Cummins Power - Insulating Materials Mentor: Robert Rossini Patrick Cleaver Justin Fernandez Ethan Taylor.

Cummins Power - Insulating Materials

Mentor: Robert Rossini

Patrick Cleaver

Justin Fernandez

Ethan Taylor

Cummins Inc.

Headquarters:

Columbus, IN Employees: 33,000+ worldwide Earnings: $11.4 billion (2006)

Business Units

Engine, Power Generation, Components Distribution

Cummins Power Generation

Products: Generators for RVs, Yachts, and

residential standby Emergency standby power

Stationary, mobile, open, and sound attenuated enclosures offered for all generator sets

Anatomy of a Generator SetTurbocharger Air Filtration

Control System

Alternator

Fan

Engine

Enclosures

Recessed doors

Exhaust Air Intake

Sound Insulation

Current Insulating Material

Mineral Wool In used because:

Cheap, operating temperature Disadvantages

Difficult to work with, Requires supporting material, Requires extra manufacturing

Needs/WantsNeeds Operation at high temperatures (900 °F), must not burn

or degrade Must not absorb water, must resist mold

Wants Higher thermal resistance (R > 4.3) Better acoustic dampening (STC > 10) Better workability

Self Supporting Material Fewer Processing steps

Product Design Specifications1. Thermal- Continuous operation at 900 °F- Acceptable surface burning, 5/5 or better (ASTM E-84)2. Sound- Sound Transfer Coefficient comparable to mineral wool (STC 10)3. Mechanical- Compressive strength greater than mineral wool is desired (>1.7 psi)4. Environmental- Must not adsorb water (<1 % by volume)- Must not allow for mold growth5. Workability- One step installation process- Reduction in manufacturing steps6. Cost- No more than 2x cost of mineral wool ($14.8/ft3)

Weighting Factors

Selection Criteria Weight

Thermal 0.2

Acoustic 0.3

Mechanical 0.05

Environmental 0.05

Workability 0.3

Cost 0.1

Selection Criteria Weight

Thermal 0.4

Acoustic 0.1

Mechanical 0.05

Environmental 0.05

Workability 0.3

Cost 0.1

Candidate MaterialsSound Proof Foam Acoustiblok®

Calcium Silicate Expanded Perlite

Selection MatrixNeed/Want Value Weighing Factor Mineral Wool Score Expanded Perlite Score Calcium Silicate Score

ThermalOperating Temperature Need 900 °F 0.14 1200 °F 10 1200 °F 10 1200 °F 10Surface Burning Need "5/0" 0.1 "5/0" 7 "0/0" 10 "0/0" 10Thermal Expansion Want <2.0 % 0.04 <1.0 % 10 <2.0 % 10 <2.0 % 10Thermal Resistance Want (hr·ft2·°F)/Btu 0.12 4.3 8 4.9 10 3.7 6

*/4 3.46 4 3.52SoundSound Attenuation Want STC 10 0.1 STC 10 5 STC 11 6 STC 8 4

*/1 0.5 0.6 0.4MechanicalCompressive Strength Want psi 0.025 1.7 psi 1 80 psi 8 100 psi 10Flexural Strength Want psi 0.025 - 1 50-60 psi 8 65 psi 10

*/0.5 0.05 0.4 0.5EnvironmentalWater Absorbtion Need <1 % vol 0.025 <1 % 10 <1 % 10 <1 % 10Mold Resistance Need Yes 0.025 Yes 10 Yes 10 Yes 10

*/0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5WorkabilityEase of Installation Want - 0.12 2 step 1 1 step 10 1 step 10Processing Want - 0.18 3 step 1 2 step 6 2 step 6

*/3 0.3 2.28 2.28

Cost Want $/ft3 0.1 14.8 10 16.3 9 17.8 8*/1 1 0.9 0.8

Total */10 5.76 8.28 7.5

Design Solution

For a 35kW level II enclosure:• 11 pieces are to be cut from received

board• Installed into walls/doors• Installed above generator and around

exhaust system

Insulation board dimensions

Cutting/Forming

Done with circular saws 57.5 feet of cutting per enclosure Ventilation is required to eliminate spread

of dust

Insulation of door panels

Insulation of exhaust area

Elimination of perforated steel

Exhaust box installation

Insulation block

Perforated steel

Small bolts

Thickness will remain the same

Thermal conductivity of expanded perlite:

.85 Btu in/hr ft2 °F Thermal conductivity of mineral wool:

1.06 Btu in/hr ft2 °F Same thickness will be used Thermal insulation will improve

Thermal conductivity

heat flow rate thickness

thermal conductivity area

*Assuming a heat flow of 3000 Btu/hr

∆T = 735 °F

• For mineral wool with k = 1.06 Btu in/hr ft2 °F

∆T = 590 °F

Further Testing

Acoustical testing Mechanical testing

Ability for material to withstand vibrations Impact testing

Regional Market Worldwide leader in auxiliary

generator sets for RVs, commercial vehicles and recreational marine applications.

Caterpillar and Volvo are the primary competitors

$2.42 billion in 2006 9.1 % increase

Potential Increase

Increase earnings due to new products and manufacturing efficiency gains

7-9% of sales Potential increase of $170-218 million

Capital Investment

Ventilation System: $75,000

Circular Saws (5): $5,000

Engineering Testing: $14,000

Total: $94,000

Variable Costs

Assumptions: Energy used for ventilation: $3,000 per

year Energy costs for operating saws: $540 per

year Blade costs $10 each 30% overhead

Variable Cost per Enclosure

Item Cost/EnclosureInsulating Material $178Perforated Steel $47Manufacturing Labor $605Cutting Labor $15Saw Operating $0.06Saw Blade Replacement $0.57Ventilation $0.34Subtotal $845.97Overhead $253.79Total $1,099.76

Breakeven Analysis II

235, $352500

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400,000

$1,600,000

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000# of Enclosures

Cost

Sales

Cost ComparisonItem Expanded Perlite Mineral Wool Cost Difference

Ventilation System $75,000 $0 -$75,000Circular Saws (5) $5,000 $0 -$5,000Engineering $14,000 $0 -$14,000Total $94,000 $0 -$94,000

Insulating Material $178 $160 -$18Perforated Steel $47 $140 $93Manufacturing Labor $605 $605 $0Cutting Labor $15 $0 -$15Saw Operating $0.06 $0 $0Saw Blade Replacement $0.29 $0 $0Ventilation $0.34 $0 $0Subtotal $845.69 $905.00 $59Overhead $253.71 $271.50 $18Total $1,099.40 $1,176.50 $77

Variable Costs

Capital Costs

Breakeven Analysis I

-$200,000

-$100,000

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Savi

ngs

Units Sold

Project Timeline

Going Forward

Potential Material Identified Potential Cost savings Mock-up Enclosure Materials Testing