SeniorDesign FinalReport

December 18, 2009
Dr. Herb Hess

Electrical Engineering Department
University of Idaho
Moscow, Idaho 83843
Dr. Hess/Alion/U.S. Navy:
Enclosed is a final report on the SubMerge AUV Test Platform project. This report contains the
culmination of research, testing, and proof of concept prototype of the recently completed diesel-electric
hybrid system test platform, along with the test equipment. The results of this project will assist you
along with Alion and the U.S. Navy in their search for a solution to repower and improve AUV
performance. Copies of this report will be submitted to Dr. Herb Hess, Drs. Steve Beyerlein and Brian
Johnson, and Dr. Dean Edwards.
The members of this senior design team would like to extend their appreciation to the SubMerge AUV
Project client: Dr. Hess, Alion/Bayview Research Facility, and the U.S. Navy, for giving it the opportunity
to work in this exciting and challenging area. The team would also like to thank the University of Idaho
faculty, mentors, and other project team members for their consistent guidance and firm attention to this
projects progress.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this report please contact submerge@uidaho.edu.
Sincerely,
Mateo Cardenas-Farmer, Anthony Jaya, Jordan Stringfield, Nik Urlaub, and Brian Wise
Enclosure: SubMerge AUV Project Final Report
University of Idaho
AUV SubMerge Final Design Report
SubMerge AUV Test Bench Project

University of Idaho, Senior Capstone Design
Fall 2009
Mateo Cardenas-Farmer card1168@vandals.uidaho.edu
Brian Wise bwise@vandals.uidaho.edu
Jordan Stringfield stri7840@vandals.uidaho.edu
Anthony Jaya jaya7037@vandals.uidaho.edu
Nik Urlaub nurlaub@vandals.uidaho.edu
University of Idaho
Executive Summary
The United States Navy has developed an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) for
military applications including reconnaissance, sea floor mapping, and acoustic testing. The
AUV is powered by a string of lithium-ion batteries, which are charged at a naval base when the
submarine is docked. However, in working with Alion and the Naval Sea Systems Command
(NAVSEA) the need arose to increase the AUVs mission performance with an alternate onboard
power-producing source that could charge the batteries during a mission. In addition Alion, the
project client, desired better understanding of the power sources operation within the AUVs
enclosed environment. In order to improve mission performance, the SubMerge team has
successfully designed and built a test bench containing a turbocharged direct injection (TDI)
diesel engine joined with a Unique Mobility (UQM) alternator. Some of the test bench
functional elements include the engine and chamber air intake and exhaust, air flow within the
chamber, engine and chamber temperatures, control and monitoring systems, and fuel supply.
The 4-ft.-long closed system test bench submarine section is 4 ft. in diameter; and produces 33.7
kW at 3500 rpm of power at an efficiency of 27%, and 18.4 kW at 2500 rpm at 31% efficiency.
The SubMerge team did not perform battery charging because of the unavailability of a sufficient
number of lead-acid batteries, however parallel resistor banks produced appropriate loads on the
system on the order of 1 to 2 Ohms, simulating batteries. The test bench utilizes a rolling cart in
which the engine is secured for straightforward rolling of the engine into the chamber. The
chamber design is circular in order to closely mimic the AUVs operating conditions; and is
designed to accommodate different engine and alternator setups for purposes of testing airflow
and temperature within the enclosed space. Based on team SubMerges successful experiments,
it is recommended the test bench continue to be utilized for the acquisition of airflow,
temperature, and power-production testing of varying engine and alternator systems.
University of Idaho
Table of Contents
Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................3
Background......................................................................................................................................6
1.0 Problem Definition....................................................................................................................9
2.0 System Design.........................................................................................................................12
2.1 An Air-Tight Chamber.........................................................................................................13
2.2 Inside Chamber Space.........................................................................................................15
2.3 Voltage & Current DAQ......................................................................................................16
2.4 Sensors & Equipment..........................................................................................................18
2.5 Fuel Management................................................................................................................19
2.6 Powertrain Placement..........................................................................................................20
3.0 Product Description.................................................................................................................23
3.1 Electrical Engineering Concepts Selected...........................................................................26
3.1.1 Virtual Tour through the DAQ System.........................................................................27
Hooking up and running the DAQ.........................................................................................32
3.2 Mechanical Engineering Concepts Selected........................................................................33
3.2.1 Mechanical product components..................................................................................33
4.0 Design Evaluation....................................................................................................................39
4.1 Engine & Test Bench Maintenance.....................................................................................39
4.2 Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA)...............................................................41
5.0 Testing Procedures & Results..................................................................................................42
5.1 Efficiency Test.....................................................................................................................42
5.2 Efficiency Test Uncertainty Analysis...................................................................................43
5.3 Airflow & Temperature Test................................................................................................44
6.0 Recommendations & Improvements.......................................................................................46
7.0 References................................................................................................................................47
8.0 Appendices...............................................................................................................................48
A.0 Calculations........................................................................................................................48
A.1 Efficiency Testing Statistical Analysis Root Sum Squares (RRS) Method.................48
A.2 Efficiency Testing Data...................................................................................................50
A.3 Efficiency Testing Uncertainty Analysis......................................................................52
B.0 Complete Drawing Package................................................................................................53
B.1 Bill of Materials (BOM).................................................................................................54
University of Idaho
C.0 LabVIEW Programs............................................................................................................56

C.1 LabVIEW program code.................................................................................................56
D.0 Complete Project Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA).................................61
E.0 Vendor data sheets...............................................................................................................62
E.1 CAS-LUUV Power/Energy Requirements......................................................................62
E.2 Electronic Data Sheets....................................................................................................68
University of Idaho
Background
From the Center for Intelligent Systems Research (CISR) presentation by Kyle Bennett and
Kyle Ryan [1], investigation of the following Statements of Work has started:
1. Analysis of power requirements for AUV operating with continuous sonar
2. Characterize hybrid electric powertrain including components for AUV
3. Characterize power requirements for AUV under different mission requirements
4. Analyze different HEV configurations for use in AUV under the mission requirements
Alion, CISR, and NAVSEA, located in Bayview, ID on Lake Pend Oreille, working with the US
Navy requested the fall 2009 senior design team, SubMerge, to improve AUV range and
performance. The current AUV with which this project is based generally uses 12 kW of power.
Prior work by CISR and Alion includes research on internal combustion engine technologies,
alternative combustion technology, fuel cells, and alternative powertrains [1]. Dr. Herb Hess,
electrical engineering professor at the University of Idaho, presented the team with the design
project with the objective to identify and develop a new method of powering Alions AUV that
would improve the system characteristics to better meet the challenges of missions. Lithium-ion
batteries, capable of providing 20 kW for 12 hours, power the AUV, and take approximately 3
hours to charge. The initial scope of the SubMerge team was to assess the current power scheme
and develop an alternative solution for powering the submarine. The scope transformed into
designing and constructing a test bench that will accommodate different engine and alternator
combinations for successfully performing power-production testing.
This paper is going to address the second topic mentioned above, the characterization of a
hybrid electric powertrain that includes an engine and alternator combination that outputs 18.4
kW at 2500 rpm and 31% efficiency. Figure 1 shows the TDI engines power versus engine
speed curve [Appendix E].
If the TDI engine and UQM alternator where installed into the AUV, the bench results
show that proof of concept would serve the clients desire for improved AUV performance.
Capabilities of the test bench include the ability to test different power configurations, compare
results, and verify the concepts to fulfill the power requirements.
University of Idaho
The test bench will benefit the design team, the entire AUV project, the University of
Idaho, and Bayview test facilities; and will make the process of testing new ideas much easier
and more expedient.
Figure 1: TDI Diesel Engine Power and Torque vs. Engine Speed
University of Idaho
University researchers will be able to look more in depth at similar projects since each
project would only have to tailor the bench to fit their needs rather than build their own. With
any solution, the deliverable for proving the validity of the idea will be fabricating proof of
concept hardware. This test bench strives to provide the means to test and prove any solution
proposed for the sub-charging system. Any design will need to provide discrete amounts of
power for specific times. The test bench provides the ability to compare results from competing
ideas as well as standardize deliverables for designs.
University of Idaho
1.0 Problem Definition

