P18485: Biochar Concrete Roofing Tile Manufacturing and Complete Roof System
/public/

Customer Handoff & Final Project Documentation

Table of Contents

Team Vision for Final Demo and Handoff

Phase Objectives:

In this phase the team would like to accomplish these tasks:

Individual tasks:

In this phase, the team has divided these goals into these themes and assignments:

Phase Updates

Pulse of the Project Being the last project phase, these objectives have been completed thus far and will be talked about.

Imagine RIT

Full Imagine RIT Display

Full Imagine RIT Display

Team Members at Imagine RIT

Team Members at Imagine RIT

Test Results Summary

Test Results Summary Table

Test Results Summary Table

Strength Test

Description

The strength test was conducted in the Student Life Center by stacking weights onto the tile in 5 lb increments until failure. Two planks of wood were used to simulate the roof supports. The weights were stacked on top of a plexiglass sheet supported by a pair of shoes, in order to simulate the surface area and weight distribution of a person standing on the roof.

Test Results

Strength Testing With 250 lbs

Strength Testing With 250 lbs

The tile broke at 340 lbs, almost 100 over the ideal engineering requirement of 250 lbs.

Solar Heat Gain

Description

Both test roofs were placed outside in direct sunlight for 2 hours. The test took place on April 27th, 2018. The temperature on the inside surface of each roof was recorded every minute using an Onset HOBO External Temp/RH Logger. The sensors were switched from one roof to the other after one hour to ensure that they were providing accurate readings.

Test Results

Solar Heat Gain Test Results

Solar Heat Gain Test Results

 Solar Gain Temperature Difference

Solar Gain Temperature Difference

The point-by-point data can be found here.

Summary

The inside surface of the tile roof was on average 10 degrees Fahrenheit cooler than the metal roof. The metal roof also changed temperature more rapidly than the tile roof. The switching of the sensors from one roof to the other confirms that each sensor was showing an accurate reading. It should also be noted that at around the 82-85 minute mark and 100-101 minute mark the sensor became detached from the tile roof. This is the reason for the missing data points in the “Solar Gain Temperature Difference” graph.

Loudness Test

Description

The test was completed using a typical garden hose and a variable nozzle. The first setting used was the Shower setting. This setting is similar to light but steady rain. The second setting used was the Stream setting. This setting consisted of a single stream of water at a higher pressure than the Shower setting. We used this setting to simulate heavy rainfall.

Test Results

Loudness Test Results

Loudness Test Results

The point-by-point data can be found here.

Summary

Average Loudness

Average Loudness

Looking at the results in the table above, it can be show that the tile roof does a better job at soundproofing than the metal roof. Not only is the tile roof quieter in both simulated situations, the difference between the shower and the stream was roughly 2 decibels compared to a 14 decibel difference with the metal roof.

Waterproof Test

Description

The waterproof test was designed to test the water resistance of the tiles when assembled together on the roof. This test was conducted by assembling a test roof with 4 normal tiles and 2 top tiles. We sprayed the tiles for one minute with a hose nozzle on the "shower" setting to replicate rainfall. We wrapped the sides and bottom of the roof in plastic sheets, and lined the bottom with dry paper towels in order to observed any water that dripped through the roof.
Test Roofs for Waterproof Test

Test Roofs for Waterproof Test

Test Results

Waterproof Test Results

Waterproof Test Results

Based on our test results, the tile overlap method was successful in preventing water from entering the roof. We did observe drops of water that had landed on the paper towels; however, these drops were attributed to water coming in either from the sides of the roof or from water dripping onto the beam at the front of the roof.

Water Durability Test

Description

The water durability test was conducted in order to determine the ability of an individual tile to withstand constant water flow. This test was conducted by putting a tile in a sink and letting a stream of water run over it continuously for 4 hours. The water flow rate was about 67 mL/sec. After 4 hours, the tile was inspected for signs of water penetration.

Test Results

Water Durability Test Results

Water Durability Test Results

The inspection of the tile showed a darkened patch on the underside of the tile, near the area where the water flow was concentrated. However, it is difficult to draw conclusions from this test for the following reasons: 1. The tile was not fully cured, which could have led to a greater tendency for the tile to absorb water. It is possible that a fully cured tile would not show the same results. 2. While the tile does appear to absorb water, we were unable to observe an water actually dripping from the darkened spot. It is unclear whether the tile would actually let water pass through, or simply absorb the water to a certain capacity. 3. The tile surface was not perfectly smooth and had some bubbles, which may have contributed to the tile absorbing water. It is possible that removing all bubbles from the top surface would prevent this from happening.

