Design and Analysis of a Bottle Washer for Reusable Bottles

Design and Analysis of a Washer for Reusable Bottles
Page 1
Final Report – Masters Capstone DesignProject
April 22, 2015, Miami, Florida, USA
DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF A WASHER FOR REUSABLE BOTTLES
Akpejiori Ethasor
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Miami
Coral Gables, Florida, USA
Diaz Daniel
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Miami
Coral Gables, Florida, USA
ABSTRACT
A project was defined to create a mechanism to wash
reusable squeeze bottles. Using a case study was done
on the University of Miami their use of disposable
bottles is to be eliminated due to cost and pollution of
the environment by dumping the plastic waste. The
school saves about $540 to $680 by using reusable
bottle instead of the disposable ones. Different
designs for a prototype were done until a final
prototype was chosen due to favorability in cost, and
ease of manufacturability. To meet the FDA standard
for cleaning a bottle, the food and public health
standards were researched and met, using pressurized
water at a temperature greater than 66oC. Calculations
were made for the flow rate through the mechanism to
optimize the flow through the channels of the washers
in the assembly. A drainage size had to be calculated
to eliminate flooding of the mechanism during its
operation. 8 drain holes of 0.75” diameter were used
to eliminate the flooding problem. The prototype
worked perfectly well in achieving the goal of
cleaning Gatorade bottles it specifically is designed
for. The mechanism can be used in cleaning other
types of hollow kitchenware with a dimensional
reevaluation to fit whatever it is designed to wash.
The design also pushes the University positively
towards a green status.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Abstract 1
2. Introduction 2
2.1 Statement of the project 2
2.2 Literature Review and
Background 2
3. Preliminary Considerations and

Page 2
Assumptions 3
3.1 Timeline 3
3.2 Constraints 3
3.3 Assumptions Made Along
with Rationale 5
4. Design Methodology 5
4.1 Other Possible Designs 5
4.2 Why the Chosen Design is
the Most Appropriate 7
5. Design and Analysis 7
5.1 Interpretation of Results 7
5.2 Error Analysis 8
6. Steps Towards the Prototype
12
6.1 Cost Analysis 9
6.2 Assembly, Sub-Assembly,
And Parts-Drawing 9
6.3. Discussion on how the
Prototype is Done 11
7. Conclusions 13
7.1 Discussions 13
7.2 Lessons Learned 14
7.3 Suggestions for
Improvements 15
8. References 15
9. Appendices 15
9.1 Data 15
9.2 Material 18
INTRODUCTION
In the presentation of this report, the modeling of a
reusable bottle washer will be explained. Each
component is modeled, assembled, and analyzed
using Pro-Engineer Wildfire. The design process is
explained for the production of the prototype. The
final prototype dimensions and workings is also
explained. The FDA food code is research to obtain
information on properly cleaning a Gatorade squeeze
bottle. Upon obtaining the parts for the final
prototype, the parts are machined, the holes and
drilled to the designed dimensions for the exit of the
fluid in the spry, and the assembly is welded togethter
to obtain the working prototype.
The prototype is then tested and observed to any
faults or failures. Drain holes are made on the
prototype to eliminate flooding of the mechanism
while in operation. The flow through the mechanism
is improved by making fillet on the entrance into the
outer washer. The final prototype is obtained in T6-
6061 aluminum and will be viable in meeting the
green status due to the elimination of plastic waste
into the environment.
4.1. STATEMENT AND BACKGROUND OF THE
PROJECT
The goal of this project is to model and create a
mechanism that can efficiently clean reusable bottles
en masse. The bottle specification for this design is a
32oz reusable Gatorade squeeze bottle. The idea for
this project originated from observing a typical
University of Miami football practice session. During
every break and rehydration period, the players drank
Gatorade from 12oz disposable plastic bottles instead
of from available 32oz squeeze bottles. The Athletic
training staff employed to administer the Gatorade to
the players explain that the problem with using the

Page 3
squeeze bottles is the rigorous and time consuming
process it takes to clean them after every practice. As
a result, it became the scope of this project to model
and create such a device that could assist the
University of Miami athletic program in cleaning
their reusable bottles after football practices and
competitions, and take a significant step in efforts of
achieving a ‘Green’ status for the University.
Fig.1 Reusable Gatorade bottles set out to be washed
As stated, this mechanism will assist athletic trainers
to rapidly clean these 8in deep hollow bottles without
the need for industrial dish-washers. Also, by creating
this mechanism, we eliminate the waste and cost
associated with the consumption of commercially
produced 12oz Gatorade disposable bottles. Wastes
eliminated include both plastic wastes to the
environment (landfills, bodies of water), and also
waste of space and energy in storing these packs of
12oz Gatorade bottles.
Aside from making a device available for the athletic
department to clean their 32oz squeeze bottles, with
further improvements to its design and physical
structure we can apply the utilization of this
mechanism for culinary practices, and home/kitchen
appliances.
PRELIMINARY
CONSIDERATIONS/APPLICATIONS
3.1. TIMELINE
Prior to embarking on this project, a timeline was set
for its completion. Adhering to this timeline was a
priority but due to unforeseen circumstances
adjustments were made. A Gannt chart for this
timeline was created:
Fig.2 Chart Showing the Timeline of the Project
3.2. CONSTRAINTS
Economic Impact: Using the University of Miami
football team as a case study, 40 - 50 cases of
Gatorade are used in a given football practice. Each
case contains 24 120z disposable plastic bottles,
costing $15 a case. A reusable squeeze bottle is
capable of holding 32oz in volume of liquid contents.
For the utilization of the squeeze bottles, it was
assumed that the athletic department would purchase
and use pre-mixed Gatorade powder to produce their
own Gatorade for practice and competition. It costs
about $75 for a case of 14 Gatorade pre-mixed
powders. 1½ packets is required to be mix into 10
gallons of water for the equivalent of an 8oz
disposable Gatorable bottle. Making the cost
calculation, the ability to wash and utilize these
squeeze bottles will save the athletic department
about $540 to $680 per football practice.

