December 10, 2014

Zengtao Chen, Ph.D., P.Eng.

CEO
Chen Inc
Mechanical Engineering 4-31F, University of Alberta

Re: Design & Technology Foundation’s final design proposal for the Wind-Powered Oil Derrick

Dear Dr. Chen,

I am writing you with regard to the Design and Technology Foundation’s final design submission for the
Wind-Powered Oil Derrick. The proposed design remains focused on a smaller “marginal” sized oil pump
used for isolated regions where electricity is not readily available and production rates are below 10
barrels per day. The design itself includes a horizontal wind turbine system with a power output split
two ways. A constant amount of power will be devoted to driving the pump jack, while any additional
power will be used to power a generator and store energy for future use.

The enclosed report details the overall final design of the wind-powered oil pump. Specifically, the
report covers the final power transmission design within our agreed scope of work, a full concept for
energy storage to be used in times lacking wind, and an engineering drawing package for necessary
custom parts.

I urge you to contact me with any questions or recommendations. The team is very committed to
delivering a competent product and guarantee excellence throughout each stage of production. I look
forward to working with you in the final stages of this product and am very excited to see the Wind-
Powered Oil Derrick through to completion.

Sincerely,

Vincent Castonguay-Siu

Enclosures (2: Report, Drawing Package)

Wind-Powered Oil Derrick
Bid 18, Presented to Chen Inc, 10 December 2014
Design & Technologies Foundation: Graeme Bekker, Vincent Castonguay-Siu,
Jonathan DeMong, Taylor Elkjaer, and Brennan Goodkey

ABSTRACT
Oil Companies abandon profitable wells when they can no longer extract enough oil to
cover production costs. However, there is still profit to be made from the remaining oil in
these wells. Design and Technology Foundation (DTF) have created a conceptual design
that will effectively extract the remaining oil by using clean, renewable, and inexpensive
wind energy. By utilizing average Southern Alberta wind speeds of 5 m/s, a 12 m rotor
diameter wind turbine is used to supply the 2.25 kW needed to power a standard 160-size
pump jack at a production rate of 10 barrels per day. The design uses the rotor and tower
from a standard 25 kW wind turbine. The internals have been replaced with a series of gear
trains and chain drives that transfer power from the rotor to the base of the tower, where it
attaches to a transmission. The 7-speed manual transmission allows the pump jack to be
operated at optimal power at a wide range of wind speeds. In high wind speeds, a
generator can be engaged to the transmission to store excess energy. All gears, shafts, and
bearings were subject to detailed design calculations to ensure they met all specifications.
A drawing package was created so the product can begin manufacturing. Total project cost
is an estimated $62 000.00 including the manufacturing and purchasing of parts and the
total design team wages. DTF is proud to present our efficient, clean, and cost effective
solution to oil extraction.

i
Table of Contents
Introduction........................................................................................................................................... 1
Design Methodology............................................................................................................................ 2
Analysis................................................................................................................................................... 5
Shafts...........................................................................................................................................................5
Figure 1: Skeleton Diagram for Shafts, Bearings, and Gears....................................................................5
Gears...........................................................................................................................................................6
Bearings.......................................................................................................................................................7
Figure 2: Bearing Placement....................................................................................................................8
Chain...........................................................................................................................................................8
Figure 3: Chain Transmission Sprockets and Idlers..................................................................................9
Efficiency.....................................................................................................................................................9

Discussion............................................................................................................................................ 11
Figure 4: Seven-Speed Transmission......................................................................................................11

Time Management............................................................................................................................. 13
Cost Estimate....................................................................................................................................... 14
Conclusion............................................................................................................................................ 16
Bibliography........................................................................................................................................ 17
Appendices.......................................................................................................................................... 19
Appendix A: Tables....................................................................................................................................19
Table A.1: Rotor Diameter vs. Power Output for a Wind Turbine..........................................................19
Table A.2: Concept Decision Matrix.......................................................................................................19
Table A.3: Shaft Specifications...............................................................................................................20
Table A.4: Shaft Deflection.....................................................................................................................20
Table A.5: Shaft Deflection Slope...........................................................................................................20
Table A.6: Shaft Whirl............................................................................................................................21
Table A.7: Shaft Torsional Vibration......................................................................................................21
Table A.8: Material Selection.................................................................................................................21
Table A.9: Gear Specifications...............................................................................................................22
Table A.10: Bearing Criteria...................................................................................................................23
Table A.11: Bearing Selection................................................................................................................23
Table A.12: Cost Breakdown..................................................................................................................24
Table A.13: Design Cost Breakdown......................................................................................................25
Appendix B: Figures...................................................................................................................................26
Figure B.1. Design 1: Horizontal Turbine w/ No Storage........................................................................26
Figure B.2 Design 2: Horizontal Turbine w/ Flywheel Storage...............................................................27

ii
 Figure B.3 Design 3: Horizontal Turbine w/ Battery Storage..................................................................28
Figure B.4 Design 4: Vertical Turbine w/ Water Storage........................................................................29
Figure B.5 Design 5: Archimedes Fan w/ Flywheel Storage...................................................................30
Figure B.6: Gantt Chart—First Draft......................................................................................................31
Figure B.7: Liquid Planner Gantt Chart..................................................................................................32
Figure B.8: Gantt Chart—Final Draft......................................................................................................33
Figure B.9: Time Distribution.................................................................................................................34
Appendix C: Calculations...........................................................................................................................35

Main Body Word Count........................................................................................................................(4857)

iii
Introduction
The bid proposal for the wind powered oil derrick designed by DTF includes a total analysis package that
will sufficiently allow Chen Inc. to manufacture or purchase all parts and to be confident in the longevity
and success of such a project. The feasibility of this project relies heavily on the efficiency of the entire
mechanism, therefore purely mechanical parts were chosen. This project includes the manufacturing
and purchasing of all parts and the installation of those parts. This power system is intended to be
connected directly to an existing stripper well pump jack with the standard gear reducers having the
necessary output speeds to do so. Included in the design package is an engineering drawing package of
all parts required to be manufactured for this project. All gears, shafts, and gear casings are to be
custom manufactured. A turbine with a rating of 25 kW will be used to power the system. This turbine
can be purchased from Polaris America LLC. The total project cost is estimated to be $26 000.00 for all
materials purchased and parts manufactured, while the design cost from the analysis totals $38 470.00.
A universal project safety factor of 2.1 was calculated to allow an appropriate level of safety given the
unpredictability of the wind. Total transmission efficiency was calculated to be 81.1%, as the product of
all gear, bearing, and chain power transmission efficiencies.

