senior thesis - esp - final

University of Nebraska-Lincoln College of Engineering

Computer and Electronics Engineering Department

CEEN 4990

Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P.)

By

Daniel Hamrick

Kyle O’Doherty

Elliot Triplett

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the B.Sc. Degree, Computer and Electronics Engineering, College of Engineering,

University of Nebraska Peter Kiewit Institute, Omaha, Nebraska, U.S.A.

May 2012

2 Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P.) Final Report

I. ETHICAL DESIGN STATEMENT

Team E.S.P. has periodically reviewed the IEEE Code of Ethics and has applied the design process to the final

proposed design. Though out the planning, design and construction process all project engineers held public safety

as the highest concern for this project and the E.S.P. project reflects that distinctly.

II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

Team E.S.P. has taken into high consideration the environmental effects of the parking lot detector and has opted

for lead free – RoHS compliant components wherever possible.

III. PROJECT ABSTRACT

The E.S.P. system allows drivers to better utilize parking spaces across the University of Nebraska campus by

allowing them to see the availability of parking spaces on a website, accessible from any mobile device. Consisting

of four induction loops, a tracking computer and a server to host the client access, our product will autonomously

and passively monitor vehicle traffic without pedestrian interference.

The induction loops are buried in the road and generate a small magnetic field that is altered as metallic objects

pass over the system. This change is registered by the tracking computer and sent to the server with a system

status message over an Ethernet connection. The server then stores this data locally and provides a visual

representation of the traffic volume to the user as well as a remote access capability to campus parking

administrators.

IV. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Efficient Student Parking team would personally like to thank the faculty and staff at the University of

Nebraska for all of the council, assistance and patience over these past four years as we worked towards this goal.

The team would also like to thank our friends and family for all the support they have provided to help us succeed

during the project and in our education.

The following individuals were involved in this projects design, development and approval:

Resource Manager – Daniel Hamrick

Hardware Engineer – Kyle O’Doherty

Software Engineer – Elliot Triplett

Senior Project Officer – Professor Herb Detloff

Parking Office Manager – Jim Ecker

Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P.) Project Proposal 3

V. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Efficient Student Parking project was undertaken based on personal experiences of the team and fellow

classmates regarding difficulties in parking on the University of Nebraska campus. Our team wanted to come up

with a product that was cheap enough for a state school to purchase and implement yet our greatest challenge

was devising a system that would be adaptable to the different parking lot styles, configurations and individual

challenges while still maintaining a high level of accuracy.

The solution for this problem evolved into a common vehicle detection method used in street light sensors and

automatics driveway gates. This solution was selected based on the cost of materials to construct, accuracy, and

the ability to not be triggered by pedestrians. In the final version of E.S.P. the team was able to demonstrate a

highly accurate vehicle detection system that could be adapted to several environments and parking lot styles

using variable components and deployment configurations of the induction loops. The success of the project was

demonstrated using a set of individual performance tests and acceptance testing to provide system viability and

standard certification. These tests include verification that a vehicle can be detected even at speeds of 35 mph

entering or exiting the parking lot and accuracy verification of detection of 106 out of 106 vehicle transitions.

Additionally, the client was verified to work on Safari, Firefox, Internet Explorer and Chrome web browsers on both

laptops as well as smartphone platforms all while being updated within 20 seconds of a change in the system.

In its current form, the E.S.P. system has the potential to be deployed immediately; however, given the

opportunity to develop this product our team has several suggestions. First, would be to further develop the client

interface to a more professional looking and feature rich product that would then be adapted to a cellphone based

application. Second, would be the development of a marquee display that would connect to the system to display

a clear and obvious indication of parking availability when driving by the parking lot entrance. Finally, the local

node has a few items that would need to be changed; specifically from our reliability analysis we found that our

3.3V and 5V regulators have a 9.1 and 17.6 year Mean Time to Failure respectively, an unacceptable rate for a final

commercial product.


TABLE OF CONTENTS i. Ethical Design Statement ....................................................................................................................................... 2

ii. ENVIRONMENTAL Impact Statement .................................................................................................................... 2

iii. PROJECT Abstract .................................................................................................................................................. 2

iV. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .......................................................................................................................................... 2

v. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 3

List of Figures and Tables ............................................................................................................................................... 8

1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 11

2.0 Problem Formulation ............................................................................................................................................. 14

2.1 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................................................ 14

2.2 Background ........................................................................................................................................................ 15

2.2.1 Introduction – Patent analysis .................................................................................................................... 15

2.2.2 Results of Patent and Product Search ........................................................................................................ 15

2.2.3 Analysis of Patent Liability .......................................................................................................................... 18

2.2.4 Action Recommended ................................................................................................................................ 19