Page 4
Fig.3 10-gallon storages for mixed Gatorade
Fig.4 Pre mixed Gatorade powders
Environmental Impact: Eliminating the use of
disposable bottles will eliminate dumping of plastic
wastes to the environment. The pollution of the
oceans, landfills, and the effect of contamination of
wildlife with plastic would be significantly reduced.
Fig.5 12oz unused cases of disposable Gatorade
bottles
Manufacturability: The final working prototype was
designed for ease of manufacturability. Upon
obtaining the proposed final CAD design of the
prototype, T6-6061 aluminum materials were bought
with the closest dimensions to the final design. These
parts were then cut, machined, and welded together to
obtain a prototype nearly identical to the CAD
designed prototype. The final dimensions of the holes
were selected with considerations to standard drill
diameters.
Standard pipefitting, plugs, caps, and hoses were used
in the configuration of the prototype. These were
obtained from local hardware stores, and fitted to the
assembly. The manufacturing process of the final
prototype took a week of consistent machining,
drilling, and welding respectively.
Health and Safety:
The use of this mechanism will pose little or no
chance of bodily harm or injury to the user. With the
major constraint of the project being the breach of
health and safety standards, the material selection had
to be no-porous material with ease of cleaning.
Aluminum was the most viable material available for

Page 5
these criteria. It presented little to no health risk and
the cleanliness of the squeeze bottles would be
determined by codes and standards set aside by the
FDA (Food and Drug Administration).
In order to remove any residue (sugars, dyes,…) the
tested bottle was put through a cycle of wash in the
washer and then theoretically completely submerged
in a tank of hot water maintained at a temperature of
at least 77ᵒ C (171ᵒ F) for at least 30 seconds. Based
on our design, falling under the category of “Manual
Warewashing Equipment”, according to FDA food
code 2013 this would be the appropriate measure for
using hot water as a method of sanitation. The hot
bath tub is used strictly as a means for sanitation and
all other residue that should be cleaned off the surface
of the bottle is done so by the bottle washer. The
section out of the FDA food code handbook may be
found in the next section.
Codes and Standards: We adhered strictly to the
Codes and Standards set by the FDA in cleaning
Kitchen Utensils and Food Handling Equipment. The
clauses obtained from the “FDA Food Code 2009:
Chapter 4 - Equipment, Utensils, and Linens” and
from the “Food Code U.S. Public Health Service
2013 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service” were
strictly adhered to, and are provided below:
4-101.11 Characteristics.
Materials that are used in the construction
of UTENSILS and FOOD-CONTACT SURFACES OF
EQUIPMENT may not allow the migration of
deleterious substances or impart colors, odors, or
tastes to FOOD and under normal use conditions shall
be:
 (A) Safe;
 (B) Durable, CORROSION-RESISTANT, and
nonabsorbent;
 (C) Sufficient in weight and thickness to withstand
repeated WAREWASHING;
 (D) Finished to have a SMOOTH, EASILY
CLEANABLE surface; and
 (E) Resistant to pitting, chipping, crazing,
scratching, scoring, distortion, and decomposition.
4-501.111 Manual ware washing Equipment, Hot
Water Sanitization Temperatures.
If immersion in hot water is used for SANITIZING in
a manual operation, the temperature of the water shall
be maintained at 77o C (171o F) or above. P 134 4-
3.3. ASSUMPTIONS
Several assumptions were made prior to the start of
the design process for the working prototype. The
prototype was tested with the threshold of these
assumptions:
1. A pressurized flow of water at the washing
temperature will be used to provide a flow rate
of water into the washing equipment.
2. An inlet valve will be used to control the fluid
flow into the mechanism at any given instant.
3. Liquid solutions used as the cleaning fluid,
running through the mechanism are FDA
health standard approved for sanitization.
4. Techniques for cleanliness are to be designed
to meet the parameters set by FDA food codes.
DESIGN METHODOLOGY
4.1. OTHER POSSIBLE DESIGNS
Prior to embarking on the project, various designs
were sought out for the mechanism. First, dimensions
for a standard 32oz Gatorade squeeze bottle were
obtained from the training room of the University of
Miami athletic department. Every design constraint