1
Design Methodology
With a stripper well, a power requirement on the shaft driving the pump jack is 2.25 kW (Genuine jacks).
This value is assumed for the mean well depth of 2000 m (Colborne, J., Bustin, M., Reinson, G., Bruder,
N., 2013, page 2) commonly found in the Alberta plains and Lethbridge area. The maximum output shaft
speed driving the pump jack would be 0.22 rpm. This setup will be appropriate exclusively for finishing
off wells that are mostly drained. These concepts do not account for any onsite change of pump jack
only the replacement of the diesel or natural gas generator with a wind turbine and a mechanical gear
reducer.

Based on the preliminary design specifications, the wind turbine must be able to convert the average
wind speeds of the Alberta prairie to useable power. The Alberta prairie region occupies a rectangular
area, South-East of Edmonton. Typical values for the Edmonton Area are 12.2 km/h while Lethbridge has
average wind speed of 18.3 km/h (Government of Canada, 2014). By checking data from the
Government of Canada and Government of Alberta, an average wind speed of 14.7 km/h (4.1 m/s) was
calculated for the Alberta prairie region. The records used daily wind readings, compiled from the years
of 1971-2000. However, based on this average speed, it is not feasible to use a wind turbine to create
the required power. We decided to limit the region to where a wind turbine would be effective. The
wind speeds of southwestern Alberta are much better suited to this application. By using the same
method previously outlined, an average wind speed of 5.1 m/s was calculated. This average wind speed
will be used for the calculation of the power that can be generated from a wind turbine.

The energy storage methods of batteries and flywheels were considered. Batteries are a proven
technology that can work while flywheel energy storage is a relatively new and untested method,
though theoretically possible.

Both vertical and horizontal axis turbines were included in preliminary designs; however, horizontal axis
wind turbines are another proven technology that will work in the specified location of southwestern
Alberta. Using equation 1:

1 3 (1)
P= C p A v ρ
2

Where CP is the coefficient of performance (value = 0.3), A is the area, v is the velocity, and ρ is the
density of the air (1.225 kg/m^3). The power from an average wind speed of 5 m/s and a rotor diameter
of 12 m will be sufficient to power the specified well type and pump jack size (see Appendix A, Table A.1)
includes power output with variable rotor diameters.

Both planetary gear trains and fixed gear trains are feasible and the use of herringbone gears would aid
in power transfer. The Final design consisted of a fixed gear manual transmission implementing both
herringbone and spur gears, as well bevel gears located at the top of the turbine to improve
functionality.

2
There were six criteria that the concept designs were focused around. These six included durability, cost,
environmental impact, mobility, manufacturing simplicity, safety, and efficiency. Through a decision
matrix process, five concept designs were tested, ranked, and scored against each other. Through the
process three designs came out as the top contenders. Designs 1(horizontal wind turbine with no
storage, Figure B.1.), 5 (Archimedes fan with flywheel storage, Figure B.5.) and 3 (Horizontal turbine
with battery storage, Figure B.3.) placed 1 st, 2nd, and 3rd, respectively. The final design includes the best
components of designs 1 and 3. The decision matrix can be found in Appendix A, Table A.2. The sketches
of all five designs can also be found in Appendix B, as Figures B.1 through B.5.

The justifications for the six criteria are as follows. Durability was included because in small-scale
operations, any breakdown or repair costing more than a few thousand dollars results in a loss in profit
rendering this project financially unfeasible. Similarly, the criteria of efficiency, manufacturing simplicity,
and cost all contribute to the profit of such a project. Only the safety and environmental impact criterion
were not tied to the cost of the project. The ranking between projects in the safety category were more
of a go or no go decision. If the project was not safe it was not considered. All of the concepts
mentioned here passed our minimum safety requirements. The main difference between the rankings in
safety came from the flywheel energy storage method due to the greater danger associated with a high
speed heavy component and the turbine axis direction due to blade tip speeds and the location of the
center of gravity. Environmental impact was given a low weighting because all designs considered are
environmentally friendly.

Each design was given a recommended ranking based on the individual designer and then the value was
discussed in the design group.

Design 1 was considered the simplest design which permitted high scoring in design. It was ranked with
a lower safety rating because all horizontal axis turbines represented a safety risk with the high wing tip
velocity. Design 1 is considered the most economical due to its simplicity and limited components. It had
no storage method and therefore a reduced efficiency. A high durability was scored because it had
fewer parts and many of those parts were standard. A mid-range environmental impact rating was
scored because all horizontal axis wind turbines pose a threat to winged creatures.

Design 2 scored low on design because it did not include a transmission. It scored low on safety due to
the size of the flywheel. The manufacturing cost was average because flywheels are expensive but
possess no power transmission component. Efficiency was high because the flywheel presented a very
good storage method with little losses. A heavy flywheel would wear out bearings more quickly;
however, the rest of the design was relatively simple resulting in average scoring in durability.
Environmental impact was scored average because of the horizontal axis turbine component.

Design 3 was very similar to design 1 but made use of electrical storage in the form of batteries and a
planetary gear system. The planetary gears as well as the electrical storage system had it score slightly
different than design 1. It had an average ranking in design and ranked similarly in safety and durability.
Design 3 had an average manufacturing cost because it has the added battery storage from design 1.
Efficiency was high because the batteries increase the storage and efficiency. It had the highest

3
environmental impact (low score) because it made use of batteries that would need to be replaced
every five years.

