Source of Header: Adapted from [2]
<aside>
</aside>
<aside> 1️⃣
The main objective of this project is to help treat wastewater in a wastewater treatment plant by selecting an appropriate material for a filter depending on the scenario our team got. The scenario our group was assigned dealt with a filtration system that was responsible of filtering out runoff from a nearby nuclear power plant in order to protect the surrounding community from potential environmental and health hazards. Then, our research and final material choice was presented to peers. To summarize, through research and analysis, we needed to find a material that effectively filters out radioactive/nuclear contaminants in the community’s wastewater within the low budget of the town council and present our findings in a professional manner.
</aside>
<aside> 📊
<aside> ⛔
The first few steps we took in the project was making a Gantt chart (allocating time to each milestone) and assigning administrative roles to each team member. The Gantt chart (see Figure 1) made was simply a projection of what we thought our time would be spent towards rather than the real amount of time that was actually allocated to each part of the project. When deciding on what roles to assign to each member, strengths of each member and ambition for the project were both incorporated in our choices. The role that I was assigned was Subject Matter Expert (SME) which was responsible for the bulk of the research in the project alongside keeping a database for all sources used throughout the project. At the end of the project, this database of sources cited in IEEE would be attached in the final report. Finally to create communication lines between group members, we made a Microsoft teams platform for communication outside of scheduled meetings. Emphasizing communication was a key part throughout the project for our group as we thought it would be one of the most important things to succeed.
Figure 2: Shows Objective Tree brainstormed, Source: Own
One of the first things our group did together was make an objective tree (See Figure 2) which highlighted several key objectives we wanted to accomplish and potential ways to achieve them. Alongside making an objective tree, metrics were assigned to our three key objectives (Cost-efficiency, Energy Efficiency, Adaptability of Material with Different Water Contaminant Profiles) so we could test materials directly against each other. The metrics chosen were cost per cubic meter ($/m^3), water decontaminated per energy intake (kWh/m^3), and max flow rate in cubic meters per hour (m^3/h) for each of the objectives respectively. For adaptability, another method we thought about using as a metric was surrogate scale to see how different water contaminant profiles performed with materials.
To find materials that fit our goals and analyze them against each other, two main methods were used: qualitative and quantitative analysis
<aside>
Before analysis:
Figure 1: Shows the Initial Gantt Chart that contains the projected time required for each part of the project, Source: Own
To further investigate wastewater treatment plants, a morph chart (see Figure 3) was created that helped us generate means for several functions involved in wastewater treatment. Although this was not directly involved in our choice for our material, learning more about wastewater treatment helped us gain general insight and background knowledge of what the project was about. Some more background research we did as a group was on regulations regarding material acquisition, contaminant/waste standards, electricity standards, and optimal energy output. Acts such as the Canadian Environmental Protection Act of 1999 and the Canadian Electrical Code were highlighted during our research. Having deeper knowledge of regulations or standards would help us in understanding filtration systems more and also knowing what materials would be the most friendly to use in a project like this.
Figure 3: Shows Morph Chart brainstormed, Source: Own
Figure 4: Shows 4 main MPI’s and their corresponding objectives and priorities (primary or secondary), Source: Own
As subject matter expert, my primary contributions came in research (Individual and group research memos), helping out in analysis (Granta and Qualitative Charts), making a materials source database, doing most of the final project report, and presenting our conclusions. More specified things I did to contribute throughout the project can be seen below.
Our final outcome was that we chose Coir Fiber as the best material to filter out the radioactive contaminants from the power plant near the community. It performed well in the primary MPI graphs and had the most sustainable life-cycle. Based on the Eco Audit, Coir Fiber is easily recyclable, has a strong yield strength even when accounting for porosity, consumes less energy per usage, and maintains stable porosity over time without degrading too much in water. This combination of sustainability, functionality, and durability made it the most viable material.
Figure 15: Metrics of Coir Fiber, Source: Own
![Figure 16: Picture of Coir Fiber (chosen material), Source: Adapted from [3]](attachment:1e8a75f3-89da-4cf3-b712-b384989617c2:image.png)
Figure 16: Picture of Coir Fiber (chosen material), Source: Adapted from [3]