Wind Lift Force Test

Description

The wind lift force test was designed to determine whether hurricane winds could detach a tile from the roof. Based on ASTM standards, a class 1 hurricane has wind speeds of 74 mph, while a class 2 hurricane has wind speeds of up to 110 mph. Using the formula for force of a fluid on a flat stationary plate
Wind Force Equation

Wind Force Equation

We calculated that the maximum force that could be imparted by these winds on a tile is 36 lbf for class 1, and 81 lbf for class 2. Therefore, if the tile could resist being pulled off the roof at over 81 pounds of force, it would meet the ideal criteria. The test was conducted by attaching a tile to the roof, attaching a clamp to the tile, and pulling upwards on the clamp with a hanging scale until the tile was removed. The hanging scale recorded the maximum load. This test was done with only one wire attached to the roof, with the clamp attached near this point, and the max load to remove it was doubled to estimate the force required to remove both wires.

Test Results

The results of this test showed it took 75 lbf to remove one wire, meaning it would take 150 lbf to remove the tile entirely. This is well above the ideal criteria of 81 lbf.

Product Overview

Optimal Mix

For our concrete mix, we continued to use the ratio of 35% Pumice, 35% Sand, and 30% Cement by volume. We ordered 1/8th Fines pumice from Hess Pumice. When we poured our first tiles, we used a mix buffer of 1.35, as this ratio had worked for us when we poured our concrete samples. This rounded up to a recipe of

However, during the process of pouring tiles, we discovered that we needed a larger buffer. We settled on a ratio of

We have not accounted for why the buffer amount changed for the tiles vs. the concrete samples.

Final Tile Designs

Final Tile Designs

Final Tile Designs

Mold Creation

Normal Tile Mold

To create the normal tile mold, we took the following steps:
  1. Used the CNC router in The Construct to machine a large foam mold for plaster
  2. Lined the foam mold with tape in order to waterproof it
  3. Mixed and poured plaster into the foam mold to create a cast
  4. Allowed the plaster cast to cure and removed it from the mold
  5. Drilled holes in the plaster cast to allow for airflow
  6. Vacuum formed ABS sheet over plaster cast
Machined Foam Mold

Machined Foam Mold

Preparing to Vacuum Form Cast

Preparing to Vacuum Form Cast

In the process of creating our first mold, the plaster cast was damaged and made unusable. To create our next two molds, we made a new cast out of concrete, this time placing nails in the foam mold to make air holes.

We attached wooden frames to the finished molds to allow them to stack.

Finished Tile Mold

Finished Tile Mold

Stacked Tile Molds

Stacked Tile Molds

Top Tile Mold

Top Tile Creo Model

Top Tile Creo Model

Top Tile Mold 3D Model and Sheet Metal Drawing
Finished Top Tile Mold

Finished Top Tile Mold

Finished Tiles

PICTURES OF FINISHED TILES

Problems With Finished Tiles

Final Process Map

Below is the final process map to be used a reference for any future business owners.
Final Process Map

Final Process Map

Facility Layout

Facility Layout

Facility Layout

The facility layout is designed so the flow of the product is in a U shaped flow limiting the travel distance through the facility. The facility is numbered in the order the product will flow from start to finish. Tasks that must be under a roof are labeled with a dash through their center (6 total, numbers 3, 6. 7, 8, 9, & 16). The overall dimensions for the facility are 3000 square feet, or a 50x60 foot space. Note this is just a recommendation for how to layout the facility.

Space Requirements

Space_Requirements

Space_Requirements

From a spacial analysis the space requirements for each tasks was determined. Finished inventory has the amount of space to store & hold the production of 3 months worth of tiles (length of the rainy season in Nicaragua). The final suggestion was for a 3000 square foot facility that is 50x60 feet. Note that the amount of space needed is less than 1500 feet, but for space for workers to move between tasks and safely transport tiles through system additional space (3-1/2 feet) were spaced between all tasks.

