Economic and cost Analyses

Contents I. List of tables 1 II. List of figures 1 Introduction 2 Project Background 2 Problem Statement 2 The Client’s Need Statement 2 The Goal Statement 3 The Design objective 3 Design constraints 3 Scoop of work 3 State of the art research (SOTA) 4 Quality function deployment (QFD) 5 Customer Requirements 5 Benchmarking 5 Engineering Requirements 6 QFD 6 Project management 6 Final Design 7 Conclusion and Future Work 10 References 11 Appendices 12

List of tables

· Table of individual assignments see Appendix A

· Table of team assignments see Appendix B

· Decision matrix tables see Appendices G and H

· Table of objectives see Appendix C

List of figures

· Selected location figure see Appendix I

· Tensionless Pier Wind Turbine Foundation figure see Appendix I

· QFD chart figure (will be handed out for audience) see Appendix D

· Gantt Chart see Appendix F

Introduction

Wind Energy harvesting systems have been around for centuries. These systems have been used to grind wheat, pump water and up unit the early 20th century, to produce electricity. In the 1970’s, the increase in the cost of crude oil sparked a wind energy race and which led to the rapid expansion of wind harvesting technology. Since then, wind turbines have evolved from small 100 KW units to large, highly efficient 8 MW power-generating machines. Even after such expansion, there is ample room for technological growth and application of wind energy harvesting systems in the United States.

Project Background

Currently in Arizona, the majority of the energy produced is generated from the Hoover and Glen Canyon dams in the northern sector of the state, and from the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in Tonopah producing a combined percentage of 33.8 of Arizona’s energy [1]. Because of Arizona’s Renewable Environmental Standard, by law, Arizona is required to produce 15 percent of its electricity consumed from renewable energy sources by 2025 [2]. Since hydroelectric power is already heavily used throughout Arizona, other forms of energy must be explored such as wind energy.

Although wind energy can be an excellent complement to hydroelectric plants for producing renewable energy, Arizona only generates 0.48 percent of its energy from wind production [3]. Even with this low amount of energy produced, Arizona has a good outlook for wind production in its northern sector. As depicted in figure 1 [4], there is a band of good wind resources beginning from the city of Peach Springs, extending southeast to the city Springerville.

In order to expand Arizona’s wind energy production, our Client, David Willy, has asked our team to conduct research in Wind turbine development in Arizona. Mr. Willy is a professor at Northern Arizona University teaching various engineering courses ranging from Computer Aided Design to Renewable Energy Labs. During his career, he worked on various wind and solar energy projects for SRP, Next Era/Windlogics and APS. Mr. Willy’s demonstrated need is a result of his experience and interest in development of wind energy production in Arizona.

Problem Statement

This section discusses the problem formulation of our team’s project. This section will be broken up into The Client’s need statement and The Problem Definition.

The Client’s Need Statement

Our client’s need comes from his background in wind energy research. Mr. Willy’s need is to have a team of engineers analyze the viability of wind energy in Arizona. In this project, our team will create a proposal regarding design and research in the following fields: blade design, turbine location, energy production, economics and environmental impact.

The Goal Statement

In order to guide our team’s efforts, our team created several goal statements to present to our client. A list of the goal statements can be seen in Appendix C. After reviewing our goal statements with our client, the team’s agreed our goal was to research and design several areas of a wind energy harvesting system. Once a goal statement was agreed upon, our team was able to evaluate the design objectives for the project.

The Design objective

The design objectives provide measures for our team to comply by. The objectives must have quantifiable measurements in order to document how well the objective is completed. Each design objective must be completed in order to satisfy the client’s need. Key objectives for the wind turbine project include a competitive levelized cost of energy when compared to other forms of energy production, and to site a location with good wind potential as well as close proximity to the load. A list of the design objectives can be viewed in Appendix C.

The environmental and location oriented objectives are under certain conditions such that the turbine farm must not be within reasonable proximity of residential communities, major highways, and archeological sites. Arizona has no specific wind siting authority, codes, or regulations but wind facilities must obtain siting and zoning approvals at the county level [5]. These types of conditions can be more thoroughly defined in the design constraints of the project and the quality function deployment.

Design constraints

Within the project design, there are constraints that the project must also abide by and they must also be quantifiable. The constraints come from both our client, as well as from government regulations.