Page 6
and dimension was made to the dimensions of the
bottle. Dimensions for the bottle washer are given
below:
 Length – 9.0625in
 Diameter – 3.120in
 Neck – 2.455in
 Inner Diameter – 2.120in
Many ideas for the design of a bottle washing
mechanism were thought out and considered. Most of
them were struck out due their infeasibility, as one of
the goals was to create a totally mechanical
mechanism and eliminate any use of electricity on the
working prototype. This decision was made to
eliminate any risk of electrocution, as the working
fluid (water) has a high conductance.
Other proposed designs considered were seen as too
expensive to achieve a cheap financial budget. One of
the fore-proposed designs was one that contained
multiple divided chambers across the length of the
washing cylinder, each having oscillatory motions
relative to the axis of the cylinder. The motion of each
chamber was to have the same oscillatory frequency
but move opposite to the preceding or proceeding
chamber. This design proved to be complex, as the
means of producing an opposing oscillatory motion
for each chamber while obtaining a fluid flow though
all chambers was not feasible.
Another proposed design included a cylindrical
washer with helical profiles for divided chambers but
the design did not pose much of a challenge and
problems did not differ much from that obtained with
the divided oscillating chambers. Another design
proposed involved the ability to wash both the interior
and exterior of the bottle by a means of rotational
motion. To translate a rotational motion of the internal
cylinder produced by thrust obtained from the exiting
fluid though the orifices of the inner chamber (inner
washer), producing a torque to create a rotational
motion of the inner washer about its axis, to an outer
chamber (outer washer) a cam-follower system,
coupled with a crank slider was the best option
partially due to its simplicity, and mostly due to its
feasibility for the design idea. The design also had a
base connection, responsible for splitting the flow to
the outer and inner washer, which housed the inlet
connection.
This design idea was chosen after carefully studying
the mechanics and workings of an electric toothbrush,
a pressure washer, and a lawn sprinkler system. In
comparison to initial designs, adding bristles to the
outer washer would create complexities to the design,
and would pose problems with replacements and
cleanliness. It was decided that spray techniques in
washing both the inside and outside of the bottle
would be the best option. Inverting the bottle during
the spray-washing process would also assist in fluid
drainage.
The prototype was developed and is shown below:
Fig 6. 3-D model of initial prototype

Page 7
Fig 7. Final Model of Initial Prototype
Due to the immense cost of having this design made,
a full-scale model of this prototype could not be
obtained. In order for the design to be made the
original was scaled down by 50% which threw off all
the flow rate and dimension calculations that had
been done earlier. While testing this initial prototype,
it was concluded that the inner washer could not
generate enough force to drive the outer washer in an
oscillatory motion through the cam-follower-crank
system. This design also did not pass for
manufacturability, as it could only be made in 3-D
print, which is a virtually expensive means for
creating a product and any leading competitor could
undercut the design’s cost by designing something
simpler. The prototype was also created in a less-
dense ABS plastic with faults in leaking and does not
meet the FDA food code for handling manually
warewashing food and beverages.
Despite not obtaining the final prototype from the
previous design ideas, these prior designs paved way
for the final design and prototype.
4.2. WHY THE CHOSEN DESIGN IS THE MOST
APPROPRIATE
The final design was chosen mostly in part to the
working failures of the initial prototype, cost, and
lessons learned in manufacturability. Referring back
to the failures of the previous prototype, the assembly
of the mechanical system and nozzles created on the
inner washer for rotational motion were eliminated.
The use of ABS plastic was eliminated and replaced
with aluminum. The base connection was eliminated
and holes were made directly on the bottom plate for
pipefittings.
The final design was exponentially less expensive,
much simpler, more effective, projected less wear and
tear in the long run due to the elimination of moving
parts, and simplified the design and design process.
The new prototype also passed the non-porous and
non-adhesive criteria for a sanitation equipment
standard set by the FDA by using an aluminum
material.
DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
5.1. INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
In testing the prototype, various calculations had to be
made. The total inlet (0.4418ft2) and outlet area of the
fluid in each washer (0.1584ft^2 and 0.4224ft^2 for
the inner and outer washer respectively) was
calculated. The flow rate of water (outer washer exit
flow rate: 0.0232ft3/s, inner washer exit flow rate:
0.0106ft3/s, assembly exit flow rate: 0.0300ft3/s, and
assembly flow rate with bottle: 0.0307ft3/s) to operate
the mechanism was obtained by measuring the time it
took the fluid to fill up an empty bucket of known
volume (5 US gallons: 0.6684ft3). This was done for a
total of 15 times to obtain an accurate value for the
volumetric flow rate. The total inlet area and total
outlet area (77 total holes) were obtained. The
pressure of 60psi and temperature of 143OF of the hot
water outlet was measured. These obtained values
were used in calculating the velocity of the inlet and
outlet.