The specific project requirements were to design and build a self contained test bench
that could successfully operate and test an internal combustion (IC) engine in a laboratory,
having the dimensions 4 ft. in diameter and 4 ft. long (Figure 2). The diameter matches the
existing AUVs. The test bench also had to accurately measure certain vital parameters, such as
chamber air and engine temperatures, and necessary air flow required for chamber cooling; in
addition to accurately monitor the energy into and out of the system.
The test bench was constructed from available hardware from campus, general
construction-purchased components, fabricated parts from the University of Idahos Facilities
and Department of Mechanical Engineerings Machine Shop, and frame welding at All
Fabrication and Supply LLC, in Pullman, WA.
In addition to the physical chamber, the test bench required equipment to monitor vital
engine information, alternator output, battery simulation, and the chamber airflows and
temperatures. The chamber also required straightforward access to the engine/alternator combo
to aid in their installation and maintenance. Finally the chamber allowed for the passage of all
cables and wiring in the data acquisition (DAQ) process while still maintaining an effective air
seal for a closed system. The test bench simulates a battery-charging load on the alternator and
engine from 4 resistor banks in series.
University of Idaho
Figure 2: Preliminary Test Bench Design Sketches
In water the AUV chamber would most likely be water cooled, however since the test
bench is not designed for submersion the TDIs stock radiator cools the engine during operation.
10
University of Idaho
The test bench provides cooling of the ambient chamber air through forced convective airflow.
For the safety of the engine and chamber components, the DAQ system monitors the
temperatures and mass flow rates of the intake and exhaust. Figure 3 shows the test bench
projects functional list.
Figure 3: Test Bench Functional Diagram
Figure 3 says that the primary function of the test bench is to Simulate Sub
Environment, which means that, using the four primary functions listed the most crucial AUV
operation features can be tested for feasibility. The primary systems of the test bench are the
engine, alternator, batteries (or more specifically, battery simulation with resistor banks), and the
engine chamber.
2.0 System Design

At the final stage of project development, the concepts leading up to the final test bench
design narrowed from an on-going refinement of the projects scope. The reason behind this is
that the team wanted to make certain of Alions actual needs, which involved an extended period
11
University of Idaho
of concept generation and functional identification of the problem to solve. For example, one of
the constraints of the test bench design was that the current number of lithium-ion batteries
powering the motor would be reduced by half to make space for the engine/alternator setup.
Another constraint was that the test bench was not meant for water submersion; however the
design still required an air-tight seal in order to accurately measure chamber airflow. The idea of
running the engine and charging the batteries simultaneously while submerged involve
pressurized tanks for intake air and exhaust. Testing an alternator would be important to show the
client that the test bench could successfully simulate battery charging, while still maintaining the
other constraints. An engine-operated submarine requires some sort of intake and exhaust
snorkel, but long protrusions are discouraged from such a vehicle. For a test bench that measures
closed-in parameters, however, snorkels for intake and exhaust are permissible. Therefore, the
test bench is designed for an AUV power system that surfaces before engaging the
engine/alternator to charge batteries. Figure 4a shows a block diagram containing the test bench
systems, and Figure 4b showing the categorized accompanying sensor data.
Figure 4a: Test Bench Setup Block Diagram
12
University of Idaho
Figure 4b: Data Acquisition Sensor Diagram
2.1 An Air-Tight Chamber

Efforts were made to seal the test bench with foam weather stripping, primarily at the
chamber ends (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Chamber weather stripping seal and Plexiglas covers
13
University of Idaho
When in operation, the suction produced by the chamber fan (Figure 6) pulls the Plexiglas covers
against the weather stripping, further aiding the air-tight seal. The 12-in. fan pulls the chamber
air out. A mass airflow sensor is attached at the chamber inlet (Figure 6).
Figure 6: Chamber airflow fan (on left) and chamber air inlet (on right)
Holes drilled in the chamber cylinder for cable and wire passage also compromise a
perfect airtight seal (Figure 7); however, a foam tube section was inserted (shown on the right in
Fig. 7) to insulate the hole that contains the engine operation controls, engine battery leads, and
fuel line. The UQM/controlling module connections, the UQM water coolant lines, and the
thermocouple temperature sensors passed through the other (left, as shown) hole, leaving no
space for a foam insulator. As tight as these connectors are, air still passes through.
Figure 7: Holes drilled in the bottom of the test bench chamber for cable and wire passage
14
University of Idaho
2.2 Inside Chamber Space

Space is an important constraint in the test bench chamber. It houses the engine and
alternator, a number of sensors, and wiring and cable paths. The rolling engine cart, on which
the engine is mounted, was meticulously designed for optimizing space inside the chamber
cylinder for a fuel tank, DAQ system, or even an engine cooling system. Sheet 1 in Appendix B
shows the main product assembly drawing of the test bench, and the second sheet shows a front
and cutaway profile view of the test bench. The as-built test bench has 5 to 6 inches above the
engine to the top of the cylinder, and about 8 inches below the bottom of the engine (Figure 8).
There is ample room for cooling airflow across the exhaust manifold on the side.
Figure 8: Focus of space inside cylinder chamber
15
University of Idaho
2.3 Voltage & Current DAQ

Another issue is the control of current and voltage from the alternator. One idea was to
run the alternator at full power then use a DC to DC converter to step down the voltage. The
team transitioned from purchasing an alternator to using one already owned by the college, the
UQM alternator already mentioned, and its accompanying controlling module (Figure 9).
Figure 9: Unique Mobility (UQM) Alternator and Controlling Module
After the initial research, the team focused on designing a test bench for a system that
runs the engine only when the AUV surfaced to charge the batteries, because handling
pressurized tanks of gases would have been more time consuming for the scope of the project,
16
University of Idaho
and more expensive. In addition, an open and accessible test bench that could accommodate
many engine and alternator setups would benefit future senior design projects with its versatility.
The main electrical engineering aspect of the project is the management and control of
the numerous sensors in the test-platform. For this, National Instruments LabVIEW interface
(Figure 10) program was chosen as the data acquisition program that monitored the sensors,
post-processed measurements, and displayed operating information.
Figure 10: LabVIEW Interface program used for monitoring system data in real time
2.4 Sensors & Equipment