The constraints are listed below:

· The Turbines must be 3 blade Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbines (HAWT)

· The Turbine Array must produce at least 6942 MW-H per year from wind regime of 6 m/s average per year

· The Turbine Array must produce at least 70,000 MW per year

· The Turbine Array must be in the State of Arizona

· The Turbine Array must have a Levelized cost of energy comparable to other forms of energy production

Establishing the client’s need statement, our team’s goal statement and the design objectives along with constraints oriented our team to identify the real problem. Now to begin constructing a solution for our client, the team had to create a scope of work to define the project’s tasks and set deadlines for this project to meet.

Scope of work

To begin organizing this project, our team must create a scope of work. The scope of work analyzes the projected work and tasks, which our team committed to follow.

After meeting with our client, our team created the scope of work for the wind turbine project. The scope of work is broken down as follows; required individual assignments, required team assignments and special client deliverables. In addition, the scope of work includes all tasks or deliverables requested by our client with their corresponding due dates.

To summarize, scope of work is a document that includes all the tasks and deliverables requested by our client with their due dates. The team divided the tasks and deliverables based on three sections, individual assignments, team assignments, and special client deliverables. The three tables that summarize the scope of work for this project can be found in Appendix E and Appendix F.

State of the art research (SOTA)

The second step in this project is to research the necessary information to maintain project direction. The state of art research indicates that our team must research all up to date information related to our project using all available resources.

In order to research the most information, the team implemented a plan to research for the project; Each team member obtained five relevant references from four different types of sources.

As a result, the team came up with 20 different references from various different sources. Our team reviewed all the sources and selected the references most relevant to our project regarding location, blade design, and cost. We then combined the references into one concise SOTA Research pool. Below are some of the references the team selected. Their corresponding sources may be found in the references.

· Engineering magazine: Wind Turbine Blade design

This magazine has been chosen because it contains information about the limitations and strengths of different designs of wind blade since the historical times. According to the magazine, windmills which are the traditional design were cost effective, however; they had poor performance because of they were heavy and too large. The other design discussed in the magazine is vertical axis design that does not require one to invent a system to face the wind. However, it has a low speed ratio that makes it inefficient. The authors in this magazine also propose the horizontal design of their high speed ratio. In addition, the horizontal ones are preferable because it is easier to control their rotor speed [6].

· Textbook: Wind energy explained; theory, design, and application

This book was selected because wind power with the focus on a wind turbine is one of its main subjects. According to the book, when designing wind turbines, one should consider analyzing their performance economically. The wind design should be economically effective compared to other energy sources in an area. The books also contain theories that explain how different types of turbine designs work [7].

· United States Patent: Wind Turbine Design Cost and Scaling Model

This is a government source that talks about renewable energy projects. The source has been chosen because it specifically talks about wind-generated energy. It focuses on the cost of Wind Turbine design cost. The source enables one to know whether or not the wind turbine design is cost effective. When designing the wind turbine, it is vital to evaluate their costs and performance. According to the patent, the design of wind turbine determines their effectiveness in generating energy [8].

To sum up, the state of the art research helps our team to be on the right track for this project. By using every available source, we created an idea about what our final design will be and what our client expecting from the team.

Quality function deployment (QFD)

The Quality Function deployment is used to measure the relationship between the Customer Requirements and the Engineering Requirements. The QFD also covers benchmarking to review existing products, which may already satisfy the client’s need. Overall, the QFD infuses the voice of the customer within the design project.

Customer Requirements

The customer requirements are specific points of interest that project must inherit. The customer requirements do not have a direct measurement, but they can be quantified with engineering requirements. Some customer requirements for this project include: functionality in low wind speeds, low cost of operation, and total energy production. Using the engineering requirements satisfies these requirements. A full list of the customer requirements can be seen in QFD.

Benchmarking

Benchmarking analyzes existing products that may already satisfy the customer’s need. Benchmarking is also useful for researching engineering requirements that our project must consider. There are a few existing wind turbines that can satisfy the customer need. Some benchmark wind turbines are listed below:

Vestas V112-3.3/3.45 MW

This is a 112m rotor diameter wind turbine in the order of 3 Megawatts. It is produced by the company, Vestas, and is capable of operating within a wind speed range of 3 m/s to 25 m/s [9]

GE 2.75-103 Turbine

This turbine, made by General Electric, produces 2.75 Megawatts of energy from 103m rotors. The rotors feature Low Noise Trailing Edge serrations, which lower acoustic resonance and allow the turbines to operate in noise sensitive areas at full capacity [10].

