Group 043-02: Improving electrospinning efficiency

This week, we have made a some progress in writing the report. We had a meeting on Wednesday, 5/30, to discuss what tasks each one of use should be completing. However, there was a slight set back, because we were unsure of what template to follow. We have started writing in one format, and plan on adjusting the information to whatever template our lab instructor would prefer.

The following parts were assigned to the following people, and a draft will be posted on a static page either tomorrow after our meeting, or this weekend:

This week, has been yet another successful week as far as research is concerned. We are able to finally wrap up this phase of our project after this week, and begin starting the final report!

This week, Peter has developed a preliminary decision matrix, shown in Table 1, that shows the pros and cons to the proposed electrospinning apparatus versus other company's apparatuses. Although it does not include all of the possible proposed designs, it does show the advantages of the "best" model over the competitors. The best possible total score is 25, and the worst possible score is 0. The proposed model got a 21/25, while the closest competitor received only a 15/25. This shows how innovative the proposed model is in comparison to other companies' models.

This week a lot of progress was made, which helped make up for last week's delay. Peter was able to contact a major electrospinning apparatus manufacturing company, called NanoFMG. They were contacted, so that our group could see the prices of other electrospinning apparatuses that are on the market. We want our design to, not only better in terms safety of safety and efficiency, but also be cost effective. The prices are listed in Table 1, which was sent to us by NanoFMG.  The price of the cheapest machine they sell that would be suited to our purposes (the Ne200) around $25,000 [1]. 
The total projected expenses for our project should significantly less than prices listed in Figure 1. 

Table 1: This figure represents the costs of different electrospinning apparatuses that the company NanoFMG sells. It is a good indicator of what the prices of other machines on the market are [1].

Kenny was also able to start the beginnings of his part of the final project, which is designing and creating a CAD model of the electrospinning device we want to make for this project. Though it the drawling is still somewhat in it's infancy, it certainly gives a concrete of ida of where we are headed and what we want the machine to roughly look like. This portion of the project is the only physical manifestation of the research and hard work everyone has put into this project, so it should represent everything we have learned through this design process. A picture of the design at this stage is inlaced under Figure 1. 

Figure 1: This picture shows the beginnings of the CAD model for the electrospinning apparatus design that is being worked on further. It gives a rough idea of where of what we are thinking right now and a projection of how we want the final product to work.

The other members of our group have also been working long and hard to find out more information on patents and other important information about the how to go about the rest of our design. Phu and I are looking up more patent information, with the help of Jay Bhatt. Phu is still gathering more information as of right now, and after our meeting tomorrow we should be able to posy some of his findings online. 

[1] NanoFMG. (2012, May 6). Pricing for the NanoSpinner 24 [Web]. 

This week's progress has been delayed for the time being based on unforeseen circumstances. Specifically, 3 members of the group were unable to work on the project owing to the fact that their building was flooded and they were forced to move from it. The progress that has not been made this week will be made up in the coming weeks. We are still continuing our research as best we can and trying to make as much tangible success as possible. Phu has emailed Jay Bhatt, the Engineering librarian asking for details electrospinning. Kenny is still currently working on the CAD model of the electrospinning apparatus we want to design. Peter will contact the dehumidifier companies within in the coming days. We will regroup tomorrow morning, 5/4, at 9AM and discuss how we will make up for the lost time.

The only updates on the research performed this week come from Sam, who looked up a variety of safety regulations for fume hoods. This research will help us further our design plan and understand how we want to connect the apparatus to a fume hood. The safety manuals are available through these links:

http://web.princeton.edu/sites/ehs/labsafetymanual/sec7g.htm


http://euverc.colostate.edu/safetytests/High_Voltage_Safety_Manual.pdf


http://www.spellmanhv.com/Technical-Resources/Articles/~/media/Files/Technical-Resources/Articles/IEEE_Recommended_Practices.ashx

Today, April 27th, in lab, our group discussed the research each of us individually found. Peter found more information about dehumidifier and will continue his research this week. We still need to discuss the high voltage power source after and the safety regulations concerning them. However, the tasks for this week is as follows:

• Phu - Research Patents 
• Kenny - Beginning modeling design
• Peter - Contacting companies about dehumidifier safety regulations
• Katie - Compiling all the research and monitoring blog
• Sam - Research safety information on fume hoods

Last week, on April 20th, our group discussed the design proposal that was posted online and began to think about the safety precautions that should be addressed in our design. One of our important design goals listed was the new electrospinning apparatus' safety features. Electrospinning can be a dangerous process, due to the toxic solvents, sharp needle, and high voltage power source involved in spinning nanofibers. Part of our initiatives for this week was to research the different safety features and regulations on different parts of the new design. The following research tasks were assigned to the specified group members:

On April 16th 2012, our group had a meeting to discuss our progress and the research each one of us had found. We discussed the background information and different companies that have developed electrospinning technologies. We also discussed and updated the design we wish to include in our design proposal. We also discussed and confirmed it is important to reduce the number of variables that can affect the electrospinning process.