The teams electrical engineers located several data acquisition modules from a past
design project, which support up to 32 input channels per module. Two modules were selected
for use, one measures temperature, and the other voltage, which is a versatile module that if
coupled with other components would measure anything from current to airflow. Thermal
anemometers were considered because they simultaneously measure temperature and airspeed,
and therefore could be placed on the intake or exhaust, reducing the number of thermocouples
needed. Though this was a good idea, the team found that it is easier just to use mass airflow
sensors coupled with thermocouples rather than trying to interface thermal anemometers to the
DAQ system. Airflow sensors simply output a range of voltage correlating to the different
airflow speeds. The team performed some preliminary testing on the DAQ system with
thermocouples along the engine intake and exhaust (Figure 11).
17
University of Idaho
Figure 11: Preliminary temperature testing on engine intake and exhaust
2.5 Fuel Management

The test bench diesel fuel tank, attached to the engine control panel (Figure 12), has
about a 3-1/2-gallon fuel capacity. The fuel line between the tank and engine passes through the
insulated hole underneath the test bench. The ideal fuel tank location for a closed-system test
bench is inside the chamber, because temperature measurements could be taken, and special
issues could be resolved. A small tank in the compartment could prove useful to observe the
effects on the engine when the fuel is heated.
18
University of Idaho
Figure 12: Engine control panel and attached diesel fuel tank
2.6 Powertrain Placement

Previously, Figure 8 shows a front view of the engine inside of the test bench. A great
amount of thought and design went into the placement of the TDI and alternator in order to 1)
maximize the space above, below, and around it for adding hardware for other systems, such as
the fuel tank, heat exchanger, and sensors, 2) allow space for other essential components, such as
engine and alternator coolant lines and airflow and exhaust hoses, 3) allow space for working on
and maintaining the engine, and 4) so as to visually see how the engine and alternator perform.
Therefore, the engine and alternator were first mounted to an engine cart, a trackrolling steel frame (see Figure 13) that allows relatively easy installation/removal of the
powertrain from the test bench chamber.
19
University of Idaho
Figure 13: Engine cart rolls from installation cart into test bench chamber via tracks
Detailed drawings in Appendix B, particularly the last sheet, show how the engine cart,
installation cart, and test bench fit together. Without weight applied, the test bench and
installation cart tracks match correctly; however under the engine load, tire pressure affects cart
heights slightly on the order of inch, therefore it is recommended that tire pressures remain
inflated according to specification to avoid blowouts. If required, after securely tying the closest
legs between the test bench and the installation cart together, one team member can pull up
slightly on the installation cart while other team members slowly roll the engine cart containing
the engine along the tracks.
20
University of Idaho
21
University of Idaho
3.0 Product Description

The two main product components are the test bench and the DAQ system. The
mechanical side of the project includes the test bench, as shown in Figure 14 with an
accompanying list that identifies the objects indicated.
Figure 14: Test bench completed product
Letter
Description
22
University of Idaho
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
Exhaust
Vacuum
Exhaust Stack
Chamber
Airflow Fan
Chamber
Airflow Intake
& mass airflow
sensor
Engine
Intake/Filter
Weather
Stripping
Engine
Coolant hose
to radiator
Exhaust Pipe
Test Bench
Chamber
Radiator
Engine Cart
UQM
Alternator
TDI Diesel
Engine
Welded Test
Bench Tracks
Engine Control
Panel
Engine Speed
Control Knob
Diesel Fuel
Tank
The DAQ system comprises the electrical components of the projects products, as shown in
Figure 15a with accompanying list.
23
University of Idaho
Figure 15a: DAQ System Setup
Letter
A
B
C
D
E
Description
Resistor Banks
LabVIEW DAQ
Interface
Computer
Power
Supplies
Data Receiver
The UQM controlling module (Figure 9) connects the mechanical and electrical facets of the
project. Figure 15b displays how both of the sides communicate and relate, with the controlling
module as the DATA ARRAY box.
24
University of Idaho
Figure 15b: DAQ System Outline
3.1 Electrical Engineering Concepts Selected

The electrical engineers (EEs) worked to determine the best solution for data sampling,
monitoring, control, as well as battery simulation. From the various concepts found based on
this research, one was selected based on its robustness and ability to handle three out of four
requirements selected by the EEs. LabVIEW, coupled with National Instruments (NI) DAQ
system, proved to be the best solution. Not only is it able to monitor data in real time and record
the measured data, but it also could eventually be used for engine control (which has not been
implemented yet).
For battery simulation, several concepts were considered, but because none of the
available tools would be able to simulate the batteries perfectly, it was decided that the simplest
method was actually the best. Using resistor banks, the system monitored a string of batteries
that simulated a load. The only problem with this is battery-charging algorithms. There are
certain different specifications for different types of batteries, like how to most efficiently charge
25
University of Idaho
the battery by controlling the output current and/or voltage. Since the scope of the project did
not involve designing a controller for the engine, or the controller box for that matter, there is no
purpose in using batteries.
3.1.1 Virtual Tour through the DAQ System
Figure 16: Voltage (black box) LEM Transducer
26
University of Idaho
Figure 17: Output resistor for the electric current LEM
Figure 18: Current LEM setup and National Instruments (NI) devices
27
University of Idaho
Figure 19: Color code for the DBX Mass air flow sensor
Figure 20: Connection to the mass airflow sensor located on top of test bench
28
University of Idaho
Figure 21: Power supplies to test bench air fan and mass airflow sensor
Figure 22: Back of the 6267B power supply
29
University of Idaho
Figure 23: Back of 6264B power supply
Figure 24: LabVIEW program interface
30
University of Idaho
Hooking up and running the DAQ