Alstom ECO 122

The ECO 122 turbine is designed to work in low and medium wind sites. The 122m rotor, 3 Megawatt turbine is capable of being deployed with two other 100m-rotor turbines in order to optimize efficiency in varying wind speeds and also to reduce operating costs via standardization [11].

To summarize, the benchmarking of the turbines listed above provided insight on industry standards and potential areas for improvement. Each turbine had some qualities, which fulfilled the customer requirements such as energy production and low wind speed operation. Unfortunately, none of the turbines completely satisfied the customer need, which requires further development from our team.

Engineering Requirements

The engineering requirements are technical specifications that directly influence the customer requirements. Most of these engineering requirements are already implemented in the benchmarked turbines, but must also be applied to our design project. These engineering requirements come from government regulations at the National and County level. These engineering requirements range from the number of turbine rotor blades to the levelized cost of energy. More engineering requirements are available in the QFD.

QFD

The QFD chart brings the customer and engineering requirements together to rank the importance of their relationship. On the left side of the chart are the customer requirements. On the upper part, the engineering requirements are listed. The intersecting area in between ranks the relationship between the customer and engineering requirements. A high number designates a strong relationship, a low number represents a weak relationship and a blank represents no relationship. The completed QFD can be seen in appendix D.

Project management

After conducting research and meeting with our client, the team created a list of tasks that must be completed. Each task has a specific due date. In order to illustrate the distribution of the tasks between the team and to organize the respective deadlines, the team generated a work breakdown structure (WBS).

The WBS displays the process that our team will follow in order to complete the project. The project is divided into three main sections: turbine design, location and plant configuration. For each section, there are serval detailed tasks that must be completed.

The above hierarchical levels display the three main parts and how each level has its own set of tasks. The team created a detailed outline for each task with the specific details and due date and time, the detailed outline can be found in the appendix.

Gantt Chart

In order to further organize the tasks that must be completed, the team created a Gantt chart. The Gantt chart expands the WBS by including specific deadlines, projected dates, resources needed to compete the tasks and task ownership. Our team’s Gantt chart can be seen in appendix F.

Final Design

Concepts

The final design incorporates several different concepts which were selected using a decision matrix. The concepts that were selected were the most successful at fulfilling the customer needs and engineering requirements. The concepts that were selected cover the following topics: Location, foundation and construction, number of blades, airfoil type, turbine selection, transmission layout, resource assessment and environmental impact.

Location

Based on the decision matrix, our team created, we selected the location near Williams to be the site for our project. We as a team selected this location for the following reasons: the location has an average 7 m/s wind speed rate, 2.8 height snowfall, there are no major highways or any archeological sites near the location, and the topography of the location helps performance in low wind speeds. For this location, we need 650 acres of land to use. The 650 acres will harbor a total of 10 turbines with 82.5-meter rotors and at least 180 meters of spacing between each turbine. Moreover, the location will have a remote monitor headquarter in order to monitor the project. A earth view of this location can be seen in appendix I.

Foundation and construction

As a result of our selected location, our team must also select the correct type of foundation to suit the soil in the location. There are two types of foundations that suit our location: one is the Anchor deep foundation and the other one is the Tensionless Pier Wind Turbine Foundation [1]. Our team created a decision matrix to compare and select the best foundation for our project. Based on the matrix, we concluded that the Tensionless Pier Wind Turbine Foundation will reduce the project cost by 3-5%, it supports heavy turbines and tall towers higher than 100 meters, it is effective in all soil types, it is durable during earthquakes or any natural hazard and finally it is saves installation time.

After selecting the best foundation for the project the constriction may begin. There are some specific rules and regulations that must be followed when constructing the turbine farm. Arizona State is required to monitor wildlife before and after the constriction. The Federal Aviation Administration requires specific lighting for towers over 500 ft. near any air field. There must also be some visual signage, a fence surrounding the site, the tower and foundation must be painted a neutral color and there must be a plan for decommission.

Number of blades

The number of blades on a wind turbine directly affects the cost, weight, reliability, stability and maximum achievable power of the turbine. Single blade, 2 blade, and 3 blade rotors were evaluated all evaluated with the mentioned criteria.

A single blade rotor is one of the most cost effective and light ways to build a rotor. As the number of blades goes up, so does the cost and the weight: a three bladed rotor costs more to produce than a one bladed rotor. As far as stability and reliability, the one bladed rotor is unbalanced and susceptible to wind torque, which lowers reliability. Although a 2 bladed rotor is more stable and reliable, the wind torque is still prominent enough to reduce reliability. A three bladed rotor has more balance and is able to have higher stability when torque is applied to its airfoils. Analyzing the maximum achievable power as a function of the number of blades reveals that a 3-blade rotor is better at reaching high efficiency levels (Betz Limit) versus a single bladed rotor. After considering all the criteria and creating a decision matrix, a 3 bladed rotor would be the most viable option for a wind turbine.