Design 4 had a low design and gearbox score because water storage is incredibly complex and this
design had no transmission. It had the safest rating because the vertical blades pose a smaller threat of
injury. Manufacturing cost scored poorly (highest cost) because water storage would lead to an
involved and expensive infrastructure. Efficiency was low because vertical axis turbines are not as
efficient as horizontal axis turbines. Durability was low because the bottom thrust bearing would wear
out quickly. Environmental impact rating was highest because it would result in a lower bird mortality
rate and had the added feature of a birdbath.

Design 5 made use of no transmission and as such received an average rating in the design and gearbox
criteria. The small flywheel in the design was much safer than design 2; therefore design 5 received a
higher safety rating. Cost was average because it used expensive technology but no transmission. Design
5 made use of an Archimedes inspired blade design that increases the efficiency, which is why it was
given a higher efficiency rating. The flywheel design for this concept is a very compact small flywheel
that must rotate at high velocities. It scored low in durability because the new technology of the fan
blades has not been tested. Environmental impact was average due to the implementation of flywheel
energy storage.

4
Analysis
Shafts

Figure 1: Skeleton Diagram for Shafts, Bearings, and Gears

5
Shaft design plays an important role in the transmission of power and torque from the wind turbine to
the pump jack. After finalizing the design, it has been determined that there are two main systems that
transfer power using shafts. The first system consists of four shafts carrying the bevel gears and
sprockets; these shafts transfer the power generated by the wind turbine down to the second system, a
7-speed manual transmission (see Figure 1, above). These shafts must be stiff, strong, inexpensive, and
easy to machine. A decision matrix was used to decide which material would meet best design criteria
(see Appendix A, Table A.8). Stiffness and strength are the most important factors in the design because
minimizing deflection is essential to maximizing performance. Cost and machinability are also factors
because the design needs to be as cost effective as possible. As such, a conservative yet realistic
assumption that the material to be used will be AISI 1050 carbon steel due to its lower cost, ease of
machinability, high strength and stiffness (AZO Materials).

The weight of the gears and chains was used in determining diameter. Sprockets were approximated as
thin spur gears with negligible weight in the force calculations. Shaft weight was found to be negligible
in calculating diameter based on strength. Keyways will be used to connect a spline sleeve to the
transmission shafts. However, all shafts have been assumed to be subject to splined shaft SCF loading
because splines are a conservative assumption since the required keyways possess a smaller SCF.
Research suggests a 2.8 SCF for an 8-spline shaft (Collins, Busby, Staab). Frictional losses from bearings
and gears have also been neglected resulting in a more conservative estimate of shaft sizing. Further
assumptions made are that all shafts will have a ground surface finish, and temperature change will be
negligible. Each shaft is stepped by increasing shaft diameter by 5 mm, to allow proper positioning of
bearings and gears.

Shaft design calculations are outlined in Appendix C: Shaft Calculations. The first step was to calculate
forces from the gears to determine maximum torque using the appropriate gear equations. Next,
multiple bending moment diagrams were created from the gear forces and combined to find the
maximum bending moment on each shaft. The shaft diameter was calculated using the DE-elliptic
criterion and iterated until a minimum diameter was found. The last step was to check assumptions. The
maximum shear stress in each shaft was less than the yield strength and torsional deflection was less
than 3° /m. The deflection (see Appendix A Table A.4) and slope (see Appendix A, Table A.5) of each
shaft was calculated and checked. Then, lateral vibration and natural frequencies were calculated (see
Appendix A, Table A.6). Lastly, torsional vibration was found (see Appendix A, Table A.7). All seven of the
shaft diameters were calculated (see Appendix A, Table A.3) and assumptions were verified. Each shaft
met the shear, shaft deflection, slope, whirl, and vibration criteria.

Gears
Using the input and output angular speeds defined within the concept report, the required gear ratios
were defined. The fundamental law of gearing is defined as:

Ng (2)
e p /g =
Np

6
where ep/g is the speed ratio of the pinion to the gear, Ng is the number of teeth on the gear, and Np is
the number of teeth on the pinion. Due to the narrow range of output speeds, seven different gear
ratios were employed (see Table A.9). In order to reduce stress on gears, the largest gear ratio, e out/in=50,
was divided between three gear-to-gear transmissions, and remaining gear ratios were adjusted
accordingly. From these ratios, the gear stress formula was employed in order to design the gear train.
The formula for gear stress is:

Wt K a K m (3)
σ B= KS KB K I
FmJ K v

where Wt is the tangential force in the gear teeth, F is the face width if the gears, m is the module of the
gear, J is a geometric factor, and Kx are various correction factors. Sample calculations are thoroughly
outlined in Appendix C: Gear Calculations. Maximum allowable stress was determined by choosing the
same type of material as the shafts, AISI 1050, due to its strength and cost. By assuming conservative
values for face width and number of teeth on the smallest gear in the gear train, DTF calculated the
minimum allowable module using Equation (3). A conservative module of m=10 mm was chosen in order
to make gear design simple (see Appendix C: Gear Calculations – Solve for Module). DTF employed the
required gear ratios, in conjunction with the centre-to-centre distance defined by the two gears
previously designed in the module step, to define the remaining twelve gears. Once again employing
Equation (3), DTF checked that the previously designed module would be safe with the high-torque
bevel. Finally, all remaining unknowns involved with the bevel gears were defined using the required
gear ratio, and the design criterion that:

L (4)
F≤
3

where L is the length of the length of the pitch cone.

The final step in gear design involved solving for the surface stress on the gears. The formula for surface
stress is:

√ W t Ca C m (5)
σ S=C p CsCf
FId C v

Where I is the surface geometry factor, d is the pitch diameter, and Cx are various correction factors. The
surface stress was found to be much larger than the maximum allowable stress. Gears were hardened to
a level where surface strength Sfc=1200 MPa by flame or induction hardening, rendering a contact stress
safety factor of Nc=1.35.