1. Check the yellow and black cables that lead to the thermocouples. Make sure they are all
connected and the colors match yellow goes to yellow and black goes to black.
2. Check the current and voltage LEM transducers (small black boxes next to computer).
Refer to the datasheet for correct configuration (Appendix E), and Figures 16 and 18 for
examples of how to do this. A 50-ohm resistor used for the output on the current LEM is
recommended. See Figure 17 for an example of how it is connected. If desired both the
voltage and current LEM can be powered off of the same power supply since they draw
relatively low currents. After setting up the voltage and current LEMs connect them to
the DAQ using the two red- and black-labeled current and voltage.
3. Check to make sure the mass airflow sensor and the fan are connected correctly. Refer to
Figures 19 and 20 for a visual of this. A rule of thumb here is green or yellow is signal,
black is ground, and red or white is 12V. Next, check power. Figures 21, 22, and 23
show the two HP power supplies. It is recommended that the 6264B supply (Figure 23)
be used for the fan and the 6267B supply (Figure 22) be used for the mass airflow sensor.
See Figures 22 and 23 for connecting the supplies, and then set the voltage level on the
6267B to 12V.
4. The next step is to turn on the DAQ. Referring to Figure 18, turn on the device on the
right then the one on the left. Now the computer will boot up. After getting signed into
the computer, the LabVIEW program will immediately start up.
5. Most of the LabVIEW programs interface should be self explanatory. Refer to Figure 24
if you have not seen the interface before; it shows red and green lights next to the values.
Red indicates if the measured property is outside of a safe value. All temperature
measurements are in degrees Celsius, airflow is measured in cubic feet per second
(CFM), current in Amps, and voltage in Volts.
6. When you are ready to use the LabVIEW program click the little arrow in the LabVIEW
tool bar. It is the circle with the red box in Figure 24. It should also be noted that the
31
University of Idaho
engine should always be running while you are running the program because the program
does not know how to handle frequency when there is no input.
7. When ready to record data click the Acquire button (circled with green box in Figure 24)
near the top of the screen, and when done click it again to stop acquiring data. When you
have stopped taking data, you can find the saved data in a folder on the computer
Desktop called submerge data. The data is contained in a file named data. If you
wish to continue taking data, keep in mind that the program will append and overwrite
any data in this file if the file is not renamed in the folder.
3.2 Mechanical Engineering Concepts Selected

3.2.1 Mechanical product components
There are many important mechanical aspects to the final design of the SubMerge test
bench. The bench was designed with the functional model, the problem definition, and the goals
in mind. It provides easy engine installation, access, viewing, vibration dampening,
interchanging, and much more.
The test bench consists of a sheet metal cylinder, suspended by a steel-tubing frame, and
sealed by plexiglass end caps (Figure 25).
Figure 25: Test bench cylinder and support frame, and sealed end
32
University of Idaho
Inside the chamber is an engine cart frame to which the power system mounts. Both the
engine cart and the outer frame are on wheels. Lastly there is an installation cart to help with the
engine transfer (Figure 26).
Test Bench Chamber Cylinder
Engine Cart
Rolling Installation Cart

Rolling Test Bench Support Frame
Figure 26: Base Test Bench Frame and Components
33
University of Idaho
The engine cart is designed for a straight transfer from the old engine cart to the new one.
The mounting system employed on the cart the engine was located previously utilized space well
and provided engine dampening with rubber grommets at contact points, so the team saw no
reason to adjust its features. The main feature, however, of the engine cart are the wheels for easy
installation into the test bench. The TDI engine is much too heavy to lift into the bench, and the
round chamber prevents roof access, so the power system needs to be placed inside piece by
piece or slid in. Disassembling and reassembling the engine would be too much hassle, so rolling
the engine in is the most viable option. The bolts holding the wheels are a -in bolt, providing a
solid axle to roll on, and minimizing the bending due to the weight of the engine.
The cart is not complete however, without some tracks to roll the engine off of, thus an
installation cart was mandated. The installation cart has features like wheels, prepared to take up
to 300 lbs a piece, and rails at the same level as that of the test bench. Most importantly for the
installation cart is the fact that it can be accessed from above. This makes it possible to lift an
engine with a cherry picker and set it onto the installation cart. Another important feature of the
installation cart is the 4-inch lip on one side. This lip makes it possible for the rails to connect
with those of the test bench before the wheels below do. The last main feature of the installation
cart is the bolt holes at the 4 corners of the cart. These provide a much needed safety aspect to
the cart. Once the engine is in the cart, bolts are placed upside down, with the threads sticking
upward to prevent the engine from rolling off the edge of the cart. The engine sitting three feet in
the air is precarious enough, without having open ends for it to roll off. The cart tires contain
pressurized air and need refilling occasionally; inserting an engine in the cart without verifying
proper tire inflation could prove to make the engine transfer more difficult.
The chamber of the test bench itself has, perhaps, the most features. As safety is still an
issue, the bench rails have the same bolt holes as the installation cart (Figures 27 & 28).
34
University of Idaho
Figure 27: Installation cart showing location of safety bolt holes
Figure 28: Test bench tracks with Engine cart inside showing location of safety bolt holes,
which are all located at the same distance on all four edges of tracks
The bolts should be placed in the back holes before an engine installation is attempted so the
engine is prevented from rolling too far. There are also brackets (Figure 29 ) located along the
35
University of Idaho
tracks to hold the engine down, which are to be bolted in as soon as the engine is safely in the
bench.
Figure 29: Bolted brackets securely hold the engine cart to the test bench
Rubber grommets for vibration dampening are located between the chamber and the
frame, holding it and heavy-duty wheels meant to hold up to 400 lbs a piece. The chamber itself
is sealed on the two ends with silicon, weather stripping, and plexiglass end caps. These end caps
make it possible to carefully watch the engine as the tests are conducted. They are held in place
by three - 20 bolts per side, washers, and wing nuts. On the top of the chamber are two
intakes and two exhausts (Figure 14). The larger intake is to refresh the chamber and the smaller
intake is the engine air intake. The engine intake has an air filter in it, and the chamber has only
the flow sensor, connected to the DAQ. On the inside of the chamber, these two intakes have
lips used for clamping hoses (Figure 30).
36
University of Idaho
Figure 30: Engine and chamber intake hoses installed inside chamber
The exhaust ports, externally, stick up the most above the chamber. The chamber exhaust has a
12-inch fan on top with the capability of moving 3073 m3/hr [Appendix E.2] (1808.7 CFM) [2]
of air through the chamber, assuming no static pressure. This is not however, the expected
airflow since the intake is necked down to 4 inches for the flow meter installation. The engine
exhaust has a stack on it for an increased sleek look to the test bench. On the inside of the engine
exhaust port is a step from 5 to 2.5 and a V-band clamp flange to connect to the exhaust.
Another component of the chamber is the quick-connect clamps for the radiator. These provide
for easily connecting and disconnecting the radiator to cool the engine. The last major
component of the chamber is the control board on the outside (Figure 12). It is mounted at about
waist level and offers the switches to run the fuel pump, the intercooler fan, the radiator fan, the
starter, and engine control speed.
The mechanical features of the test bench were selected for many reasons; mainly they
are intended to promote safety, ease of use, flexibility, and accuracy. They should increase the
usability of the test bench and provide for interchangeability and upgradeability.
37
University of Idaho
4.0 Design Evaluation

The primary objectives for this project were to create a test bench that closely simulates
the AUV dimensionally, and design the data acquisition system to monitor the vitals of the
system. The design of the test bench required versatility so that many different engine and
alternator combinations could be installed and tested. It also required provisions for intake,
exhaust, fuel, and cooling. In the final design all these design concerns have been accomplished.
The engine installation system, as well as mounting system, proves to be very versatile. The user
will simply have to design and install engine mounting brackets for the engine cart, and then use
the same installation process. The intake and exhaust are both flexible so that they ease
installation as well as adaptability to other engines. Cooling has been designed so that the engine
radiator mounts outside of the test bench due to the radiator being a liquid to air heat exchanger.
The radiator was mounted outside of the test chamber, because being a liquid to air heat
exchanger would cause the chamber to overheat. For testing purposes this most closely
resembles the actual AUV environment. The data acquisition system monitors airflow, vital
temperatures, as well as provides a RPM measurement and readout. In the data acquisition
system final design all these requirements have been provided. LabVIEW provides a platform
and design environment that uses a visual programming language commonly used for data
acquisition. For all of the temperature readings K-type thermocouples were used and inputted
into LabVIEW.
4.1 Engine & Test Bench Maintenance