Page 8
To solve the problem with drainage, the total flow
rate (0.0338ft3/s) of the outlet orifices were
calculated. This was set as the flow rate of the
drainage. To minimize flooding a flow rate greater
than the inlet flow rate is picked. A flow rate of
0.05ft3/s is picked as the flow rate of the drainage
outlet. The total drain outlet area is then obtained
using the flow continuity equation:
A1V1 = A2V2
Using this equation, for a safe value of the outlet flow
rate of 0.05ft3/s, and a drainage inlet area of 0.8642ft2,
the value of the drainage outlet area (0.5848ft2) is
obtained. This area is divided into 8 parts to obtain
the minimum diameter of each hole. The calculated
value of the minimum diameter of the drainage hole is
0.3051in. a safety value of 0.75” diameter is used for
the drainage holes to nullify any fluctuations in the
increase in pressure or flow rate through the
assembly.
5.2. ERROR ANALYSIS
To calculate percent error of the volumetric flowrate
and average outlet velocity, a theoretical and actual
value of each is required. Those values would then be
plugged into the equation,
‖ 𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 − 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙‖
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙
∗ 100 = % 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟
to obtain a percent error.
The theoretical values were calculated using a
combination of the continuity equation along with the
measured flowrate of the inlets and areas of the
outlets:
Q1 = Q2 = 0.0338ft3/s = A2V2
= (0.5848ft2)* V2
V2 = 0.0578 ft/sec = 0.0176 m/s
The actual values that were measured for the flowrate
and average velocity of the water through the outlet of
the washer were:
Q2 = 0.0307 ft3/s (mean of measured flowrates)
Q2 = 0.0307 ft3/s = A2V2
= (0.5848ft2)* V2
V2 = 0.0525 ft/s = 0.0160 m/s
Therefore for the flowrate of the bottle washer, there
was an error of,
‖0.0338 − 0.0307‖
0.0307
∗ 100 = 10.1% 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟
For the average velocity of the outlet flow, there was
an error of,
‖0.0176 − 0.0160‖
0.0160
∗ 100 = 10.1% 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟
With such a small error in the volumetric flowrate and
average velocity of the fluid, we can assume there is a
change in energy within the system.
5.3. OPTIMIZATION OF DESIGN AND
SELECTION OF FINAL DESIGN PARAMETERS
Given the fact that there was an error of about 10% of
the resulting flow rate and fluid velocity tested, some
things may be said about further optimization to the
design of the bottle washer.
Since due to the restriction of the design having to be
able to be manufactured en masse, that meant that the
design had to me be limited in the amount of
rounding to allow for the most optimal fluid flow
through the bottle washer. Flow through the chamber
of the outer washer is currently not as uniform
throughout as it ideally was intended to be. Given
these restrictions, adding more inlets for the outer
washer would help improve the volumetric flow rate
throughout.

Page 9
That of course would cost more in labor and materials
seeing as the price in adapters and connecting parts
would double. However, seeing as the error was only
10%, further optimizing the design would not be
necessary for the results obtained. Optimizing would
only cost more and possible competitors would
simply go with the simpler design to undercut the
price.
STEPS TOWARDS THE PROTOTYPE
6.1. COSTANALYSIS
Prototyping the initial design took the brunt of the
cost of the entire project. Despite obtaining a scaled
down model of high grade ABS material with low
density, the total cost of 3-D printing the half scaled
model of the prototype with a discounted price, and
obtaining pipe and fitting amounted to about $1000.
For the final prototype, a 1/8” aluminum plate and a
½” aluminum plate both with dimensions of 10X10,
an 8” OD rod, a 6065”ID rod, and a 0.824” ID rod
was purchased; all with a length of 12”. The total cost
of these material and all other unused aluminum parts
cost $135.32. The machining, drilling, and welding,
of the prototype was done with assistance from a
faculty member of the University.
6.2. ASSEMBLY, SUB-ASSEMBLY, AND PARTS
DRAWING
In modeling the parts for the final prototype, Pro-
Engineer Wildfire was used to create a CAD drawing
and analyze the placements and feasibility of the
elements in the parts. As stated earlier, each part was
created with strict consideration to the dimensions of
the 32oz Gatorade squeeze bottle. After obtaining the
aluminum materials with standard dimensions
(dimensions closest to the proposed sketches), the 2-
D sketch was updated to account for the materials
obtained.
The sketch and detailed explanation of each of the
parts is shown below:
The Inner Washer
The inner washer, the most important part of the
design, is tasked with washing the inner part of the
bottle. The inner washer stands at 10.5”, welded to
the plate at 8” from the top to the top of the plate. The
ID of the inner washer is 0.824” with a thickness of
0.113” (standard ¾ pipe). Three holes of diameter
0.098” are drilled horizontally across the curved
surface of the cylinder. This horizontal layer of holes
is then patterned for 6 vertical layers, 1” apart. The
top of the inner washer is then threaded to fit a brass
cap on to be closed off. Holes of the same diameter
are drilled 30o to the horizontal on the edge of the
brass cap. The purpose of drilling the hole at this
angle is to enable the mechanism in washing the
internal edges of the bottle. The bottom end of the
inner washer is also threaded to fit a pipe fit on for
connection to the hose. The sketch of the inner
washer is shown below:
Fig 8. 2-D Front Orientation of Inner Washer