Airfoil Type

An airfoil is a structure with curved surfaces designed to give the most favorable ratio of lift to drag. The type of airfoil is characterized by its thickness percentage, mean camber line, symmetry, lift force and drag force. The three types of airfoils that were evaluated with the mentioned characteristics were the NACA 0012, NACA 63(2)-215 and LS(1)-0417 airfoils.

The thickness of the airfoil changes the amount of drag and effective camber. A greater thickness percentage increases drag and reduces effective camber. A thicker airfoil is less desirable because less effective camber reduces the maximum lift coefficient. A reduced lift coefficient directly translates to less power. This makes the LS(1)-0417 airfoil more desirable for this aspect. A properly cambered airfoil can increase the maximum lift coefficient. Out of the 3 airfoils mentioned, the LS(1)-0417 airfoil has the most desirable camber. As far as symmetry, the NACA 0012 is the most symmetric. This translates into the ability to have a high positive angle of attack. Drag is less desirable because of the reduction in efficiency. The airfoil type that has the least amount of drag is the NACA 63(2)-215. Finally, the most influential characteristic is lift. The more lift an airfoil can generate, the more wind energy the airfoil can capture. The airfoil type with the most lift is the LS(1)-0417. After completing the decision matrix for the airfoils, we decided the LS(1)-0417 was the optimal airfoil design for this project. An image of the airfoil can be seen in appendix J.

Turbine selection

The team selected the turbine that fit our need for maximum capacity wind speed, hub height, capacity, cost, and rotor diameter. The turbine selected is a GE 1.6-82.5. This turbine, made by General Electric, produces 1.6 Megawatts of energy from 82.5 meter rotors. The turbine is a three-bladed, horizontal axis wind turbine [2]. Moreover, General Electric offers a warranty for the turbines and an annual check to make sure they are still fully functional. In addition, the GE 1.6-82.5 is a reliable, which means that they can function well at low wind speed. Also, GE 1.6-82.5 wind turbines do not damage easily and can be easily repaired when any problem arises.

Transmission layout

For this part of the project our team chose a specific layout for the farm. The turbines must be close to the load to avoid any additional costs for the connection between turbines to the load. Also, the team must follow the standard regulation for spacing between each turbine, which is at least 180 meters apart. Because we are required to generate a 70,000 megawatt-h/year, we need and 10 turbines that produce at least 7000 megawatt-h/year. In addition, making the turbines near the load will prevent a large amount of voltage drop; the shorter the distance between turbines and the load, the less voltage the system will lose.

Resource Assessment

Based on the decision matrix for resource assessment, the team came up with three main sources of data: Forecasting research, measurements tools and wind maps. All of these sources provide high quality data which can be used to simulate accuracy in the final design [3].

Environmental Impact

Based on the site selection (Williams), we discovered some environmental concerns regarding land use, wildlife habitat, public health and community and air pollution. For land use, the wind farm will be sited in a hilly region. A benefit of this type of location is that there is less land use versus constructing a wind farm on flat area. Another benefit of this location is avian wildlife (such as birds and bats), will not interact with the wind turbines compared to a flatter region. Public health and community basically covers noise produced by the movement of wind turbine blades. On the selected location, noise will not be an issue because the site is distant from any residential areas. Finally, air quality can be improved in this region by shifting energy production from conventional sources over to cleaner wind energy. As a direct result, Nitrogen Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide levels can be dissipated from the air because of wind circulation created by the turbines [4].

Selection Process

After reviewing each concept, our team created several decision matrices to aid in selecting the best solution. Appendix G and Appendix H display the various decision matrices with the concepts and criteria.

Conclusion and Future Work

Although the project is near completion, there is still much work that the team must complete. The team must analyze the project from different perspectives such as economics, functionality and overall fulfilment of the client needs and requirements. The design must still include several specific details regarding the projected levelized cost of energy, environmental impacts, transmission layout, turbine blade design overall performance of the wind energy generating array.