Bearings
The Design and Technologies Foundation determined the required bearings by first optimizing the
design. The primary focus of DTF was to strategically place bearings in such a way as to facilitate the
construction of the turbine. Figure 2 (below) depicts the relative placement of all bearings. In order to
ensure construction was possible, bearings were placed within the casing of a gearbox when possible

7
and two redundant bearings were added (Bearing 5 and 13, Figure 2). Axial bearing 5 is designed to
support the weight of the vertical shaft and its associated gears upon turbine assembly. Bearing 13
secures the location of one of the shafts found in the manual transmission, which is contained

Figure 2: Bearing Placement

within a multi-compartmental gearbox, while external components are being fastened. The design team
next focused on simply supporting any shafts when possible, as shown by the location of bearings 8 and
9. Due to the availability, low cost, and high-speed application of axial and the radial deep groove ball
bearings (FAG Bearing Catalogue) they have been selected as DTF’s bearings of choice. The bearings’
expected life cycles were calculated under the assumption of continuous usage for one year at
maximum operating conditions. The process continued as team next ascertained the magnitude of the

8
radial and axial reaction forces at all bearing locations, using sum of moment and force equations. The
calculated forces and life cycles were then used to determine the dynamic load rating of the bearings.
Bearing criteria were then compared (see Table A.10) which led to the decision of using the most robust
and sealed bearing when bore diameters were identical (see Table A.11). Sealed bearings will decrease
the chance of oil degradation in gearbox bearings, which may have otherwise posed a problem since oil
contamination within a gearbox is unavoidable. Gearbox bearing lubrication has been selected to be the
same as the oil found within the gearbox itself; lubrication of bearings outside of gearboxes will be done
with grease. The reasoning behind the selection of grease is to minimize leaking, which can still occur in
sealed bearings, albeit at a very slow rate.

Chain
The power transmission selection initially began with the use of a shaft which was quickly deemed
unfeasible after recording a required weight of over 2100 lb (see Appendix C: Shaft Calculations) and in
turn astronomical estimated production costs. Instead, a bush roller chain selection was examined and
deemed a much more suitable means of power transmission. For the actual selection, it was necessary
to analyze both the speed as well as the applied torque so that an adequate selection could be made. To
do this, an adjusted power output including impact evaluations (see Appendix C: Chain Transmission
Calculations, Table 1) was used so both speed and torque could be evaluated simultaneously. The
turbine used in our design is rated for a 25 kW output which is limited by the turbine cut-out wind speed
of 25m/s. Calculated values place the angular velocity at 218.84 rpm and the adjusted maximum power
at 32.5kW for impact loads. Therefore, it is imperative to design for a corrected maximal power output
of 32.5 kW. Reference to a chain selection chart (see Appendix C: Chain Transmission Calculations, Table
3) enabled DTF to chain model CHE120, possessing a 1.5’’ pitch, and a corresponding 23T. This selection
minimizes chain pitch to decrease noise and increase efficiency while ensuring strength. Analysis of the
max allowable load determined that the chain selected possessed a factor of safety of 14, far exceeding
the required factor of safety of 10 used for chains loaded under 8 000 000 cycles. Since an abnormally
long length of chain is required (50 times the chains pitch), the chain must undergo tensioning ("Renold
Roller Chain Catalogue”). Upon communication with Renold Co. representatives, the decision to utilize
four chain tensioners in conjunction with two 19m chains with 598 links. Figure 3 depicts the tensioners

9
 Figure 3: Chain Transmission Sprockets and Idlers
or “idlers” and the sprockets on the chain. This tensioning system reduces efficiency by up to 2% but
permits effective power transmission over longer distances. See Appendix C: Chain Transmission
Calculations for detailed calculations.

Efficiency
Appendix C: Efficiency Calculations contains a thorough breakdown of efficiency calculations. Efficiency
of the entire system was determined by calculating the power transfer efficiency of each component
and multiplying each together. It was assumed that gear meshing would occur between lubricated hard-
steel gears (“Coefficient of Friction Reference Table” - Engineer's Handbook) and that bevel-to-bevel
meshing can be approximated as spur-to-spur meshing. Gearing losses are associated to churning,
winding, sliding, and rolling losses (Croes, Jan. "Literature Survey: Gear Losses", 2009, page 21).
However, an effective efficiency can be approximated using empirical equations. Hence, approximate
spur to spur power transmission efficiency has been calculated to be 98.0% and herringbone-to-
herringbone transmission efficiency has been determined to be 96.8%. Research on the effective power
transmission efficiency associated with chain and sprocket combinations has led to the conclusion that
such a combination would have an efficiency of at least 98% for a chain loaded in tension with a
minimum of 305N (Biman, Sengupta, 2012, Industrial Workstation Design). The self-weight of the chain
is expected to be 371N (see Appendix C: Chain Transmission Calculations). Therefore, we can safely
assume an efficiency of 98%. However, extra chain transmission components such as tensioners and
rollers must also be accounted for; therefore, subtracting all efficiency losses associated with such
components is necessary. After thorough research, it has been determined that each pair of tensioners
will induce a loss 1.2% (Renold Roller Chain Catalogue, 2014) in efficiency. Assuming the power will be
transferred using to 2 chain transmission systems with 2 pairs of tensioners between them, we can
assume a final chain drive efficiency of 93.7%. The product of calculated efficiencies, and hence the
effective efficiency of the system is 81.1%.