Page 10
Outer Washer
The outer washer is responsible for washing the outer
surface of the bottle. The dimensions of the outer
washer were carefully selected for feasibility reason
in fitting a standard human hand greater than 5” to
place and remove the bottle after washing. The
cylinder with an 8” OD and 1/8” thickness is coupled
with the cylinder with a 6.065”ID and 0.28” thickness
to form the outer washer. The outer washer stands at
12” long in the vertical direction, having 8-layers of
holes of 0.081” diameter, 45o apart on the same axis.
The holes are placed on the inner cylinder (6.065”ID),
with this layer of holes patterned for 6 vertical layers,
1.5” apart, with the first layer of holes at 0.5” from
the top of the plate. The top of the cylinder is welded
to a 0.125” thick donut shaped plate, cut to fit the
outer washer assembly (with an ID of 6.065” and OD
of 8”). The 7th layer of holes of the outer washer
assembly is placed 2” from the sixth layer. It is also
inclined at 30o from the horizontal to enable the outer
washer in washing the bottom and bottom edge of the
bottle. The sketch of the outer washer is shown
below:
Fig 9. 2-D Front Orientation of Outer Washer
Plate (Pipe Connections)
The plate is responsible for holding both the inner and
outer washer in place. A 0.5” thick, 10”X10” plate is
used to achieve this purpose. A hole in the middle
having the inner washer dimensions is drilled to fit
through. Two holes of 0.37” were drilled 3.69” each
from the center of the plate. These drilled holes are
the entrance of the water into the outer washer. The
dimensions of the holes were obtained from the exit
dimension of the purchased fitting adapter used in
connecting the pipe to the assembly.
The plate also served the purpose of draining the
assembly of water after washing the bottle. The drain
consists of 8 holes, 45o apart and on a 2.45” radius,
modeled to fit on the opening diameter of the bottle.
The diameters of the holes were calculated
considering the flow rate water exiting the assembly.
The diameter of the drain holes had to be big enough
to eliminate flooding of the assembly during washing.
The minimum diameter of the holes to accomplish
proper drainage was 0.5634”. A diameter of 0.75” was
chosen for the drain holes to for safety. The sketch of
the plate is shown below:
Fig 10. 2-D Sketch of the Plate

Page 11
The parts were assembled in Pro-Engineer and
checked for any assembly errors before being sent out
for manufacturing.
A model assembly for the prototype is shown below:
Fig 11. A sketch of the Assembly showing the Internal
Parts
Fig 12. A model of the assembly showing the Bottom
View
6.3. DISCUSSION ON HOW PROTOTYPING IS
DONE
After the CAD design and assembly was obtained, the
sketches were sent out for manufacturing. In piecing
the parts together, all the holes were first drilled on
the plate. The dimensions of the hole were carefully
marked and precisely drilled. The cylinders were then
cut to the desired lengths, and then machined to
obtain a smooth and orthogonal surface in preparation
for welding. About a 1/10” between necessary
surfaces was kept in order to account for welding.
The holes were then drilled on the 6.065”ID cylinder
and the inner washer. To achieve a feasible weld of
the assembly, the inner washer was fit into its drilled
fitting and welded around the plate. The 6.065”
diameter cylinder was then placed on the plate and
welded on the outside edges, as it was impossible to
place a weld to achieve an internal weld for the parts.
The weld was machined off to obtain proper clearance
for the hole, so that the weld would not interfere with
the incoming water. The 8” cylinder was then welded

Page 12
to the plate to create flow area for the outer washer.
This was done on the edges of the outer washer.
To obtain a closure of the outer washer, the donut
shaped plate; initially cut to fit and cover up both
cylinders was welded on the surface of the cylinder,
creating a perfect seal for the outer washer. Prior to
welding the external washers, the drilled holes were
de-burred and a fillet was created for each hole to
improve the flow of water out of the orifices. The two
entrance holes to the outer washer were tapped to
screw on a ¼ adapter, which in subsequence was
converted to allow a hose of ¾ to be connected by
means of adapters. An adapter was also screwed onto
the inlet of the inner washer. After all the welding and
machining was done, the mechanism was cleaned and
prepped for testing.
The images of the final prototype are shown below:
Fig 13. Top view of the final prototype showing the
inner washer and drain holes
Fig 14. Top view of the Final prototype showing the
spray from the inner and outer washer

Page 13
Fig 15. Front view of the final prototype showing all
the pipe connections and draining of the working
mechanism
Fig 16. Top view of the prototype while the bottle is
being washed
Fig 17. Placing / removing the bottle fro the prototype
while the bottle is being washed
Fig 18. Bottom of the prototype showing all the
welded pipe connections and fittings
CONCLUSIONS
Discussion:
The project definition was to design and create a
mechanism that can wash reusable squeeze bottles. A
case study was done on the University of Miami
football team, when noticing that Gatorade was being
consumed from disposable 12oz Gatorade bottles
instead of their 32oz squeeze bottles. Upon further
investigation, it was observed that the problem with
using reusable squeeze bottles was due to the tedious
and time-consuming process of washing and cleaning
them. Further calculations proved that the school
would save about $540 to $680 daily by using the
reusable bottles in place of the disposable ones.
The design process started with discussions on the
possible designs. Many designs were proposed, but
the final design chosen involved a spray type washing
process, modeled after a pressure washer. The process
had to have the capability of washing the inside and
outside of a bottle. The bottle’s dimensions were
taken to obtain the possible dimensions and
constraints of the proposed bottle washer.