To conclude, our client David Willy asked our team to create a proposal for a wind turbine project. The project has many different areas of research, with specific details and requirements. After meeting several times with our client, team RASS set a plan to complete this project in the most efficient and timely manner. In other words, as a team we accounted the required work and divided it between members to ensure good quality and precision. The project required State of the Art research to benchmark and fully understand the client’s problem statement. After the preliminary work, the team used decision matrices to select the best concepts for the design project. After working extensively on the design project, our team proudly delivers this proposal to our client, David Willy, to approve further expansion for the project.

Identify and map out the work that would be completed if this project would be

Continued past this semester. Be sure to reference the updated Gantt chart.

Move under the statement of qualifications

Design analyses

This section should have subsections for each of the analytical tasks that were

completed for your design. Please label each section with the analysis as well as the

person(s

) responsible for the work. Example: Structural Analysis (John Doe

Project Economics

This section should have subsections for each of the econ/cost tasks that were

Completed for your design. Please label each section with the analysis as well as the

person(s) responsible for the work.

Example: Levelized Cost of Energy Calculation (John Doe)

Design ethical consideration

Statement of qualifications

Rafeal Vera is a junior in Mechanical Engineering at Northern Arizona University. Rafeal specializes in mechanical part of the project, understanding how the turbine project works. He also skillful in technical writing, he was the primary author of this project. He also has had extensive work with SolidWorks, making him a vital part of this team. For full resume see Appendix K.

Abdulrahman Alsabah is a junior in Civil Engineering at Northern Arizona University. He has a great understanding of environmental effects and impacts of our project. He is also very useful for researching part he helped the team a lot during the research stage. For full resume see Appendix L.

Abdullah Alsalman is a junior Civil Engineering student at Northern Arizona University. He has a fantastic ability to keep projects on track according to the time limit of a project due to his leadership skills. He also possesses the ability to take a step back during a project and notice if important details are being missed. For full resume see Appendix M.

Sulaiman Alsaqlawi is a Junior Civil Engineering student at Northern Arizona University. He is efficient in AutoCAD and SolidWorks having done many renderings for projects previously. He is also very proficient when completing research, never missing a detail. For full resume see A ppendix N.

For any wind project you need engineers from all majors, project managers, economics specialties, Etc. For this project this team came over many challenges and obstacles. The First challenge was the engineers students involved in this project. We had 3 Civil engineering students and one mechanical engineering student. Because the wind turbine project include mostly mechanic work like blade design, mechanics of gear and rotor. And we only had one mechanical engineer the work load on our mechanical engineer Rafeal was a lot. As far for the civil engineering work in this project like the construction of the foundation or the layout of the project done by 2 of our civil engineering student Abdullah and Sulaiman. For our third team member who is also a civil engineering student he decided to work the environmental part of this project covering the environmental impacts and resource assessment. The second challenge was in lack of information and details in some assignments throughout this project.

In the end, our team overcome all these challenges and obstacles by working hard and working together as a team. The team worked really hard in this project. Each member of our team gave all his best to complete this project in the perfect way. For example if one of our team members had a task that he do not know that much about that task, he will educate himself about this task by reading necessary text to complete the task, or ask help from team members. Another important aspect of completing this project is that our team worked as a real team by helping each other. We also get along as a team so we can function better in the project. To sum up even though we did not had the dream team for this project, we as a team tried really hard to get close to that dream team by working hard and committing to do the work. If you were to do this project over (now that you have gained some experience) what disciplines would you (as a team) want on your team in order to set your team up for success?

References

[1] Arizonaexperience.org, 'Powering Arizona', 2012. [Online]. Available: http://arizonaexperience.org/innovate/powering-arizona. [Accessed: 06- Jul- 2015].

[2] Eia.gov, 'Arizona State Profile and Energy Estimates', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=AZ#tabs-1. [Accessed: 06- Jul- 2015].

[3] Arizonaindicators.org, 'Percent of Power Generated in Arizona from Solar and Wind Energy | Arizona Indicators', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://arizonaindicators.org/visualization/percent-power-generated-arizona-solar-and-wind-energy. [Accessed: 06- Jul- 2015].

[4] Apps2.eere.energy.gov, 'WINDExchange: Arizona Wind Resource Map and Potential Wind Capacity', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/wind_resource_maps.asp?stateab=az. [Accessed: 07- Jul- 2015].

[5] The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, 'Wind Energy & Wind Park Siting and Zoning Best Practices and Guidance for States', Regulation Report, 2012.

[6] Conteches.com, 'Wind Turbine Foundations - Contech Engineered Solutions', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.conteches.com/markets/wind-turbine-foundations.aspx. [Accessed: 08- Jul- 2015].