Manufacturing BOM

Manufacturing_BOM

Manufacturing_BOM

The Manufacturing BOM includes everything for the manufacturing setup costs except for the costs of utilities (electricity and water), the plastic bottle stringer, and building cost. These numbers were found by estimating the number of tools needed for each task and then researching costs using real numbers found online. As you can see the largest costs would be the concrete mixer and the pumice grinder. The pumice grinder must be able to crush the pumice to the desired size to add to the mix and be able to crush enough pumice to meet the weekly demand level.

Task Breakdown

Task_Breakdown

Task_Breakdown

The task breakdown numbers were collected from studying the EcoSure video of tile creation and from real life experience. A scaling factor (for larger size of tile, more concrete to pour) as well as an error adjustment factor of 33% were used to come up with realistic time estimations for specific tasks in the build process. One of the longest times for the process is mixing the concrete (which was assumed to be done by wheelbarrow and shovel, but hoped to be actually completed by a mixer) is 20 minutes based on our groups experience with mixing the materials necessary for 1 tile creation. The total time to create 21 tiles a day comes out to be roughly 4 hours and 50 minutes. This does not include subtasks such as grinding pumice, shredding plastic, or cutting wire. It is likely that part time workers would come in on one day to help the business achieve the necessary raw material levels needed to produce the weekly demand.

Standard Work

Designed

Cleaning of molds: After tiles are taken out of molds, use a cloth to wipe down remaining concrete from molds

Cleaning of metal frame: After wax paper with tile is moved onto the mold to form, wipe down the metal frame to remove any remaining concrete with a cloth

Keeping track of inventory: Using colored tape outline the areas in the inventory for which a batch (21 tiles) can be stacked within. Use a different color for each day the tiles must be cured in the inventory. Whenever a batch is placed in inventory the date is recorded, the inventory name, the batch number, and the color code the batch was placed within. Using a different color diagonal to create different color patterns (I.E. Red tape with blue slash through) so that only a limited amount of colored tape needs to be purchased do make each batch area unique. This data will be added to a master set that keeps track of all inventory. Batch numbering allows for tracking of defected parts.

Move tiles to next inventory/cure area:' Check the board/data tracker to determine which batches of tiles need to be moved forward in inventory. Gather a rolling cart. Go to the inventory and place tiles onto the cart. Move rolling cart with tiles to next inventory. Place the batch in the new inventory and mark the date which moved and the color of the batch. Each day this will be done first thing in the morning to have available molds for production.

Undesigned

Task Breakdown

Costs Discussion

This section reviews the final costs of the roof. Using data collected by the team, market research, and stakeholder information, the Saunder’s team (Commercializing Pumice Roof Tile in Nicaragua) was able to estimate the production cost of a tile to be $1.69 USD[5]. This cost was driven by material costs, material percentages per tile, and a number of logistical, overhead and labor costs.
Cost Comparison of Concrete vs Zinc Roof

Cost Comparison of Concrete vs Zinc Roof

Other than the tile costs, each roof requires a number of costs that are common to all roofs. These “base rates” were factored into both roof costs. Costs that were unique to each roof were then added to compare capital costs (Above). The concrete tile roof was found to have a capital cost of $844, more than $300 higher than the zinc roof. The cost of the roof only taking into account tile cost is $470.21. The concrete roof requires eight more C-beams, with a total cost for those being $108 more than the Zinc roof. For the cost comparison, the cost of the tiles was considered $1.98, a 117% inflation, to allow any future business to make a profit above the $1.69 production cost per tile.

Risk and Problem Tracking

Below is the risk assessment for this phase.
Risk Assessment

Risk Assessment

Below is our problem tracking table. This tool is useful in conquering some of the obstacles in an organized manner. Note that not all problems have been solved yet.

Problem Tracking

Problem Tracking

Plans for Wrap-up

Overall Project Conclusions

The team concludes the following items after the conclusion of the project:

Hand Off

This is a list of items that will be handed off to the customer.

Recommendations for future teams

Final Project Documentation

Technical Paper

Final Poster

All Product Drawings

All CAD Files for House Assembly

All Other CAD Files

Standard Operating Procedure


Home | Planning & Execution | Imagine RIT

Problem Definition | Systems Design | Preliminary Detailed Design | Detailed Design

Build & Test Prep | Subsystem Build & Test | Integrated System Build & Test | Customer Handoff & Final Project Documentation