Page 14
The FDA and Public health food code was adhered to
obtain a standard for the cleanliness of the bottle. It
was concluded that in order to obtain a clean and
sanitized product, the bottle would have to be run
through the bottle washer and then completely
submerged in a hot water tank at a temperature of 77o
C (171o F) or above.
At the first attempt of design a mechanism consisting
of an inner washer rotating about its axis was created,
driven by thrust forces developed at the exit of the
fluid, with an outer washer oscillating on its own axis.
The motion of the outer washer was intended to be
driven from the rotating motion of the inner washer,
connected by a cam-follower-crank system. A base
connection, which contained the inlet port for the
mechanism, was responsible in separating the flow
into each washer.
Manufacturing this prototype proved to be immensely
expensive, which then forced the manufacturing of a
½ scale model; which then wasn’t helpful in being
able to wash a bottle. The material of production,
(ABS plastic), did not meet the FDA standards for
ware washers. After this design was discarded, a new
design was created in its place.
Aluminum was used chosen for the material. The use
of aluminum material met the FDA code for the
material properties used for standard washing
equipment. A new design was made with just an inner
washer, outer washer, and a base plate that had
connections to the hoses connected to the hot water
outlet. The mechanical system was eliminated, as it
proved to be too complex and unnecessary for the
design. Materials were sourced from the local
aluminum supply store, with a re-dimensioning done
of the entire assembly done after obtaining the
materials of standard dimensions. After obtaining the
materials, the holes on the washer were drilled,
machined to cut away excess materials, and the outer
washer was welded off to create a seal on the top.
Pipefitting adapters were drilled on the bottom of the
plate to connect the hoses to the inner and outer
washers, while a brass cap was put on the top of the
inner washer to seal off the top. A hole at 30 degrees
was drilled on the inner washer for the water to reach
the inner edges of the bottle.
Calculations were made to obtain proper flow through
the mechanism. The total outlet area of each washer
was slightly smaller than the inlet area so as to create
some acceleration though the exit orifices, but not too
small to reduce stagnation pressure in sections of the
mechanism. Drainage holes were created to prevent
flooding of the assembly during washing. The
drainage holes were calculated by assuming a higher
value of the flow rate of drainage exit compared to
the total flow rate from all the orifices. The diameter
of each drainage holes was set at 0.75”, which worked
perfectly in draining the used water in the mechanism.
In testing the prototype, flow rates were measured and
used in calculating the error of the mechanism. As for
potential improvements to the prototype, it was
observed that a rise in length and increase in angle of
the top layer exit orifices for the outer washer could
be made to get a better outside clean for the bottle.
The design being an open-ended prototype could also
be redesigned for cleaning cups, and other hollow
plates and kitchen equipment. It could also be
redesigned, with the mechanism connected together in
multiple rows, which would deem viable for washing
multiple bottles at the same time.
The design and prototype worked perfectly well,
while achieving all the set out goals. The cost of the
redesigned prototype made with aluminum was far
less than the cost of the previous design made out of
ABS material. In relation to the expenses of the
athletic department, the cost of manufacture and
purchase of this mechanism would be insignificant in
comparison to the daily cost the department incurs in
utilizing disposable bottles. This design also
eliminates the cause of plastic waste into the
environment, contributing to a more green University.
Lessons Learned:
A great deal was learned from this project. This
project got us familiar with the design process. The