10
Discussion
The design was specified to be personal. This criterion was met because one person can safely operate
the entire process of the device. All shifting of the seven-speed transmission will be controlled by a PLC.
Figure 4 depicts the seven-speed transmission in its entirety. The input power comes in on the lower left

Figure 4: Seven-Speed Transmission

hand side, while there are multiple outputs on the upper right hand side. Both outputs are connected to
clutches. These clutches are engaged or disengaged based on input wind speed. For example, at high
wind speeds both the clutches at the outputs to the pump and generator would be engaged, allowing
for the excess energy to be stored in a battery. At low wind speeds above the cut-in speed of the
turbine, the clutch at the output to the generator would disengage, allowing all the energy to be
devoted to running the pump. When wind speeds drop below the turbine cut-in speed (or essentially to
zero), power stored in the battery will be supplied to the electric motor attached to the pump, which
would clutch in and run the pump. In this way, the pump could be run at all times, regardless of wind
speed.

11
In order to keep the output speed to the pump and generator relatively constant, the seven speed
transmission was employed. In Figure 4, between gears 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6, and beside gear seven
are four shifter collars. The collars are “dogtoothed” (teeth extending horizontally) and are connected to
the shaft by splines, whereas the gears turn freely on the shaft. As the input speed from the chain is
variable, the correct gear ratio can be chosen by sliding the dogtoothed collar toward the gear set
corresponding to this ratio. The dogteeth will then mesh into machined holes in the side of the gear,
allowing said gear set to transfer power to the output(s).

Because this shifting mechanism, as well as the storage system using a battery and generator is outside
the scope of work of DTF, a full analysis has not been completed on these components. These concepts
are included to provide the client with the best possible product.

The actual height of the turbine would make the product non-feasible as a backyard project. The total
height is 22 m, which ensured that the process could produce a stripper well output (8-10 bbl per day)
and could function consistently 24 hrs per day. As outlined in the assumptions, this project would be
much more feasible in a location with average wind speeds over 18.3 km/h. When analyzing these
criteria, it is evident that the majority of the Alberta prairies would not be suitable and only the
southwestern part of the province would meet these requirements.

12
Time Management
The Design and Technologies Foundation created a base model Gantt chart (see Appendix B, Figure B.6)
using Microsoft Excel in order to permit the team to keep track of all the personnel devoted to a single
task at any given time and offer an estimated visual overview of all current and future tasks and
deadlines. However, to account for real-time progress the implementation of Liquid Planner (see
Appendix B, Figure B.7) was required. Making use of both simultaneously permitted DTF to keep track of
estimated time resource allotments and actual time expenditure required for task completion
throughout the entire project. As the project progressed through its various stages the team kept an up-
to-date Gantt chart (see Appendix B, Figure B.8), which provided useful information with regards to the
initial deadline estimates and actual task dates of completion. When comparing the both Gantt Charts
and making use of the information provided by Liquid Planner team time distribution (see Appendix B,
Figure B.9) we can see that due to several notable changes throughout the design process and the
additional time required for many of the analytical tasks, certain completion dates had to be pushed
back and several tasks replaced. This did not influence overall project as the tasks swaps were outside
the scope of work of the deliverables but did influence personnel distribution. Future considerations to
be given attention in future project time management would to account for design changes and
unforeseen time delays associated with large projects by embedding a certain degree of flexibility in
estimating task completion.

13
Cost Estimate
In terms of price estimation, the costs were split up into 6 major categories including bearings, gears,
shafts, chain, casings and the turbine structure. The total project will cost an estimated $26000.00 for all
materials manufactured and purchased while the design cost from the analysis and design will cost
$38470.00. A manufacturing cost breakdown is available in Appendix A, Table A.12, and a breakdown of
design costs can be found in Appendix A, Table A.13. Installation costs are highly dependent on the
region therefore it is difficult to make an accurate estimate of installation. As a general estimation
however, Canadian installation costs could increase the price by up to $19 990 for delivery, installation
of concrete pad and assembly of the machine (Next Level Concrete, Keyno Investments Trucking, EMCEE
Contracting). It is also noted that the generator and batteries for storage are simply relocated from the
purchased turbine and clutched in and out when wind power is lacking to ensure steady production.

Bearings:
For the pricing of bearings, quotes were taken from FAG Industries Part Manual (FAG Germany
Products). There were a total of 16 bearings of 6 different types.

Turbine:
At the beginning of the project a Polaris P-25 kW turbine from Polaris Industries was selected for its
affordable price as well as reputable service history. In this price is included the entire turbine stock,
empennage assembly and generator which was relocated for our design. Additional modifications to the
turbine including shaft and bearing placements were quoted in the “Modifications” portion of the cost
breakdown. This specific design is purchased from “Shandong Yaneng New Energy Equipment Co.” and
shipping is considered in the price estimate.

Gears:
The selection and pricing of custom made gears was done by taking into account the base material cost
and the machinist time to machine the necessary features quoted to average Edmonton machinist rates.
The spur gears were initially expected to be purchased but price including shipping was found to be
more expensive than supplying the material and having them waterjet cut to required dimensions
(Razorline Cutting Edmonton). The herringbone gears are assumed to be initially waterjet cut to outside
diameter and center bore diameter with machining used to complete the herringbone teeth.(all
machining costs are in reference to CW Manufacturing Ltd.)

Shafts:
Due to the simplicity of the shafts used, stock material was priced out and the cost of machining time
was added on. This included the machining required for cutting to size and adding necessary steps. The
base material was quoted from “Metals Depot Ltd.” (Metals Depot USA) which took into account size,
length, and material for the base shaft used

Casing:
The casings category includes the transmission cover as well as the bearing holders in the turbine stock.
Because all of these components are custom built, materials again were selected and added to the

14
expected machining time quoted at Alberta machinist rates. Because of the low temperature and slow
moving components, basic 20 GA steel was used and was assembled by welding and machining. If a
more robust packaging is required casting is suggested as indicated in the drawings.

Chain:
Pricing of the chain and idler sprockets was done in reference to Tsubaki Canada Ltd., the primary chain
distributor for Canada. The 4 sprockets however, were priced at Steel Sparrow Ltd, which offered a more
favourable price.

