Low-Fi Prototype 1
For this prototype, the connection and electrical sub systems were built together physically to Illustrate how connections should be made, whilst the interface was built on wix.com with the back end built with the Arduino and MQQT server, to illustrate how the web app should be. Materials and equipment used for building the electrical and connection subsystem: Arduino, bread board, ethernet shield, jumper cables, resistor, laptop for power source, When building this prototype, we found a hard type figuring out the connections because we did not have enough wires and could not wire the whole thing using resistors hence for this prototype the full schematic is not deployed with regards to connection. Nevertheless, all the components are present in the picture to help visualize the weight and physique of the final package, which is essential to the product design. From our research we realized that some of the individual components used for this prototype are not going to be the same ones used for the final product in order to build a feasible and viable product. This is because it is not reasonable to build an actual project on a breadboard. We also have to use better sensors than what is in our standard electrical kit. Essentially, I think with this prototype, the interface subsystem is well defined but going forward with the electrical and connection subsystems, we would need PCB’s and more affordable devices to reduce the cost of implementation on a large scale, hence make our design feasible.
Low-Fi Prototype 2
This particular prototype was designed to be low cost and to use as little parts and components as possible. The focus here was meeting its basic functionality which was recording the data required from the pond and displaying it. This prototype exists as one assembled unit with all subsystems integrated. The package is designed to be attached to the exterior walls of the fish pond where the display can be easily seen. However, the sensory probes fit through the fish pond wall into the water on the interior side of the wall to be able to make contact with the water on the interior side and record the data. There is an LCD to show the recorded data from the pond.
The picture above illustrates the subsystem responsible for the human sensor interface. There is an LCD display that shows the information that is measured in the pond by the sensory probes
The sensory probes consists of a temperature probe, PH sensor, ammonia and oxygen level sensors. These are shown as the round rod like extrusions on the right side of this picture
The design consists of a housing that contains the electronic components such a micro-controller unit which reads the electrical signals coming from the sensory probes and interprets it as meaningful data. The sensory probes are those rod-like structures that come out from the main body of the package. The package is designed to be installed on the exterior wall of the fish pond where the sensory probes penetrate to make contact with the water on the other to read the data required. The sensor package also has a WIFI module that is able to connect to a particular server (local or remote) to upload the all the data it records
Front-End
This is the front-end system or user interface where the data from sensors will be dispatched after deep analysis and various prediction from database, and weather prediction algorithm. The user will be able to search for any parameter such as water Ph, temperature as well as a particular date in case he or she wants to compare the trends of water conditions within a specific month.
The improvement will be to make the interface more customized to the level where any fish farmer will be able to interpret the result. In doing that, we hope to use the local language and other visual and easy graphics.
Feedback from User
Generally, the feedback we had from our community partner(user) was very great. The user was very satisfied with our design but after asking some questions about our design and implementation, a few things came up. During this feedback collection process, our team asked three main questions: What are some of the good features of the design? , what are some of the bad things about the design? and what can be done to improve the design?
A. What are some of the bad things about the design?
The user did not go straight to answering this question. He probed a little more to know more about the implementation of the design.
Measuring Nitrite and ammonia levels : He asked questions like “What are conditions that the sensor package checks?”. We answered saying the sensor package measures temperature, pH and oxygen level in the pond water. His response was great but he moved on to ask why we are not measuring other conditions like Nitrite and ammonia levels. We responded by saying that both ammonia and nitrite levels change the pH of the water, hence a change in pH can be thought of as change in those conditions as well. He agreed that the approach will cut down the cost in making the sensor package and also make it cheaper for the fish farmers, however, he believes Nitrite and ammonia build up is the root cause of pH change, therefore being able to monitor it will be great for the pond.
Controlling the fluctuation of conditions in the pond: He also asked this question: “How about measures to control the problems your device identifies. How is that being handled currently? “. In response to that question, we explained that the scope of our project is only limited to monitoring the conditions in the pond and alerting the farmers whenever there are fluctuations in the conditions. The user disagreed with this. According to the user, many companies have built and are building technologies that monitor the conditions of the pond and coming up with a way to help farmers control the fluctuations and make everything stable will make our design very unique.
B. What are some of the good things about the design?
Limiting the sensor package for use in the confined ponds: The user asked if the sensor package can be used in cages and river ponds and we said it can only be used in confined ponds where the inlet and outlet of water can be controlled. In cages and river ponds, the flow of water and other conditions like temperature cannot be controlled. That is the disadvantage of using such systems. However, our design seeks to help improve yield in confined ponds so that more fish farmers can move towards that end when starting new fish farms.
Where the device will be mounted: The user liked the idea that the sensor packages will be mounted at the corners of the pond and maybe, in the middle as well depending on how large the pond is.
Convenience: The user was happy about how the design makes it so convenient to monitor the conditions of the pond. The users of the device do not need to constantly be at the farm to keep an eye on the water conditions, they can do that on their phones or other mobile devices at the comfort of their homes or wherever.
Reduction in cost and losses : He expressed that this approach will cut down a lot of cost. This includes cost of hiring more people to take shifts at the farm in monitoring the conditions of the ponds and transportation costs to the fish farm.
C. What can be done to improve the design?
Adding user manual: The user suggested that we add a manual to guide the farmers on what to do when any of the water conditions change. For instance, in the manual, we add that if the pH changes, reduce or stop feeding and change the water.
Specifying the number of sensor packages that should be used in a given size of the pond: During the feedback process, the user asked the number of sensor packages that are needed to accurately measure the conditions in the pond. He suggested that we specify that in the manual as well.
Measuring Nitrite and ammonia levels: Since nitrite and ammonia levels is the root cause of pH changes in the water, it is very necessary to measure those conditions in the pond.
Feedback from Faculty
The faculty commented that we did a great job with the prototypes. However, they were expecting to see a physical representation of the sensor. According to them, we argued that our circuit gives a sense of the size and weight, but if there's no sensor to include in that, then it doesn't really paint the full picture
Testing
Power Consumption Test Aim: Test if packages do not consume power (>50mAh) Procedure: We simulated the different circuitry(the ones with battery source and the ones with solar panel source) in an online software and calculated the power dissipated. Results: Since the sensors remained the same across the different circuits, the power dissipated was constant. However, we realized that unlike the solar panels, the batteries needed to be replaced periodically.
Convenience Analysis Aim: Analyze how convenient it is to use systems Results: Users want to be able to monitor ponds without being physically present. The ways to do that is via a web app or mobile app which they can conveniently view. All the ideas that had elements of web or mobile app view passed this analysis
Comentários