Page 15
major lesson learned was in product
manufacturability. Upon switching to aluminum as
the material for the final prototype, we had to adjust
the dimensions of the prototype to conform to the
aluminum parts readily available. We also learned to
always have a detailed design sketch and look into all
the constraints before setting out to manufacture to
eliminate overhauling the project due to unrealized
faults that could have be eliminated from the start.
This was also seen in the many unnecessary and
unused parts we bought that amounted to a waste of
resources.
From the failed prototype, we learned a lot about
improving the flow through channels by providing a
fillet radius on flow bends to eliminate flow
separation, and hereby, reduce or eliminate pressure
drops. Despite being a failure, improving the
mechanical system consisting of the cam-follower
connection, taught us a lot in that aspect. The failed
prototype also taught us a lesson in manufacturability.
The prototype could not be manufactured on a large
scale as a result of 3-D printing due to the
complexities in the design. We also learned to always
make every mechanism design as simple as possible
to cut cost and improve its ability to be manufacture
en masse.
Suggestions For Improvement:
Being an open-ended project, the washer can be
improved in many ways. The washer can be made in
an assembly, connecting more washers in order to
washer more Gatorade bottles all at the same time.
For this to be achieved, we would need to obtain a
larger flow rate of water at a much larger pressure
than 60psi.
Also, the spacing of the holes can be altered to obtain
a more even wash across all the segments of the bottle
to be washed. The angles of the inclined hole can also
be altered to obtain a better wash on the inside and
outer edges of the bottles, while a hole or series of
can be drilled on the top of the inner washer to obtain
a wash on the top of the bottle.
A wide range of improvements can be done for sizing
the prototype to any bottle dimension desired. The
size of the initial prototype can also be reduced
immensely, cutting down cost and reducing the
weight of the mechanism. To improve portability, risk
of minor cuts and injuries, and durability, the sharp
edges of the plates can be machined of to obtain a
circular base, while a stand can be made for the
prototype, with the pipe openings made parallel to the
curved surface of the cylinder, to allow for an easier
connection from the hot water outlet.
REFERENCES
[1] Specifications, Design, and Kinematic
Analysis of an Electric Toothbrush using
CATIA V5R19 http://e-
archivo.uc3m.es/bitstream/handle/10016/1301
9/Specification,%20design%20and%20kinem
atic%20analysis%20of%20an%20Electric%20
Toothbrush%20using%20CATIAV5R19.pdf?s
equence=2
[2] How do toothbrushes work?
http://www.explainthatstuff.com/electrictoothb
rush.html
[3] Okiishi, Munson, Huebsch, Rothmayer;
“Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics”. 7th Edition
[4] Robert L. Norton. “Design of Machinery”. 4th
Edition
[5] Singheresu Rao. “Mechanical Vibrations”. 5th
Edition
[6] Robert E. Sanders, Jr. (2001). "Technology
Innovation in Aluminum Products". JOM 53 (2): 21–
25. Bibcode:2001JOM....53b..21S.
doi:10.1007/s11837-001-0115-7.
[7] Plastic Properties of Acrylonitrile Butadiene
Styrene (ABS) Small table of ABS properties towards
the bottom. Retrieved 7 May 2010

Page 16
APPENDICES
9.1. Data
Matlab Code for Flow rate calcultaions
clear
clc
inlet_pipe_dia = 0.75
inlet_area = pi*inlet_pipe_dia^2/4
inner_n = 21;
inner_dia = .098;
inner_area = inner_n*pi*inner_dia^2/4
outer_n = 56;
outer_dia = .081;
outer_area = outer_n*pi*inner_dia^2/4
buck_vol = 0.66840278 %ft^3
outer_washer_flow_rate_exit = buck_vol/28.76
inner_washer_flow_rate_exit = buck_vol/63.08
assembly_flow_rate_exit = buck_vol/22.26
assembly_flow_rate_bottle= buck_vol/21.75
% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % %
%
% % % % % % Drainage %%%%%%%%
drainage_inlet_flowrate = outer_washer_flow_rate_exit +
inner_washer_flow_rate_exit
drainage_inlet_area = outer_area + inlet_area
% % % % for a flow rate greater than 0.0338, assume theflow rate to
more
% (0.05)
drain_outlet_area = drainage_inlet_flowrate*drainage_inlet_area/0.05
% % % % for 8 holes, the radius is calculated
drain_8holes_dia = sqrt((drain_outlet_area/8)*4/pi)
% we need hole of diameter >> 0.3051
% % we picked 0.75 to be on thesafe side
WASHER CAM SVAJ
function [s,v,a,j] = svajexample(t)
b1=pi/12;
b2=11*pi/12;
b3=pi/12;
b4=11*pi/12;
h1=0;
h2=1.72125;
if t>=0 && t<=b1
s=0;
v=0;
a=0;
j=0;
elseif t>=b1 && t<=b1+b2
s=h2*(35*((t-b1)/b2)^4 - 84*((t-b1)/b2)^5 + 70*((t-
b1)/b2)^6 - 20*((t-b1)/b2)^7);
v=h2/b2*(140*((t-b1)/b2)^3 - 420*((t-b1)/b2)^4 +
420*((t-b1)/b2)^5 - 140*((t-b1)/b2)^6);
a=h2/b2^2*(420*((t-b1)/b2)^2 - 1680*((t-b1)/b2)^3 +
2100*((t-b1)/b2)^4 - 840*((t-b1)/b2)^5);
j=h2/b2^3*(840*((t-b1)/b2) - 5040*((t-b1)/b2)^2 +
8400*((t-b1)/b2)^3 - 4200*((t-b1)/b2)^4);
elseif t>=b1+b2 && t<=b1+b2+b3
s=h2;
v=0;
a=0;
j=0;
else
s=h2-(h2*(35*((t-b1-b2-b3)/b4)^4 - 84*((t-b1-b2-
b3)/b4)^5 + 70*((t-b1-b2-b3)/b4)^6 - 20*((t-b1-b2-
b3)/b4)^7));
v=-h2/b4*(140*((t-b1-b2-b3)/b4)^3 - 420*((t-b1-b2-
b3)/b4)^4 + 420*((t-b1-b2-b3)/b4)^5 - 140*((t-b1-b2-
b3)/b4)^6);
a=-h2/b4^2*(420*((t-b1-b2-b3)/b4)^2 - 1680*((t-b1-
b2-b3)/b4)^3 + 2100*((t-b1-b2-b3)/b4)^4 - 840*((t-
b1-b2-b3)/b4)^5);