[7] Ge.com, '1.6-82.5 Class IIIB Wind Turbine', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.ge.com/in/wind-energy/1.6-82.5-wind-turbine. [Accessed: 6-Jul- 2015].

[8] Nrel.gov, 'NREL: Renewable Resources Maps and Data Home Page', 2014. [Online]. Available: http://www.nrel.gov/renewable_resources/. [Accessed: 08- Jul- 2015].

[9] Union of Concerned Scientists, 'Environmental Impacts of Wind Power', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/our-energy-choices/renewable-energy/environmental-impacts-wind-power.html#.VZ0EoRNVikp. [Accessed: 07- Jul- 2015].

Appendix A

Required individual assignments:

Week	Date	Individual Assignment
1	2-4 June	Project Signup
2	9-11 June	Teaming and Proposal Outline
3	16-18 June	SOTA Summary
4	23-25 June	SOTA lit review final
5	30 June –2 July	Project Introduction
6	7-9 July	Analytical Tasks
7	14-16 July	Econ Quiz
8	21-23 July	Economics/Cost Analysis, Ethics Quiz
9	28-30 July	Ethics of your design
10	4 August	No individual assignments given that week

Appendix B

Required team assignments:

Week	Date	Team Assignment Information
1	6 June	Scope of work · A memo describing individual and team assignments for this course
2	11 June	Problem Statement · Our team must write the project problem statement.
3	16-18 June	· Requirements & QFD
4	23-25 June	· Concepts Generation
5	30 June –2 July	· Combine SOTA
6	7-9 July	· Polished Pre-Proposal
7	14 July - 4 August	· Final Proposal
8	14 July - 4 August	· Final Proposal
9	14 July - 4 August	· Final Proposal
10	14 July - 4 August	· Final Proposal

Appendix C

List of Customer Requirements

· Cost: the total cost of the project should be reasonable

· Electricity load: the project should not take a lot of electricity load

· Shadow Flicker: The effects produced when rotating wind turbines blades.

· Aesthetic: The shape of the design should meet the client’s requirements

· Eco Friendly: the project should be economically friendly

· Environmentally friendly: the project should be environmentally friendly and should not produce any environmentally issues.

· Archeological consideration: Exclusion zone

· FAA safety consideration: The project should meet the FAA safety consideration necessities

· Low maintenance: The project should not cost a lot of money on the maintenance

List of Goal statements

· Design and research and manage a wind turbine farm to serve cities in the State of Arizona, satisfying all Arizona State Laws.

· To Design and Research a wind turbine array that meets production standards and is environmentally and economically suitable for the Northern Arizona region.

· To Design a wind turbine farm and research potential impact regarding Civil and Mechanical engineering aspects

· To research and design several areas of a wind energy harvesting system.

Table of objectives

Objective:	Basis for measurement:	Units:
Inexpensive	Lowering the cost	US dollars
Environmentally friendly	Degrading environmental damage	Wild life and habitat Public health
Construction	Strong structure	US dollars
Location	Anywhere in Arizona Good annual wind rate	Meters Mile/hour
Optimal blade design	Produce 6942 MW/h per year	Megawatt/hour

List of engineering requirements

· Wind Turbine produce 6492 MW/H per year

The wind turbine must be capable to produce that certain amount of energy to cover the needs of our client and costumer.

· High quality gearbox

The gearbox must adjust with different wind speeds, and have long lifespan and service. 

· Wind turbine rotor diameter should be between 100-120m: the rotor must support great loads.

· Work on all winds environments (low- medium- high): The turbine should generate power in different wind speeds

· Average hub height must be between 200 and 230 ft: The tower must be high enough to harvest smooth, fast moving air.

· Average total height of 300-320 ft.

· Diameter of base should be approximately 10-15 ft.

· Safety shutdown feature in case of emergency

Appendix D

Figure 1

Figure 1 shows the Quality Function Deployment (QFD) created by our team. The QFD is used to relate customer requirements to engineering requirements.