The SubMerge team has not developed a formal maintenance plan for the test bench and
TDI/UQM powertrain due to the limited usage of the system by the team and others. It ought to
be assumed that any engine/alternator power scheme and related hardware have already been
serviced before they are installed into the test bench. For instance, SubMerge determined the
system efficiency before its installation into the test bench, thereby bypassing extra work.
However, the team did experience minor delays with some parts of the system, in particular the
radiator and cooling system (Figure 31) immediately after installation, the team had to ensure
proper cooling of the engine by making sure sufficient coolant was present in the radiator, and
that no air was remaining in the engine. The team resolved the issue by raising the radiator so
that the bubble at the radiator cap was above the engine water pump, and then sufficiently filling
38
University of Idaho
the radiator and tightening all hose clamps on the system. Future engine radiator placement will
be addressed in the Recommendations section.
Figure 31: Engine radiator and coolant hoses
Figure 32: Engine cooling system hookup inside chamber
4.2 Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA)

Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA) is a very useful method in design to
predict the possible ways a product may fail (Figure 10).
39
University of Idaho
Figure 33: DFMEA Analysis
After completing several revisions of the DFMEA it became apparent that the worst type of
failure for this project would be complete engine or alternator failure. Both of these devices are
very expensive and time would prohibit their replacement. Figure 33 shows sample taken from
the DFMEA in Appendix D to demonstrate the usefulness of this method.
40
University of Idaho
5.0 Testing Procedures & Results

5.1 Efficiency Test
The team performed two different testing procedures: system efficiency and
airflow/temperature measurements. The efficiency tests measured the difference of fuel mass
consumed and the alternator power produced. The system efficiency is equal to the energy
output divided by input energy. Thus,
system =
Energy out VI t
=
Energy
um
where V = alternator voltage, I = alternator current, t = run time, u = 42.5 kJ/kg = diesel fuel
heating value, and m = diesel fuel difference of mass measured during for each run time.
Figure 34 illustrates the efficiency testing setup.
Figure 34: Efficiency Test Setup
This test not only provided efficiency data but also confirmed the correct operation of the
engine and alternator. The measurement at three rpm levels determined the efficiency: 1500,
2500, and 3500 rpm. The five 1500 and 2500 rpm testing runs lasted one minute, while the five
3500 rpm runs lasted thirty seconds due to engine cooling constraints. Power output at 1500 rpm
was approximately 7 kW with efficiency of 25% and a percent error of 8.42. Power output at
2500 rpm was approximately 18 kW with efficiency of 31% and a percent error of 9.62.
Power output at 3500 rpm was approximately 33 kW with efficiency of 27% and a percent error
of 6.43. Complete tables of recorded data are located in Appendix A; however Table 1
summarizes the test data and efficiency results. The resistor banks provided 1.5 Ohms for all
power-level test runs.
41
University of Idaho
Efficiency Test Summary

Run Level
Power In
(kW)
Power Out
(kW)
Efficiency (%)
1500 RPM
27.62
7.08
25
2500 RPM
3500 RPM
59.09
120.4
18.44
33.72
31
27
Table 1: Efficiency Test Summary
5.2 Efficiency Test Uncertainty Analysis

SubMerge conducted two uncertainty analyses on the test bench. First a root sums
squared (RSS) analysis was followed through the equations to reveal significant ranges of error.
Most of the variables had small amounts of error associated with their measurement, but the
mass was measured with a scale that had a resolution of 1/100 of a pound. As it turned out, this
variable contributed nearly 85% of the error. Table 2 below shows the accepted variable errors.
Variable
Mass m
Energy Density
Error
0.002267kg
0.001 kW/kg
u
Voltage V
Current I
Time t
0.0001V
0.0001A
0.5s
Table 2: Variable Errors
From here the partial uncertainties are taken and placed into Equation 5 below.
2
2
2
2
m +
u +
V +
I +
m
u
V
I
t t
) (
)(
)(
)(
(5)
42
University of Idaho
This outputs the uncertainty in the efficiency according to the RSS method. This however
resulted in efficiencies much larger than the ideal values, so SubMerge reassessed the error
according to confidence intervals. With confidence intervals the following Equation 6 is used,
where c is the t-value from the student tables.
cS
cS
Pr { X
< < X +
}=1
N
N
(6)
Each efficiency test ran 5 times and all the information was saved onto Excel spreadsheets.
These sheets came in handy not only to analyze the data, but also to plan future tests to decrease
error. The results of the error analysis are in the results section below.
5.3 Airflow & Temperature Test

The second set of tests was designed to test the cooling capabilities of the enclosed test
bench as well as to find the required airflow through the chamber to keep the engine and
alternator from overheating.
The data SubMerge acquired from the airflow testing is divided into 3 sections for the
low medium and high power levels. As the data was taken for these tests the temperature seemed
to fluctuate fairly randomly making accurate readings hard. Table 5 below shows the results for
the airflow tests.
Run
Speed
Airflow (cfm) Temp (F)
Uncertainty (F) % Uncertainty
1000
323.7343869 61.78911618
0.019493248
0.031548029
72.3068386
2000
361.4289569
1
0.027794757
0.038440012
3000
337.6726403 79.7078734
0.033677395
0.042251027
Table3: Airflow Results
These results are considered to be very good by SubMerge. The temperatures are well
under the critical temperature that will melt the plexiglass. One major thing to note however is
that the temperature inside the engine bay was only 50F, which greatly reduced the internal
chamber temperature. If the temperature outside initiated at 100F, the chamber temperature
could easily be in danger of reaching critical levels.
43
University of Idaho
The tests ran smoothly as we collected the data. The engine temperature remained at a
comfortable level, the chamber temperature remained within specification, and the resistor banks
temperature remained low enough that overheating was not an issue. The engine ran without
hiccups. Submerge was initially worried about the seal provided around the edges by the end
caps to the test bench, but once testing the suction force inside the chamber was sufficient to pull
the end caps in tight for a good seal. The current and voltages remained accurate with the data
collected in the earlier tests on power vs. voltage.
This was carried out to simulate the true environment an AUV engine runs in. There are,
however, many complications that this induces. The complication that the airflow test were
directed toward is the fact that the engine puts off a lot of ambient heat, and without proper
cooling the chamber would overheat causing many problems for the team. The cooling method
SubMerge used is an exhaust fan meant to cycle fresh air through the chamber. The tests then
directly measured the dependant variable, the ambient chamber temperature. The largest
independent variables contributing to ambient temperature were the engine run levels or power
levels, and the chamber exhaust flow rate.
The team set a critical temperature of 100C as a maximum guideline for the chamber.
The plexiglass end caps are probably in the largest danger from internal heat, so an estimated
beginning melting point of plexiglass is used to scale the tests. Plexiglass is estimated to begin
melting at about 100C, and so the LabVIEW code [Appendix C.1] was set to alarm when the
temperature neared this value.
For the chamber cooling tests SubMerge again conducted five iterations of each test at
three power levels. The power levels were lowered for this test to 1000, 2000, and 3000 RPM.
The tests were required to be sustained for longer periods of time to achieve steady state in the
temperature values, making it hard to dissipate the high power output without overheating the
resistors banks.
The key design calculations included calculations to find the charging time needed for the
batteries, the output needed from the alternator, and the black box efficiency of the system.
The final cost to build the proof of concept came to approximately $6500 if $28/hr as the
salary of an entry level engineer is considered. This is approximately $2240 for the conceptual
design process, $1120 for drafting time, $2500 in materials and labor, and finally $500 in
additional materials.
44
University of Idaho
6.0 Recommendations & Improvements