15
Conclusion
DTF was contracted by Chen Inc. to design a personal-sized wind powered oil derrick. Based on
assumptions made, it was determined that a 25 kW turbine would be suitable to mechanically run an
existing stripper well pump jack with the standard gear reduction intact. Based on an average wind
speed varying from 5 m/s to 25 m/s, the product is recommended for southwestern Alberta. Utilizing a
dual output system to the pump and a battery-generator setup, the product should run a pump non-
stop regardless of wind conditions. This design is extremely efficient, and should satisfy and surpass all
wishes of Chen Inc. All necessary mechanical components within the agreed scope of work including
shafts, gears, and bearings have been fully designed and specified with a factor of safety of no less than
2.1. Calculations are detailed in Appendix C, and an engineering drawing package is included.

16
Bibliography
"Analytics." LiquidPlanner, 13 November 2014.

AZO Materials, “Properties of AISI 1050 Steel”, AZO Materials, n.p., n.d., 12 November 2014
http://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6526

“The Big Bearing Store” |Chain Products, n.p., n.d., 02 December 2014
http://www.thebigbearingstore.com/servlet/the-105/%23120-Roller-Chain/Detail

Carey, J., University of Alberta Course Notes for MecE 360, n.p., n.d. 25 October 2014.

Castonguay-Siu, Vincent C., Jonathan P. DeMong, Brennan Goodkey, Taylor Elkjaer, and Graeme
Bekker. Concept Report: Wind Powered Oil Derrick. Rep. Edmonton: 2014

Castonguay-Siu, Vincent C., Jonathan P. DeMong, Brennan Goodkey, Taylor Elkjaer, and Graeme
Bekker. Analytical Report: Wind Powered Oil Derrick. Rep. Edmonton: 2014.

"Coefficient of Friction Reference Table - Engineer's Handbook." Coefficient of Friction Reference Table -

Engineer's Handbook, 08 November 2014
http://www.engineershandbook.com/Tables/frictioncoefficients.html

Collins, Jack A., Henry R. Busby, and George H. Staab. Mechanical Design of Machine Elements and
Machines: A Failure Prevention Pesrpective. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2010

“CW Manufacturing Ltd.” |780-948-8810

“EMCEE Contracting” | 780-497-2222

"FAG Germany."  | Products & Services  | Product Catalogue Medias®, n.p., n.d. 09 December 2014

"FAG Germany."  | Products & Services, n.p., n.d., 09 December 2014

Ignou Academics, “Shafts” Machine Design. n.p., n.d. 09 November 2014

http://www.ignou.ac.in/upload/Unit-7-60

“Keyno Investments Trucking” | 780-964-9959

“Metals Depot” |General Material Pricing, n.p., n.d., 02 December 2014

http://www.metalsdepot.com/catalog_cart_view.php?msg=removed

“Next Level Concrete” |780-289-5805

Oberg, E. & Jones, F. D.,. Machinery Handbook 29th Edition, Connecticut, Industrial Press, 2012.

Plymouth Tech, “Bending in Shafts with Helical Gears”, Gears, n.p., n.d., 12 November 2014
http://www.tech.plymouth.ac.uk/sme/desnotes/gears/helicalbm.htm

17
“Razorline Cutting Edmonton” |780-948-0959

Roymech, "Shaft Design Basics", Shaft Design, n.p., n.d., 09 November 2014
http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Drive/Shaft_design.html

Roymech, “Straight Bevel Gears”, Bevel Gears, n.p., n.d., 11 November 2014
http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Drive/Bevel_Gears.html

“Steel Sparrow” |Sprockets, n.p., n.d., 02 December 2014 http://www.steelsparrow.com/skf-chain-

sprocket-31.75-mm-pitch-x-23-teeth-x-pcd-233.17-mm-simplex-chain-sprocket-metric-sprocket-
pitch-1-1-4-31.75mm-pilot-bore-type-b-c-teeth-23-code-phs-20b-1bh23-standard-iso-20b.html?
currency=USD1

“Tsubaki Chain Canada” |Roller Chain Sprockets, n.p., n.d., 02 December 2014
http://chains.ustsubaki.com/item/no-120-1-1-2-pitch-sprockets/no-120-1-1-2-pitch-plain-bore-
sprockets/120a23

18
Appendices
Appendix A: Tables
Table A.1: Rotor Diameter vs. Power Output for a Wind Turbine
Rotor Dia. Power Power
(m) (kW) (HP)
1 0.02 0.03
2 0.08 0.1
3 0.17 0.23
4 0.3 0.41
5 0.48 0.64
6 0.69 0.92
7 0.93 1.25
8 1.22 1.64
9 1.54 2.07
10 1.91 2.56
11 2.31 3.09
12 2.74 3.68
13 3.22 4.32
14 3.73 5.01
15 4.29 5.75
16 4.88 6.54
17 5.51 7.39
18 6.17 8.28
19 6.88 9.23
20 7.62 10.22

19
 Table A.2: Concept Decision Matrix

Table A.3: Shaft Specifications

Shaft # Of Calculate Rounded Stepped Stepped Region
Iterations d Diameter Region (Region of increased shaft diameter)
Diameter (mm) Diameter
(mm) (mm)
1 4 80.40 85 90 Between Bearing 1 and Bevel Gear 1
2 3 38.54 40 45 Between Bearing 3 and Bearing 4
3 3 39.66 40 45 Between Bearing 5 and Sprocket 1
4 4 35.12 40 45 Between Sprocket 2 and Sprocket 3
5 3 35.11 40 45 Between Sprocket 4 and Initial Gear 1 (Spur)
6 3 62.20 65 70 Between Initial Gear 2 (Spur) and Bearing 14
7 2 43.46 45 50 Between Bearing 15 and Bearing 16

