Somehow, I thought the pace would slow down a bit after “Ramp Up Week” and that we would start to feel a little better about making progress on our projects. Yikes! This REU program is intense! We are learning a lot, but there are high expectations set for us.
The major goal in our project this week is to complete our research into available sensor options and make our recommendations for purchase. I am researching the outdoor environmental sensors (measuring near-surface air temperature, relative humidity, and soil moisture) and Kiarra is researching the wearable sensors (measuring air temperature and skin/core body temperature). We presented our initial findings on Tuesday morning. Dr. Habeeb and Dr. Clawson asked questions and asked us to report back on Thursday with our recommendations on which systems to purchase.
With the environmental sensors, I have been researching options with three different companies. There are a lot of options available if you only want to measure “weather data” such as air temperature and humidity, or if you want to measure soil moisture, but once you combine the two different options together, the choice become much more limited. Onset Computer Corporation makes the HOBO sensors that were used in the Madison, WI heat island studies. These sensors have been widely used in academic studies and offer a variety of data collection options. Eileen Sandherr is the representative that I have been talking with at Onset. They have three different sized dataloggers that we are considering: the H21-USB Micro Station, the U30 Weather Station, and the RX3000.
Another option is Campbell Scientific. After requesting more information from the company, I received a phone call from Del Satterthwaite, the Indiana sales representative. I told him about our plans for our research study, and he said he would get back to me with a list of the equipment that I would need and a sales quote. True to his word, I had his quote in hand by the end of the day. Unfortunately, instead of being a “plug-and-play” option like the other two companies, from Campbell Scientific, you purchase a case, a datalogger, a solar panel, all the probes, and solar shield…and you have to put them all together yourself. Although Campbell Scientific equipment is frequently cited in academic papers, this does not look like the best option for our study.
Meter Group, Inc. offers the final option. I refer to this company as the “Apple” brand of the dataloggers. Instead of ordering temperature, humidity, and soil moisture sensors and connecting them to a datalogger to collect and store the data, with this company, you order a complete weather station to which you can add the soil moisture sensor. Their product is sleek and simply designed, and offers a lot of options. However, the Meter equipment is double the price of the HOBO. Unless the faculty see assets that I am missing in my evaluation, I cannot justify the increased prices of the Meter equipment over Onset’s HOBO products.
I made my recommendation to Dr. Habeeb that we purchase either the HOBO H21-USB Micro Station or the HOBO RX3000 from Onset Computing Company. The H21 is the smaller, more economical unit, but requires that we download the data directly from the datalogger via a USB cable. This is not a problem for this initial pilot study, as we need to be going to the stations to check the station’s air temperature readings with the wearable sensors’ air temperature readings. However, if we want to pursue longer term studies, expand the sensor network, and open up the opportunity for other research units to access the sensor data, it would be helpful to have remote access possibilities. That is where the HOBO RX3000 comes in. It broadcasts the data directly to HOBOlink.com and the data is available over the internet. (Update: we are ordering the RX3000!)
After our weekly training meeting with Dr. Siek on Wednesday, Ben shared more information about the upcoming Mini-U session that we would be helping with next week. We reviewed paper circuits and discussed the observations that we would be making during the class. Here is the circuit that we made with copper tape, a LED, the Arduino and the light sensor.
Environmental sensors were installed in three locations on campus at Indiana University-Bloomington. The different sites were designed to measure the impact of different types of vegetation on the surrounding air temperature. One station was installed in \textbf{tree canopy location}, one was installed at the campus farm \textbf{X distance from the center of campus}, and one was installed in \textbf{XXX parking lot} to measure results with an impervious surface.
My first “failure” this week was getting frustrated with the original sales representative that I worked with at Onset Computing. I was connected to him through their online chat option when I had questions about the sensors and accessories that we need to order. He gave me his email address and told me to email him if I had further questions. After three unanswered emails, I was getting ready to write Onset off as a possible supplier for the sensors. I went online again Thursday morning and used the “chat” feature again. I was connected with Eileen Sandherr, who was extremely helpful. I’m glad I tried again!
My second failure/frustration this week was with how stressed I was allowing myself to get about all of the work that seems to be piling up. Taking a step back, organizing the paper that had accumulated on my desk, and mapping out a plan has put me headed in the right direction again. Onward and upward!
My meetings with my mentor last week and this week have been very helpful, but passed by far too quickly! We have established a Slack channel to help the team communicate remotely, but I look forward to when Dr. Habeeb will be able to be settled in her new office and perhaps available on campus. Unfortunately, we are still waiting on a graduate student mentor.
Based on timeline and deliverables, what challenges did our team have this week? Wading through mountains of research to make our recommendations for sensor purchase. Kiarra has done a remarkable job finding multiple options for on-body skin and air temperature sensors, but a reliable, non-invasive core body temperature sensor is rather elusive.
What failures did we overcome and how? How does this change our timeline? (Highlight any changes in a different color.) Kiarra and I made our recommendations on Thursday to Dr. Habeeb and Dr. Clawson. Depending on how long it takes for the equipment to be ordered and arrive will depend on whether the original timeline will need to be altered. A formal invoice has been requested from Onset for the HOBO catalogers, and it should be able to be submitted to Purchasing this afternoon. Dr. Clawson assured us that next week, while we are waiting for sensors to be delivered, will be a good time to catch up on writing the portions of the paper that we are struggling with at this time.
Timeline for the project:
Week 1: Ramp up week
Week 2: Start sensor selection, submit IRB, begin lit review
Week 3:
Sensor Selection
– robust enough to grow with subsequent studies
– measurements/attachments available for:
– (near-surface) air temperature
– relative humidity
– soil moisture
– pros/cons of various options
Deliverables (Week 3):
– annotated bibliography
– outline of introduction
– draft of related work
– draft of methods
Week 4:
– site selection
– on-campus approval process
– minimum of three sites
– tree canopy
– grass/agriculture
– impervious surface
– plan for sensors off-campus?
Data:
– back-end/retrieval
– database design – data storage
Deliverables (Week 4):
– outline of abstract
– draft of introduction
– peer review of related work
– peer review of methods
Weeks 5/6:
– sensor calibration
– sensor installation
– data collection
Deliverables (Week 5):
– outline of findings
– outline of discussion
– draft of abstract
– revise related work
– peer review of introduction
– finalize methods
Deliverables (Week 6):
– draft of findings
– draft of discussion
– peer review of abstract
– revise introduction
– finalize related work
Weeks 7/8:
– data analysis
Deliverables (Week 7):
– peer review of findings
– peer review of discussion
– revise abstract
– finalize introduction
Deliverables (Week 8):
– peer review of abstract
– revise findings
– revise discussion
Weeks 9/10:
– final results and recommendations
Deliverables (Week 9):
– finalize abstract
– finalize findings
– finalize discussion
Deliverables (Week 10):
– all sections camera ready!