
Net Score
Rank
Continue?
no

1
1
0
-1
-1
0
1
2
2
-1
5
no

Concepts
2
3
1
0
0
0
-1
1
0
1
0
0
1
2
3
3
1
0
0
2
2
1
yes
no

4
0
0
-1
1
0
1
3
1
0
2

5
1
0
-1
-1
1
2
1
2
0
2
no

o Comparison to original: (Table 2)

Section Criteria
Weight
Ease of manufacturing
25%
Cost of materials
25%
Able to match inner surface area
30%
Amount of Internal area
10%
Prescision needed to make
10%
Total Score
Rank
Continue?

Concept 3
Original
Rating
Weighted Score Rating Weighted Score
4
1
2
0.5
4
1
4
1
5
1.5
5
1.5
5
0.5
5
0.5
2
0.2
0
0
4.2
3.5
1
2
Yes
No

7

Description of best selected design:
o Design Chosen: Concept3 (Fig. 5)

After comparing all the hypothesized designs, concept 3 was chosen for
production. Although in each design we were able to change the inner
geometry, keeping the surface area constant was an extreme challenge.
Considering this was one of the main guidelines for the project, our group
focused heavily on this. For the few designs that could match the surface area,
the air flow through would be much too great leading to inefficient heat
exchange. In concept three, by adding small circular shapes on to bars that
crossed the squares, we could effectively match the original inner surface area
almost exactly. This was done by adjusting the radius of each small circle on the
cross bars to whatever value needed to achieve the exact surface area. Addition
to the matching surface area, the air pressure through this heat exchanger would
be high due to the minimal area of open spaces. This means efficient heat
transfer. In regards to heat transfer, although our prototype was 3D printed
using a plastic, we decided aluminum would be our metal of choice for the
8

design. Although copper is also commonly used and is more efficient at heat
transfer, aluminum is much less expensive when used in additive manufacturing.
Additionally, the difference between the two specific heats of the two mediums
is relatively small. Therefore, aluminum was the chosen material.

9

Prototype:

Design drawings:

(Figure 7)
(Figure 7.1)

(Figure 7.2)

10

Final Product:
(Figure 8)

(Figure 8.1)

As seen by these images, my group was able to create the hypothesized design.
All inner surface area was kept equivalent to the original despite changes to the
internal flow geometry. Additionally, no changes were made to the external
portions of the heat exchanger. However, one challenge our group faced was
having no control over the printing process. During the creation stage of the
project, the 3D printing process warped. (Seen at the bottom of figure 8)
However, we dismissed this as being a problem with our individual design due to
the identical results of many other groups.
11

Analysis:

Conclusion:
Compared to the initial design, our design matches the internal surface
area nearly perfectly. Additionally, the original design required much more
precision to make due to the closely spaced, thin slates. Our new design has
much less of the small spaces that a highly advanced 3D printer would be
required to make. This means the manufacturing of our new model would be
faster, and would require less expensive equipment to make. Mass production
of the new design would be relatively straightforward because of this. Finally,
although the initial heat exchanger is difficult to produce, it is very efficient. A
large goal of our group was to match the efficiency as best as possible. By
keeping the openings small but including many of them, we hope to match the
airflow of the original and hopefully its airflow as well. By keeping airflow
consistent, we believe the functionality of our prototype will be on par with the
original.

12

Presentation:
o Link to our In class design presentation
o Trifold

References:
“ED&G 100 INTRODUCTION TO ENGINEERING DESIGN." Penn State College of
Engineering, n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2016. <ED&G 100 INTRODUCTION TO
ENGINEERING DESIGN>.
"Current Project | SEDTAPP First-Year Engineering Design." SEDTAPP
FirstYear Engineering Design. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Apr. 2016.
<https://sites.psu.edu/engineeringdesignproject/first-year-engineeringdesign/current-project/>.
"EngrDesignProcess." Boeing, n.d. Web. <
http://www.engr.psu.edu/xinli/edsgn100/EngrDesignProcess.pdf >.

13