Table A.4: Shaft Deflection

Shaft Maximum Deflection Position
(m)
1 0.0001920 Rotor
2 0.0000357 Bevel Gear 2
3 0.0000276 Bevel Gear 4
4 0.0000214 Sprocket 3
5 0.0000421 Initial Gear 1 (Spur)
6 0.0001030 Gear 5 (Helical)
7 0.0000788 Gear 14 (Helical)

Table A.5: Shaft Deflection Slope

Shaft Maximum Slope Position
(Degrees)

20
1 0.0145 Bevel Gear 1
2 0.0041 Bevel Gear 3
3 0.0025 Sprocket 1
4 0.0017 Sprocket 4
5 0.0029 Initial Gear 1 (Spur)
6 0.00132 Gear 5 (Helical)
7 0.0097 Gear 14 (Helical)

21
 Table A.6: Shaft Whirl
Shaft Deflection from Whirl Natural Frequency
(m) (rad/s)
1 0.000001017 737
2 0.000000728 375
3 0.000000312 421
4 0.000000323 488
5 0.000000298 559
6 0.000001151 682
7 0.000000924 601

Table A.7: Shaft Torsional Vibration

Shaft Natural Frequency from Torsion (rad/s)
1 92031.7
2 49299.3
3 63722.2
4 61971.5
5 57857.8
6 87663.2

Table A.8: Material Selection

22
 Table A.9: Gear Specifications
Pitch
Meshe Number Diameter Centre Bore Helix Cone
Gear Type of Teeth, , Diameter, Angle, Angle,
s with
N dP (mm) DB (mm) ψ (deg) α (deg)
init.1 init.2 spur 74 740 40 - -
init.2 init.1 spur 20 200 70 - -
1 8 spur 74 740 70 - -
2 9 spur 69 690 70 - -
3 10 helical 62 316.74 70 11.84 -
4 11 helical 56 286.09 70 11.84 -
5 12 helical 50 252.69 70 8.365 -
6 13 helical 43 217.31 70 8.365 -
7 14 helical 36 183.91 70 11.84 -
8 1 spur 20 200 50 - -
9 2 spur 25 250 50 - -
10 3 helical 30 153.26 50 11.84 -
11 4 helical 36 183.91 50 11.84 -
12 5 helical 43 217.31 50 8.365 -
13 6 helical 50 252.69 50 8.365 -
14 7 helical 56 286.09 50 11.84 -
gen.p gen.g spur 23 230 50 - -
gen.g gen.p spur 43 430 ? - -
bevel.1 bevel.2 bevel 74 740 85 - 74.876
bevel.2 bevel.1 bevel 20 200 45 - 15.124
bevel.3 bevel.4 bevel 25 250 45 - 45
bevel.4 bevel.3 bevel 25 250 40 - 45
Universal Values
Module Pressure Angle Surface-Fatigue Strength
m0
(mm) φ (deg) (Flame Induction Hardened)
(Mpa)
10 25 1200

23
 Table A.10: Bearing Criteria
Bearing Bore
Numbe Neglec Dyn. Load Max. Op. Diamete
r Fradial Faxial t Faxial? Life Cycle Rating, Cr Speed r
Revolution
(N) (N) Y or N s (N) (min-1) (mm)
1 10175 - - 1.15E+08 49483 1375 85
2 2402 359 Y 1.15E+08 11680 1375 85
3 2871 - - 4.26E+08 21596 5088 40
4 3389 145 Y 4.26E+08 16193 5088 40
5 - 636 N 4.26E+08 4783 5088 40
6 4118 973 N 4.26E+08 30319 5088 40
7 3095 - - 4.26E+08 15051 5088 40
8 2520 - - 4.26E+08 18954 5088 40
9 2344 - - 4.26E+08 17631 5088 40
10 2514 - - 4.26E+08 18909 5088 40
11 1943 - - 4.26E+08 14618 5088 40
12 3374 - - 4.26E+08 39254 5088 65
Redundan Redundan
13 t - - 1.58E+09 t 18824 70
14 3503 - - 1.58E+09 40753 18824 65
15 2344 - - 1.58E+09 42174 18824 45
16 2135 - - 1.58E+09 38414 18824 50

Table A.11: Bearing Selection

Bearing Bearin Bor
Numbe g e Max. Oper. Dyn. Load
r Bearing Type Choice Dia. Speed Rating, Cr
(N) (min-1) (N)
6217-
1 Deep Groove 2Z 85 4300 83000
6217-
2 Deep Groove 2Z 85 4300 83000
6308-
3 Deep Groove 2Z 40 7500 42500
6308-
4 Deep Groove 2Z 40 7500 42500
Axial Deep
5 Groove 51108 40 6300 27000
6308-
6 Deep Groove 2Z 40 7500 42500
6308-
7 Deep Groove 2Z 40 7500 42500
6308-
8 Deep Groove 2Z 40 7500 42500
6308-
9 Deep Groove 2Z 40 7500 42500

24
 6308-
10 Deep Groove 2Z 40 7500 42500
6308-
11 Deep Groove 2Z 40 7500 42500
12 Deep Groove 6213 65 13000 41500
13 Deep Groove 61914 70 15000 23200
14 Deep Groove 6213 65 13000 41500
15 Deep Groove 6409 45 13000 47500
16 Deep Groove 6410 50 12000 52000