If other senior design teams are interested in expanding on the work done here there are
several directions they could take the project. First is replacing the lead acid batteries with
lithium-ion batteries. Second is adding a control system that would electronically control the
engine speed via LabVIEW.
The replacement of lead acid with lithium ion batteries has several hurdles. First is cost.
They would need to purchase a fairly large number of lithium ion batteries to get the voltage up
to the levels that the system operates. Second, a large amount of the project would be making
sure the batteries had a proper protection system because they are significantly difficult to protect
and more dangerous when not properly protected.
One of the original ideas for the project was to have the engine controlled by a
microcontroller. Unfortunately, due to time constraints this could not be completed. If a
microcontroller is going to be added the current plan would be to replace the throttle control
knob with a microcontroller. The microcontroller would need a 0-5 Volt digital to analog
converter and two 5 V digital outputs. The 0-5 V line controls the throttle position and the two
digital outputs are involved in starting to increase the rpm and setting full throttle. After the
microcontroller is added a connection is placed between the microcontroller and a DAQ.
Hopefully this would allow the DAQ and microcontroller to communicate. This would allow an
operator to run the test almost entirely from the DAQ and make changes on the fly to the
operating point of the engine.
The other major test bench setup hurdle is managing the external engine systems, such as
the radiator and battery, and designing and constructing some type of holder for the controlling
module. These systems ought to be secured to the test bench to enable it to be more mobile.
After the SubMerge team is finished with this project, it will be handed to Dan Cordon
and Kyle Bennett. They plan to continue testing with the current setup, and if time permits will
be purchasing a high-power gas engine and a high speed alternator. The test bench has proven to
measure system properties in a controlled environment, and it is the belief of the SubMerge team
that there are many unforeseen uses for the AUV SubMerge test bench.
45
University of Idaho
7.0 References
[1]
Bennett, Kyle & Ryan, Kyle. Power System Analysis for Unmanned Undersea Vehicle
Using a Continuous Active Sonar.University of Idaho. Moscow, ID. 23 June 2009.
[2]
Fogt, Robert. Conversions. Onlineconversions.com. BlueSparks Network, 2008.

http://www.onlineconversion.com/flow_rate_volume.htm. Accessed 18 Dec. 2009.
46
University of Idaho
47
8.0 Appendices
A.0 Calculations
A.1 Efficiency Testing Statistical Analysis Root Sum Squares (RRS)
Method
Run 1
Knowns
m
Energy
Density u
Voltage V
Current I
time t
Variable
Unknown
0.0389
96
42500
102.97
19
68.793
8
30
Perce
nt
Error
0.0022
67
[kg]
[J/g]
Volts
Amps
sec
Varia
ble
0.001
part
m
part Energy
Density
Voltage V
0.001
part V
Current I
0.001
0.5000
0
part I
m
Energy
Density u
time t
part t
Total
Uncertainty
Governing
Equation
= (V*I*t)/
(u*m)
55.578
53
10.812
53
1.55E06
3.47E06
4.5673
2
8.4236
8 %
percent
uncertinty
Nomin
al
25.833
09
32.61
%
University of Idaho
48
Run 2
Knowns
m
Energy
Density u
Voltage V
Current I
time t
Variable
m
Energy
Density u
Unknown
0.0834
33
42500
166.13
01
110.98
88
60
[kg]
[J/g]
Volts
Amps
sec
Perce
nt
Error
0.0022
67
0.001
Varia
ble
part
m
part Energy
Density
Voltage V
0.0001
part V
Current I
0.0001
0.5000
0
part I
time t
part t
Total
Uncertainty
Run 3
Knowns
m
0.1061 [kg]
Unknown
Governing
Equation
= (V*I*t)/
(u*m)
71.880
07
13.983
92
3.53E08
7.9E08
6.7599
21
9.6241
32 %
percent
uncertinty
Nomin
al
31.362
13
30.69
%
University of Idaho
49
05
Energy
Density u
Voltage V
Current I
time t
Variable
m
Energy
Density u
42500
224.65
23
150.08
65
30
[J/g]
Volts
Amps
sec
Perce
nt
Error
0.0022
67
Varia
ble
part
m
part Energy
Density
0.001
Voltage V
0.0001
part V
Current I
0.0001
0.5000
0
part I
time t
part t
Total
Uncertainty
Governing
Equation
= (V*I*t)/
(u*m)
22.972
42
4.4691
71
9.97E09
2.23E08
13.976
42
6.4356
82 %
percent
uncertinty
Nomin
al
27.503
99
23.40
%
A.2 Efficiency Testing

Data
1500 RPM Test
1521.335572
103.787
101.8889
176
103.0865
976
102.6288
052
103.4680
491
Current
(I)
69.33837
55
68.07029
81
68.87044
825
68.56460
473
69.12528
972
1511.281531
102.971
8739
68.7938
0326
Speed(RPM)
Test 1
1522
Test 2
1492.839835
Test 3
1514.065837
Test 4
1506.16641
Test 5
Avera
ge
Voltage
(V)
Power (kW)
7.196421978
6.935608996
7.099620184
7.036703462
7.152258874
7.084122699
University of Idaho
2500 RPM Test
Test 5
Speed(RPM)
2502.70200
7
2522.57943
2
2544.19572
6
2491.40068
6
2530.17204
1
Voltage
(V)
165.3614
513
166.3271
617
167.6621
889
164.3979
382
166.9018
037
Current (I)
110.4752
465
111.1204
216
112.0123
311
109.8315
393
111.5043
304
Power
(kW)
18.26834
709
18.48234
433
18.78023
262
18.05607
861
18.61027
386
Avera
ge
2518.2099
78
166.1301
088
110.9887
738
18.43945
53
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
Test 4
3500 RPM Test
Test 5
3515.23826
3517.17222
1
Voltage
(V)
228.7108
311
224.2814
717
222.6858
764
223.9935
931
223.5898
59
Current (I)
152.7979
178
149.8387
361
148.7727
453
149.6464
091
149.3766
811
Power
(kW)
34.94653
877
33.60605
223
33.12958
916
33.51983
687
33.39911
106
Avera
ge
3527.4304
3
224.652
3262
150.086
4979
33.7202
2562
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
Test 4
Speed(RPM)
3586.31533
9
3522.23612
7
3496.19020
6
Resistor Banks Values