Page 17
j=-h2/b4^3*(840*((t-b1-b2-b3)/b4) - 5040*((t-b1-b2-
b3)/b4)^2 + 8400*((t-b1-b2-b3)/b4)^3 - 4200*((t-b1-
b2-b3)/b4)^4);
end
WASHER CAM SVAJ PLOT
clear all;
N=1000;
for i=1:N+1
x(i)=(i-1)*2*pi/N;
[s(i),v(i),a(i),j(i)]=svajexample(x(i));
end
figure(1);
plot(x,s,'b-');
grid on;
title('Displacement');
xlabel('Angle (rad)');
ylabel('Diplacement (in)');
%axis([0,2*pi,0,7])
%axis equal
figure(2);
plot(x,v,'b-');
grid on;
title('Velocity');
ylabel('Velocity (in/rad)');
figure(3)
plot(x,a,'b-');
grid on;
title('Acceleration');
ylabel('Acceleration (in/rad^2)');
figure(4)
plot(x,j,'b-');
grid on;
title('Jerk');
ylabel('Jerk (in/rad^3)');
SIZING WASHER CAM
clear all;
N=1000;
Rp=.73725;
Rf=.175;
for i=1:N+1
x(i)=(i-1)*2*pi/N;
[s(i),v(i),a(i),j(i)]=svajexample(x(i));
beta(i)=atan(-
(v(i)*sin(x(i))+(Rp+s(i))*cos(x(i)))/(v(i)*cos(x(i))-
(Rp+s(i))*sin(x(i))));
dx=v(i)*sin(x(i))+(Rp+s(i))*cos(x(i));
dy=v(i)*cos(x(i))-(Rp+s(i))*sin(x(i));
if dy<0
beta(i)=atan(-dx/dy)+pi;
elseif dy>0
beta(i)=atan(-dx/dy);
elseif dx>0 & dy==0
beta(i)=-pi/2;
elseif dx<0 & dy==0
beta(i)=pi/2;
end
%pitch curve
coord_x1(i)=(Rp+s(i))*sin(x(i));
coord_y1(i)=(Rp+s(i))*cos(x(i));
%Cam profile
coord_x(i)=(Rp+s(i))*sin(x(i))+Rf*cos(beta(i));
coord_y(i)=(Rp+s(i))*cos(x(i))+Rf*sin(beta(i));
%Pressure angle
phi(i)=atan(v(i)/(s(i)+Rp))*360/(2*pi);
%Radius of curvature
rou(i)=((Rp+s(i))^2+v(i)^2)^(3/2)/((Rp+s(i))^2+2*v(i
)^2-a(i)*(Rp+s(i)));
end
figure(1)
plot(x,phi,'b-');
grid on;
title('Pressure angle');
xlabel('Angle');
ylabel('Pressure angle (degree)');
axis equal
figure(2)
plot(x,rou,'b-');
grid on;
title('Radius of curvature');
xlabel('Angle');

Page 18
ylabel('Radius of
curvature (in)');
axis equal
figure(3)
plot(coord_x,coor
d_y,'b-
',Rp*cos(x),Rp*si
n(x),'g-
',coord_x1,coord_
y1,'y-');
grid on;
title('Cam
profile');
xlabel('x (in)');
ylabel('y (in)');
axis equal
MATLAB CALCULATION OUTPUT
Seconds to fill 5
gallon bucket
Volumetric
Flow Rate of
Washer
Assembly
(gal/min)
21.2 14.1509434
21.61 13.88246182
21.56 13.91465677
21.75 13.79310345
21.96 13.66120219
21.68 13.83763838
21.95 13.66742597
21.9 13.69863014
21.65 13.85681293
21.61 13.88246182
21.58 13.90176089
21.83 13.74255612
22.6 13.27433628
21.65 13.85681293
21.88 13.71115174

Page 19
9.2. Material
Aluminum 6061-T6 was used as the material is
manufacturing the prototype. 6061-T6 aluminum
alloy is generally a cheap, and contains elements of
silicon and magnesium. It possesses good mechanical
properties and is one of the most common alloys for
general-purpose use. 6061-T6 is commonly available
in pre-tempered grade, used in the manufacture of
stressed frames, and aircraft components.
This aluminum alloy is highly weldable with arc or
any other form of welding, but loses some of its
strength after the welding process. It is also a non-
brittle material that is very machinable. On the other
hand, the previously used ABS plastic material
(Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) is a polymer made
by polymerizing styrene and acrylonitrile. It is a low
hazard material that presents low risk to health and
humans. It has desirable properties in toughness,
impact, and low electrical conductance, while also
being significantly lighter than aluminum.
ABS plastic does not meet the criteria for the washer
material set by the FDA, and thus was not used as the
material for the final prototype. Water running
throughout the mechanism made with ABS material
might be contaminated with the inorganic compounds
of the material.

Design and Analysis of a Bottle Washer for Reusable Bottles

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to Design and Analysis of a Bottle Washer for Reusable Bottles

Similar to Design and Analysis of a Bottle Washer for Reusable Bottles (20)

Design and Analysis of a Bottle Washer for Reusable Bottles