25
 Table A.12: Cost Breakdown
Unit
Price Total
Machining Hourly Rate $100
Turbine: Polaris P-25 kW Wind Turbine $12,000 $12,000
Modifications (15 hr) $100 $1,500
Turbine Subtotal= $13,500
Bearings
: 8 x 6308-2z Deep Groove Ball Bearing $77.42 $619
2 x 6207-2z Deep Groove Ball Bearing $38.15 $76.30
2 x 6213 Deep Groove Ball Bearing $136.99 $273.98
1 x 61914 Deep Groove Ball Bearing $195.30 $195.30
1 x 6409 Deep Groove Ball Bearing $239.56 $239.56
1 x 6410 Axial Thrust Bearing $281.71 $281.71
Bearing Subtotal= $1,686
Gears: 4' x 8' 1050 Steel Sheet (used for all gears) $2,500 $2,500
Waterjet Modifications (0.4 hr for spur
gear; 0.1 hr for herringbone) $100 $340.0
Machining Modifications (0.5 hr for
herringbone) $100 $500
Gear Subtotal= $3,340.00
Chain: 1196 link - 127 feet (sold per 10 feet) $127.50 $1,657.50
4 x 23T, 31.75mm Sprocket $84.01 $336.04
2 x Idler $119.00 $238.00
Chain Subtotal= $2,231.54
Shafts: 6 ft x 4'' diam Hot Rolled A36 Steel $350.19 $350.19
3 ft x 3'' diam Hot Rolled A36 Steel $160.00 $160.00
3 ft x 2'' diam Hot Rolled A36 Steel $55.50 $55.50
10 ft x 1 1/4'' diam Hot Rolled A36 Steel $139.00 $139.00
Modifications (0.25 hr per shaft) $100 $100
Shaft Subtotal= $704.69
Casing: 4' x 10' sheet 20 GA Cold Rolled $86.00 $86.00
Modifications (4 hr) $100 $400
Casing Subtotal= $486.00
Grand Total= $21,948

26
 Table A.13: Design Cost Breakdown
Design Cost Estimate
Deisgn of Wind-Powered Oil Derrick Time (Hours) ($90.00/Hour)
Research
Turbine Shaft Entry Conditions 10 $900.00
Pumpjack Shaft Exit Condions 10 $900.00
Genarator Shaft Exit Conditions 10 $900.00
Industry Standards 15 $1,350.00
Cost Estimate on Frame 5 $450.00
Cost Estimate on Parts 15 $1,350.00
Total 65 $5,850.00
Design
Sketches 10 $900.00
Material Selection 5 $450.00
SolidWorks Modeling 25 $2,250.00
Solidworks Drawing Package 10 $900.00
Total 50 $4,500.00
Design Calculations
Gears 30 $2,700.00
Shafts 70 $6,300.00
Chain Transmission 20 $1,800.00
Bearing Selection 20 $1,800.00
Total 140 $12,600.00
Administration
Team Collaboration 75 $6,750.00
General Client Meetings 6 $540.00
Specific Client Meetings 2 $180.00
Total 83 $7,470.00
Senior Engineer Time 2 $400.00
Report Writing
Concept Report 20 $1,800.00
Analysis Report 25 $2,250.00
Final Report 40 $3,600.00
Total 85 $7,650.00
Grand Total 425 $38,470.00

27
Appendix B: Figures

Figure B.1. Design 1: Horizontal Turbine w/ No Storage

28
Figure B.2 Design 2: Horizontal Turbine w/ Flywheel Storage

29
Figure B.3 Design 3: Horizontal Turbine w/ Battery Storage

30
Figure B.4 Design 4: Vertical Turbine w/ Water Storage

31
Figure B.5 Design 5: Archimedes Fan w/ Flywheel Storage

32
 September October
Task Personnel 15 19 22 26 29 3 6 10 13 17
M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F
GANTT Chart Vincent
Client Specifications Team, Client
Client Meetings Team, Client
Team Meetings Team
Brainstorming Team
Feasibility Judgement Team
Define Scope of Work Team
Concept Design All
Rough Sketches/Models All
Decision Matrix for Design Team
Determ. Enviro. Conditions Jon, Taylor
Finalize Design Team
Determ. Req. Output Power Bren, Graeme
Determ. Req. Gear Ratio Jon, Taylor
Concept Calculations All
Analyze Gear Efficiency Vin, Brennan
Stress Calculations All
Gear Stress Calculations Jon, Graeme
Shaft Stress Calculations Taylor
Part Cost Estimates Taylor
Material Cost Estimates Brennan
Material Selection Team
Solidworks All
Solid Modelling Bren, Taylor
Part Schematics Package Vin, Graeme
Assemble and Mate Parts Jon, Brennan
Assembly Schematics Package Gra, Taylor
Engineering/Design Cost All
Rough Draft Concept Report All
Concept Report Graeme
Rough Draft Analysis Report All
Analysis Report Vincent
Rough Draft Final Report All
Final Report Jonathan
Presentation Preparation All
Nove mber December
20 24 27 31 3 7 10 14 17 21 24 28 1 5
M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F

33
 Figure B.6: Gantt Chart—First Draft

Figure B.7: Liquid Planner Gantt Chart

34
 September October
Task Personnel 15 19 22 26 29 3 6 10 13 17
M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F
GANTT Chart Vincent
Client Specifications Team, Client
Client M eetings Team, Client
Team Meetings Team
Brainstorming Team
Feasibility Judgement Team
Define Scope of Work Team
Concept Design All
Rough Sketches/Models All
Decision Matrix for Design Team .
Determ. Enviro. Conditions Jon, Taylor
Finalize Design Team
Determ. Req. Output Power Bren, Graeme
Determ. Req. Gear Ratio Jon, Taylor
Concept Calculations All
Analyze Gear Efficiency Vincent
Stress Calculations All
Gear Stress Calculations Jonathan
Shaft Stress Calculations Taylor
Chain Drive Calculations Brennan
Part Cost Estimates Brennan
Material Cost Estimates Brennan
Material Selection Team
Solidworks All
Solid Modelling Bren, Graeme
Part Schematics Package Graeme
Assemble and Mate Parts Graeme
Assembly Schematics Package Graeme
Engineering/Design Cost Brennan
Rough Draft Concept Report All
Concept Report Graeme
Rough Draft Analysis Report All
Analysis Report Vincent
Rough Draft Final Report All
Final Report Jonathan
November December
20 24 27 31 3 7 10 14 17 21 24 28 1 5 9
M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T W R F M T

Figure B.8: Gantt Chart—Final Draft

35
Figure B.9: Time Distribution

36
Appendix C: Calculations

37