Bank 1
5.9
50
University of Idaho
Bank 2
Bank 3
Bank 4
6.3
6.2
5.6
Parallel
Sum
1.496819
031
51
Summary
Speed(RPM
)
1511
2518
3527
Test
1500 RPM
2500 RPM
3500 RPM
Voltage (V)
102.97
166.13
224.65
Current (I)
68.79
110.99
150.09
Power (kW)
7.08
18.44
33.72
Low Power Experiment - RPM = 1500
Time Weight
Run
(s)
(lbs)
Energy In
mass (kg)
(kJ)
Energy
Power (kW)
Out
Percentage Error (
Efficiency
(%)
%)
60
0.09
0.0408096
1734.408
7.22789
0.250041
433.6734
17
25.00411668 8.42368
60
0.08
0.0362752
1541.696
6.96594
417.9564
0.271101
7
27.11016958
60
0.08
0.0362752
1541.696
7.13067
427.8402
0.277512
69
27.75126873
60
0.09
0.0408096
1734.408
7.06748
424.0488
0.244491
95
24.44919535
60
0.09
0.0408096
1734.408
7.18354
431.0124
0.248506
93
24.85069257
University of Idaho
52
Medium Power Experiment - RPM = 2500
Run
Time Weight
(s) (lbs)
mass (kg)
Energy In
(kJ)
Power (kW)
Energy
Out
Efficiency
Percentage Error (
(%)
%)
60
0.19
0.0861536
3661.528
18.3482
1100.892
0.300664
9.62413
64
30.06646406
2
60
0.19
0.0861536
3661.528
18.5632
1113.792
0.304187
76
30.41877599
60
0.18
0.0816192
3468.816
18.8624
1131.744
0.326262
33
32.62623327
60
0.18
0.0816192
3468.816
18.1351
1088.106
0.313682
25
31.36822478
18.6917
0.323309
1121.502
74
32.33097403
60
0.18
0.0816192
3468.816
High Power Experiment - RPM = 3500
Run
Time Weight
(s) (lbs)
60
0.42
mass (kg)
Energy In
(kJ)
Power (kW)
0.1904448
8093.904
35.0994
Energy
Out
2105.964
Efficiency
Percentage Error (
(%)
%)
0.260191
6.43568
37
26.01913737
2
University of Idaho
30
0.19
0.0861536
3661.528
33.753
1012.59
0.276548
48
27.65484792
30
0.18
0.0816192
3468.816
33.2745
998.235
0.287773
98
30
0.19
0.0861536
3661.528
33.6665
1009.995
0.275839
76
27.58397587
30
0.19
0.0861536
3661.528
33.5452
1006.356
0.274845
91
27.48459113
28.7773984
A.3 Efficiency Testing Uncertainty Analysis

35
33
31
29
27
Efficiency (%)
25
23
21
19
17
15
0
Efficiency Results
53
University of Idaho
32
30
28
Average Efficiency (%)
26
24
22
20
0
2
Run Level
B.0 Complete Drawing Package
54
University of Idaho
55
University of Idaho
B.1 Bill of Materials (BOM)

Item
Quantity
Part Number
Unit
Cost
Project
Cost
Distributor
Rubber Castor
Wheel - wt. cap. 310
lbs ea.
22925T74
44.98
179.9
2
McMasterCarr
Hard Cast Iron

Wheel - wt. cap. 800
lbs ea.
2310T51
11.28
45.12
McMasterCarr
Rigid Caster Wheel

- wt. cap. 200 lbs ea.
22925T17
26.08
52.17
McMasterCarr
Swivel Caster Wheel 2

- wt. cap. 200 lbs ea.
22925T18
33.71
67.42
McMasterCarr
3/8 " Plexiglass

sheet
4' x 8'
Clear Film
Masked
92.75
92.75
Professional
Plastics
Handles
1568A46
6.86
27.44
McMasterCarr
Rubber Insulators
(1/2" hole)
8637K251
7.07
7.07
McMasterCarr
Cam Locking
Radiator Hose
Adapter Socket
51415K34
14.08
28.16
McMasterCarr
Cam Locking
Radiator Hose
Adapter Plug
51415K64
7.51
15.02
McMasterCarr
Cabin
Fan
1976K27
202.2
3
202.2
3
McMasterCarr
3/8 "
Mount
Pins
98330A230
4.87
4.87
McMasterCarr
Eyebolt
3016T39
6.86
13.72
McMaster-
56
University of Idaho
Carr
Foam
Plug
8875K14
10.14
10.14
McMasterCarr
3/8"-16
bolts
92620A622
9.53
9.53
McMasterCarr
1/2"-13 bolts for

Frame Mount
92620A712
10.82
10.82
McMasterCarr
1/2"-13
nuts
93827A245
14.18
14.18
McMasterCarr
3/8"-16 bolts for

Wheels
91257A634
9.26
9.26
McMasterCarr
3/8"-16
nuts
93827A225
11.55
11.55
McMasterCarr
Rivets
97519A410
10.77
10.77
McMasterCarr
1/2" x
2.5"
Bolts
91257A722
9.33
9.33
McMasterCarr
Yellow
Spray
Paint
~20
20
Napa Auto
Parts
Build Test Bench

(material + labor)
1750
1750
All Fab and

Supply
Total Estimated Cost
09-142
2591.47
57
University of Idaho
58
University of Idaho
C.0 LabVIEW Programs

C.1 LabVIEW program code
59
University of Idaho
60
University of Idaho
61
University of Idaho
62
University of Idaho
63
University of Idaho
D.0 Complete Project Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis

(DFMEA)
64
University of Idaho
E.0 Vendor data sheets

E.1 CAS-LUUV Power/Energy Requirements
1. The purpose of this paper is to establish a framework for defining the CAS LUUV power
system, based on the power and duration requirements for several operating scenarios.
These scenarios include:
Stationary Lake Demonstration Testing at Lake Pend Oreille
Underway Lake Demonstration Testing at Lake Pend Oreille
Execution of notional operational scenarios (While these scenarios will not be

demonstrated under the current contract, it is important to present a viable power system
concept for the intended use).
Other factors affecting the power system design include:
Grounding:
o Is the 300 VDC supply floating or grounded?
o Are the DC-DC converters galvanically isolated?
o What are the grounding requirements for the subsystem equipments?
EMI:
o What is the current ripple produced on the 300 VDC bus by the DC-DC
converters?
o What is the sensitivity of the prime power source(s) to ripple?
Safety Fusing and protection
2. Characteristics of the existing Battery Module

2.1. The existing battery module consists of 80 series connected individual lithium-ion
batteries per stack, with 2 stacks per assembly and 4 assemblies per 4 module.
Characteristics of the individual batteries are listed in Appendix A. Nominal cell voltage
is 3.2 Volts, recommended discharge current is 30 Amps or less, and nominal capacity is
60 Amp- hours (Ah). With 80 cells per stack and 8 stacks per module, the composite
battery characteristics are 288 V (nominal), 240 Amps, 69 kW, 480 Ah and 138 kW-hr.
65
University of Idaho
However, Figure 4, which presents results from discharge testing of a single stack,
indicates that 48 Ah were recovered from a 60 Ah stack (80%).
Figure 4: Single Cell Stack Discharge Test