Appendix E

Figure 2 Work Breakdown Schedule

Figure 3 WBS 2

Appendix F

Team Gantt Chart 1

Appendix G

Turbine Selection Decision Matrix

Criteria	Vestas V112-3.3/3.45	GE 1.6-82.5	Alstom ECO 122
	Percent	Score (1-10)	W.S.	Score	W.S.	Score	W.S.
Maximum capacity wind speed	25%	7	1.7	8	2	7	1.7
Cost	25%	6	1.5	9	2.2	7	1.7
Capacity	20%	5	1	8	1.6	7	1.4
Rotor diameter	15%	8	1.2	7	1	8	1.2
Hub Height	15%	6	0.9	8	1.2	5	0.7
Total	100%	6.3	8	6.7

Transmission Layout Decision Matrix

Criteria	Near Williams	Near Winslow
	Percent	Score (1-10)	W.S.	Score	W.S.
Distance from load	20%	9	1.8	8	1.6
Spacing between turbines	20%	7	1.4	7	1.4
Number of turbines	20%	7	1.4	6	1.2
Installation cost	20%	8	1.6	7	1.4
Voltage drop	20%	7	1.4	8	1.6
Total	100%	7.6	7.2

Location decision matrix

Criteria	Near Williams	Near Winslow
	Percent	Score (1-10)	W.S.	Score	W.S.
Wind speed	30%	8	2.4	8	2.4
Archeology	20%	7	1.4	5	1
Cost	30%	7	2.1	6	1.8
Topography	10%	8	1.6	6	1.2
Distance to major city	10%	7	0.7	4	0.4
	Total	8.2	6.8

Appendix H

Type of foundation decision matrix

Criteria	Tensionless pier foundation	Anchor deep foundation
	Percent	Score (1-10)	W.S.	Score	W.S.
Type of soil	30%	8	2.4	8	2.4
Efficient	20%	7	1.4	5	1
Cost	30%	7	2.1	6	1.8
Durability	10%	8	1.6	6	1.2
Maintenance	10%	7	0.7	7	0.7
8.2	7.1

Wind resources decision matrix

Appendix I

Figure 4

Figure 4 shows the selected location for our wind turbine project.

Figure 5

Figure 5 shows the selected type of foundation the Tensionless Pier Wind Turbine Foundation

Appendix J

Figure 6: Various Views of the LS(1)-0417 Airfoil

Appendix K

Rafeal Vera Jr.

Email: [email protected]

3601 S Lake Mary Rd Apt. 162, Flagstaff, Arizona 86005

623-640-4556 (cell)

Education:

College of Engineering, Forestry and Natural Sciences – Flagstaff, AZ (August 2012 – May 2017)

Northern Arizona University

· Flagstaff, Arizona

· Mechanical Engineering Major

· Minor in Spanish

· Movimiento Estudiantil de Chicanos de Aztlán (MEChA) Treasurer (Spring 2013- Spring 2014)

· Society of Automotive Engineers Club (Fall 2012-Present)

· 2.59 Cumulative GPA

· Second Year Engineering Tennis Ball Delivery System Competition all Section Team Winner

· 2 Soccer Intramural teams per school year

· Expected Graduation Date: May 2017

Coconino Community College – Flagstaff, AZ (August 2014 – Dec 2014)

· General Sciences

· 2.0 Cumulative GPA

Westview High School – Avondale, AZ (August 2008 – May 2012)

· High School Diploma

· Gifted Club (August 2008 - May 2012)

· 3.67 Cumulative GPA

Estrella Mountain Community College – Avondale, AZ (June 2010 – July 2012)

· Achieving a College Education (ACE Program)

· General Sciences

· 2.95 Cumulative GPA

Skills:

· Fluent in Spanish and English

· Excellent ability to work in a team environment

· Self-Starter – Ability to take initiative individually or in a team

· Great knowledge of Solidworks

· Competent Skills with a MIG Welder and other Fabrication tools

· Outstanding Presentation/Communication Aptitude

· Very Flexible and Adaptive under different environments

· Northern Arizona University Forklift Operator Certification

· Northern Arizona University 11 Passenger Van Operator Certification

PROFESSIONAL & LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE

Student Mechanic

Northern Arizona University│Flagstaff, AZ (August 2013 – Present)

· Use my automotive skills to service and make basic repairs on University vehicles (both local and state) to ensure that the vehicles are safe and suitable for use on campus and around the country.

· Services performed include tire rotations, tire mounting and balancing, oil services, tune ups, machining brake rotors, brake servicing, trip inspections and various other tasks performed on an “as required” basis.

· Assist University Mechanics with extensive repairs such as transfer case repairs, engine replacement and general diagnostic procedures on vehicles along with services on campus buses, quick-change bucket alignment and repairs on loaders, water line replacement on street sweepers and camel water trucks and blade replacement on industrial loader mounted snow blowers.

· Execute shop maintenance such as waste oil transfer, used oil filter crushing, chemical organization and general essential maintenance whenever possible to create a clean, well-organized work environment.

