team 2: agua para vivir [water for life]

Post on 24-Feb-2016

37 Views

Category:

Documents

0 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

Team 2: Agua Para Vivir [Water For Life]. Drew Johnson David Nyenhuis Jason Van Kampen Hendrik Vanderloo. Our Project. Cuchiverachi, Mexico. Objective. - Promote Healthy Living. 1 st Priority Deliver Water to Dorm 2 nd Priority Improve Hygiene and Health of the Community. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Team 2:Agua Para Vivir

[Water For Life]

Drew JohnsonDavid Nyenhuis

Jason Van KampenHendrik

Vanderloo

Our ProjectCuchiverachi, Mexico

Objective- Promote Healthy Living

• 1st Priority • Deliver Water to

Dorm

• 2nd Priority• Improve Hygiene

and Health of the Community

Trips To Gather Necessary InformationTrip 1: June 6- June 14,

2009Trip 2: Jan 26 – Feb 2, 2010• Needs of community• Sources of water• Elevations• GPS coordinates• Water quality• Flow rates of water

sources• Water rights• Ground conditions• Available building

materials and pricing

Water Supply

• River water

• Ground water

• Rainwater

• Spring water

• Bottled water

Where to get the water…

Water Supply

• Rainwater • Irrigation

• Spring water• Drinking• Hygiene

Concept Spring water

Rainwater

Water Supply Systems

Water Supply SystemGround Water Spring

• Spring Features• Marshy, unable

to locate eye• Clay soils• 98 m above

dorm• 1.4 km from

dorm• 2 L/min flow

rate• Community has

approved this spring for the dorm’s water supply

Marshy Area

Flow Direction

Spring Water to DormCapture water from a spring

• Design Features• Two 15’ trenches

filled with permeable rock/gravel and 3’ PVC drain tile

• Drainage ditch upstream of spring to stop runoff infiltration

• Cost = $140

Spring Water to Dorm

• Design Features• Concrete box

• 3’ x 3’ x 1’6”• 3” walls

• Concrete lid• 3’1” x 3’1” x

1.5”• Settles out

particles Ø > 0.001 cm

• Cost = $150

Settle particles out of water

Spring Water to Dorm

• Water Demand Estimate for Dorm• The maximum capacity is 40 kids• The kids stay for 4 day periods each week• The average demand for a week is 2,400 L/day

• Water Supply from Spring• Rough estimate is 2 L/min• This estimates to about 2,900 L/day

Analysis of Water Demand

Spring Water to Dorm

• Design Features• Positioned at an elevation

(95 ft above dorm) that gives at least 40 psi and a flow rate of 7 gal/min

• Ferrocement tank • Volume of 5,000 L (6.5’

diameter, 5.5’ tall)• Cost = $400

Storage Tank to EqualizePressure & Flow Variations

Water System at DormWater Purification

• Filtration• CAWST bio-sand

filter• Cost of mold = $185• Cost per filter (not

including mold) = $20

• Disinfection

• Granular calcium hypochlorite

• Cost per pound= $2.00

Water System at DormHot Water System

• Solar Heating Panel• Copper pipe• Glass covered• Circulating Pump• Heats 20 gal (75

L) of water to 95ºF inabout 5 hours

• Wood Fired Boiler• Recommended a

manufactured unit

Rainwater & IrrigationWater for Community Crops

• Gutters• 4 plastic storage

tanks(1000 Liters)

• Irrigation to community fruit trees and vegetables

• Cost = $930

Hygiene ImprovementsPit Toilets

• One pit toilet per family

• Lightweight superstructure

• Concrete block pit lining

• 3 meters deep by 1.3 meters square

• Cost per latrine = $240

Hygiene ImprovementsEducation

• CAWST posters

• Educate children about healthy sanitary practices

• Easy to understand

• Pictorial

• Spanish and English

ImplementationJune 2010

• Phase I• Cost = $1,500

• Phase II• Cost = $2,500

• Phase III• Cost = $6,000

Building the Filter MoldSteel. Welding. Steel.

• Over 150 lbs of steel from GR Central Iron and Steel

• Finished on April 27

• Cost = $185

• Issue: Took longer than expected

Filter #1Failure

• Poured filter on May 4

• Problem: Interior mold stuck in filter

• Solution: Break filter and retry!

Filter #2More success, still a failure

• Changes made• Homemade concrete

mix – as design specified

• Less water• Pneumatic hammer• Ground all rough

edges• Lathered on the oil

• Mold didn’t stick

• Crack from mid-pour mix change

ConclusionsFinal Thoughts

• Difficulties we faced• Data acquisition

• What we learned• More than engineering• Design to be built

• What we would have done differently• Built the prototypes earlier and

experimented more

• Plans are in the works to implement the project

Acknowledgments Thank you!

• Tate Burckhardt, VP, Better Water Industries Inc.• Professors Leonard De Rooy, Robert Hoeksema,

Aubrey Sykes, & David Wunder, Calvin College• Phil Jasperse, Metals and Woodshop Technician,

Calvin College• Ryan Maness, Highways and Hedges Ministries• Breese Stam, Grand Rapids Engineering

Department• Richard Stam and Lorenzo Dominguez, Salud Para

Suchil• Dan VanderHeide, Project Engineer, Williams and

Works

Questions?

top related