Based on this result, the 480 Ah and 138 kW-hr module capacities may need to be derated to 384
Ah and 111 kW-hr, respectively.
2.2. While the battery characteristics in Appendix A indicate that the recommended battery
discharge current is 30 amps or less, the maximum discharge current is 4 times this (120
A), and the 5 second pulse discharge rate is 16 times (480 A). This suggests that the
battery module will be able to handle any foreseeable pulse or inrush currents.
However, the system protective devices must be able to interrupt large DC currents in
the event of a fault.
3. Power and Energy Requirements
3.1. Vehicle and Mission Systems Equipment (MSE) Power Requirements
Vehicle and MSE power requirements are summarized in Table 2, below
66
University of Idaho
Table 2: Vehicle and Mission Systems Equipment Power Requirements

The MSE low band transmitter is not expected to be installed for the stationary or underway lake
testing. The 8 kW power draw is based on existing equipment; efforts are underway to identify
lower power alternatives.
In this document, vehicle speeds are expressed in terms of an arbitrary reference speed (per unit
(pu)). For example, a vehicle speed of half the reference speed is expressed as .5 pu.
3.2. Stationary Lake Demonstration Testing

For stationary testing, no propulsion power would be required. The vessel would be tethered to a
hauldown platform and lowered to the prescribed depth. No subsequent operation of the
propulsion or variable buoyancy systems would be required. It is assumed that controllers, even
if not in active use, would be powered and in standby. The ROM power required for this
condition would be ~225 W for vehicle and power system control, 3 kW for the receiver and
processor, and 2 kW for the transmit system (the low band transmitter is not expected to be
installed for these tests), for a total of 5.2 kW. Because the equipment will be powered from
shore, operating time is not limited by available battery energy.
3.3. Underway Lake Demonstration Testing
67
University of Idaho
For underway lake testing the low band transmitter is not expected to be installed. The following
operational sequence is assumed. The vehicle is dockside for a period of time with external
power disconnected, control and communication systems energized, propulsion systems on and
operating at 0 pu speed, MSE transmit and receive systems powered but in a quiescent state
(quiescent power assumed to be ~10 % of active power). The vehicle would then transit to the
test range at .47 pu and maneuver into position at .33 pu. The variable buoyancy system (VBS)
would be operated as required. The vehicle would execute the test sequence at speeds up to .47
pu, VBS as required, and MSE transmit and receive systems active. Following the test sequence
the vehicle would transit to the dock at .47 pu, VBS as required and MSE systems quiescent. A
summary of the power and energy requirements for each phase is presented in Table 3. For the
assumption of a 6.5 hr test sequence, the required energy is within the capacity of a single battery
module.
Table 3: Power/Energy use for "Underway at Lake"

3.4. Execution of a notional operational scenario
Two operational scenarios have been constructed. The first, summarized in Table 4, assumes a
12.5 hr, .27 pu transit to and from the operational area, with the MSE quiescent, and a 25 hr, .27
pu operation with MSE active. The energy required is on the order of 4 times the capacity of a
single battery module.
68
University of Idaho
Table 4: Power/Energy Use for "Operational Scenario #1

The second scenario, summarized in Table 5, assumes a 7.5 hr, .27 pu transit to the operational
area, with the CAS quiescent, a 72 hr, .47 pu operation with CAS active, a 1 hour .67 speed burst
with CAS active, and a 4.3 hr, .47 pu transit from the operational area. The energy required is on
the order of 13 times the capacity of a single battery module.
Table 5: Power/Energy Use for "Operational Scenario #2

When compared to the capacity of a single battery module, either scenario is energy limited
rather than power limited. This suggests that for all but the most basic missions, an
alternate/supplemental power source, with higher energy density, will likely be required.
4. Appendices
Appendix A - Battery Characteristics
69
University of Idaho
70
University of Idaho
E.2 Electronic Data Sheets

For electronic copies of the report, the following vendor data sheets link to their
respective disk folders:
battery specs.pdf
current LEM.pdf
TDI Specs.pdf
UQM Controller Documentation.pdf
Voltage Transducer.pdf
Spal 30103202 fan.pdf
power supply.pdf
71

SeniorDesign FinalReport

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

SeniorDesign FinalReport

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

December 18, 2009

Dr. Herb Hess

SubMerge AUV Test Bench Project

C.0 LabVIEW Programs............................................................................................................56

1.0 Problem Definition

Figure 2: Preliminary Test Bench Design Sketches

Figure 3: Test Bench Functional Diagram

2.0 System Design

Figure 4a: Test Bench Setup Block Diagram

Figure 4b: Data Acquisition Sensor Diagram

2.1 An Air-Tight Chamber

Figure 5: Chamber weather stripping seal and Plexiglas covers

2.2 Inside Chamber Space

Figure 8: Focus of space inside cylinder chamber

2.3 Voltage & Current DAQ

Figure 9: Unique Mobility (UQM) Alternator and Controlling Module

2.4 Sensors & Equipment

Figure 11: Preliminary temperature testing on engine intake and exhaust

2.5 Fuel Management

2.6 Powertrain Placement

3.0 Product Description

Figure 14: Test bench completed product

Figure 15a: DAQ System Setup

Figure 15b: DAQ System Outline

3.1 Electrical Engineering Concepts Selected

Figure 16: Voltage (black box) LEM Transducer

Figure 17: Output resistor for the electric current LEM

Figure 22: Back of the 6267B power supply

Figure 23: Back of 6264B power supply

Figure 24: LabVIEW program interface

Hooking up and running the DAQ

3.2 Mechanical Engineering Concepts Selected

Rolling Installation Cart

Figure 26: Base Test Bench Frame and Components

Figure 27: Installation cart showing location of safety bolt holes

4.0 Design Evaluation

4.1 Engine & Test Bench Maintenance

Figure 31: Engine radiator and coolant hoses

Figure 32: Engine cooling system hookup inside chamber

4.2 Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA)

Figure 33: DFMEA Analysis

5.0 Testing Procedures & Results

Figure 34: Efficiency Test Setup

Efficiency Test Summary

Table 1: Efficiency Test Summary

5.2 Efficiency Test Uncertainty Analysis

Table 2: Variable Errors

5.3 Airflow & Temperature Test

6.0 Recommendations & Improvements

Fogt, Robert. Conversions. Onlineconversions.com. BlueSparks Network, 2008.

A.2 Efficiency Testing

2500 RPM Test

3500 RPM Test

Resistor Banks Values

Low Power Experiment - RPM = 1500

Medium Power Experiment - RPM = 2500

High Power Experiment - RPM = 3500

A.3 Efficiency Testing Uncertainty Analysis

Average Efficiency (%)

B.0 Complete Drawing Package

B.1 Bill of Materials (BOM)

Hard Cast Iron

Rigid Caster Wheel