· Inspect vehicle lifts for maintenance and proper operation before use to uphold a safe work environment.

Parts Specialist

O’Reilly’s Auto Parts│Flagstaff, AZ (May 2013 – Present)

· Use my automotive experience, communication and computer skills to advise, source, and sell automobile parts to customers by adapting and suggesting possible solutions to different customer needs all to provide the best customer service experience.

· Perform courtesy services to customers such as battery replacements, wiper blade installations, light bulb replacement and give general advice to each customer when possible.

· Maintain and upkeep a presentable store appearance by restocking merchandise as necessary and doing essential maintenance around the store and updating planograms to display the most current and prominent merchandise to the customer.

· Refine and Perform excellent cash handling skills to ensure the customer is taken care of in a timely and honest manner.

· PROFESSIONAL & LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE (cont.)

Moving Hand

Northern Arizona University│Flagstaff, AZ (May 2013 – August 2013)

· Participate and execute moves involving furniture, desks, bleachers, and miscellaneous items that require to be relocated to different buildings for various departments at NAU.

· Supply and set up chairs, tables, and portable shades at various events including orientations, graduation ceremonies and symposiums.

· Check and maintain refuse cans around campus and gradually replacing static cans with modern “Big Belly” refuse units to sustain a presentable and modern University Campus.

· Responsible for picking up confidential documents and hazardous materials such as CFLs, Light Ballasts and Batteries and properly disposing of them along with picking up large amounts of paper for recycling and transporting it to the Flagstaff Recycling Center.

Southwest Laundry Equipment│Phoenix, AZ (June 2011 - August 2012)

· Fabricate high quality belts and covers for industrial pneumatic folders and Sylon ironers.

· Disassembled, clean, polish and refurbish Sylon and Super-Sylon ironer gears, frames, motors, roller chests and shaft assemblies to ensure proper fitment and provide a high quality product to customers.

· Operated forklifts to move incoming and outgoing shipments, unload product off delivery trucks, move multi-ton assemblies and to aid in disassembly of ironers.

· Provided service and maintenance to Ironers and Folders by lubricating, repairing, replacing and adjusting necessary components at Maricopa Medical Center Laundry department on a regular basis to maintain proper function and operation of equipment.

· Installed Sylon and Super-Sylon pads and covers at Ameripride and Cintas Linen and Apparel Services to replace the old furnishings in order to continue to produce properly iron sheets and towels in our remanufactured ironers.

Appendix L

Abdulrahman Alsabah

Email: [email protected]

724 E sawmill Rd, Flagstaff, Arizona

(928) 380-1146 (cell)

Education:

Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ August 2013 to present

· Civil Engineering

Skills & interests;

· Civil Engineering Design

· Committed to work

· Researching

· Lab work

· Speak two languages (Arabic-English)

Interests:

· Constructing and designing miniature building

· Soccer

· Automobile Mechanics

Projects:

· Cardboard chair (EGR186)

· Newspaper dog house (CENE286)

· Designing a Dual Shock for Sony PlayStation 4 using AutoCAD (CENE180)

Appendix M

Abdullah Alsalman

Email: [email protected]

724 E sawmill Rd, Flagstaff, Arizona

(928) 380-4301 (cell)

Education:

Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ August 2013 to present

· Civil Engineering

Skills:

· Civil Engineering Design

· AutoCAD Software

· Leadership

· Committed to work

· Lab work

· Speak two languages (Arabic-English)

· Researching

Interests:

· Constructing and designing miniature building

· Soccer

· Outdoor actives

· Reading Science magazine

Projects:

· Cardboard chair (EGR186)

· Newspaper dog house (CENE286)

· Designing Icliker2 for NAU using AutoCAD (CENE180)

Appendix N

Sulaiman Alsaqlawi

Email: [email protected]

724 E sawmill Rd, Flagstaff, Arizona

(626)991-9834 (cell)

Education:

Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ August 2013 to present

· Civil Engineering

Skills & interests;

· Civil Engineering Design

· Writing reports

· Documenting project

· Lab work

· Speak two languages (Arabic-English)

· Leadership

· Arrange meetings

Interests:

· Video Gaming

· AutoCAD drafting

· Reading books

· Outdoor activates

Projects:

· Cardboard chair (EGR186)

· Newspaper dog house (CENE286)

· Final project a picture frame design AutoCAD (CENE180)

Wind Turbine project

Turbine Design

Blade

Structure

Location

State of Arizona

wind resource

Regulation

Plant configuration

4