2.2.5 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 19

2.3 Problem Formulation ......................................................................................................................................... 19

3.0 Project Design Requirements, Specifications and Success Criteria ....................................................................... 20

3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 20

3.2 Objective Tree.................................................................................................................................................... 21

3.3 Project Common Success Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 21

3.4 Project Specific Success Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 22

3.5 Deliverables ....................................................................................................................................................... 23

3.6 Constraints ......................................................................................................................................................... 23

4.0 Concept Development, Synthesis and Process Description .................................................................................. 24

4.1 Literature Review ............................................................................................................................................... 24

4.2 Concept Generation........................................................................................................................................... 24

4.3 Concept Reduction ............................................................................................................................................ 25

4.4 Project Schedule ................................................................................................................................................ 29

5.0 Detailed Engineering Analysis and Design Product Presentation .......................................................................... 31

5.1 Engineering Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 31

5.2 Product Presentation ......................................................................................................................................... 35

5.2.1 Introduction – Packaging Description ......................................................................................................... 35

5.2.2 Commercial Product Packaging .................................................................................................................. 35


5.2.3 Project Packaging Specifications ................................................................................................................. 36

5.2.4 PCB Footprint Layout .................................................................................................................................. 39

5.2.5 CAD Schematics and Illustrations ............................................................................................................... 40

5.2.7 Tools Requirement ..................................................................................................................................... 41

5.2.8 Estimated Weight ....................................................................................................................................... 42

5.3 Hardware Design ............................................................................................................................................... 42

5.3.1 Introduction – Hardware design review ..................................................................................................... 42

5.3.2 Theory of Operation ................................................................................................................................... 42

5.3.3 Hardware Design Narrative ........................................................................................................................ 43

5.3.4 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 44

5.3.5 Schematic.................................................................................................................................................... 45

5.4 PCB Design ......................................................................................................................................................... 46

5.4.1 Introduction – PCB design .......................................................................................................................... 46

5.4.2 PCB Layout Design Considerations - Overall ............................................................................................... 46

5.4.3 PCB Layout Design Considerations - Microcontroller ................................................................................. 47

5.4.4 PCB Layout Design Considerations – Power Supply ................................................................................... 48

5.4.5 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 48

5.4.6 PCB Layout .................................................................................................................................................. 49

5.5 Firmware Listing ................................................................................................................................................ 50

5.5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 50

5.5.2 Software Design Narrative .......................................................................................................................... 50

5.5.3 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 51

6.0 Economic Analysis ................................................................................................................................................. 52

6.1 Cost Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 52

6.2 Bill of Materials .................................................................................................................................................. 55

7.0 Reliability and Safety Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 57

7.1 introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 57

7.2 Reliability analysis .............................................................................................................................................. 57

7.3 Safety Analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 59

7.4 Failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis .................................................................................................... 60

7.5 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 60

8.0 Social/Political/Environmental Impact .................................................................................................................. 62

8.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 62

8.2 Social Responsibility and Ethical Impact Analysis .............................................................................................. 62


8.3 Political Impact Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 63

8.4 Environmental Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 63

8.5 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 64

9.0 Discussion, Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................... 65

9.1 Project review .................................................................................................................................................... 65

9.2 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................ 65

9.3 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................. 66

10.0 User’s Manual ...................................................................................................................................................... 68

10.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 69

10.2 CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 69

10.3 Induction loop instructions .............................................................................................................................. 69

10.3.1 Preparing for installation .......................................................................................................................... 69

10.3.2 CUTTING the Pavement Slots ................................................................................................................... 70

10.3.3 FORMING the Loop ................................................................................................................................... 70

10.3.4 PREPARE the loop lead wires .................................................................................................................... 70

10.3.5 SEALING the loop ...................................................................................................................................... 71

10.4 Local Node Maintenance ................................................................................................................................. 72

10.4.1 Connections .............................................................................................................................................. 72

10.4.2 Tuning ....................................................................................................................................................... 73

10.4.3 MENUS ...................................................................................................................................................... 73

10.5 Server User manual ......................................................................................................................................... 75

10.6 System Requirements ...................................................................................................................................... 75

10.7 Startup and Operating Instructions ................................................................................................................. 75

10.7.1 Startup ...................................................................................................................................................... 75

10.7.2 Administration .......................................................................................................................................... 76

10.7.3 Logging and Troubleshooting ................................................................................................................... 77

11.0 Appendices .......................................................................................................................................................... 78

A. Notes ................................................................................................................................................................... 78

B. Engineering change requests .............................................................................................................................. 78

C. Electrical Specifications ....................................................................................................................................... 81

Schematics ........................................................................................................................................................... 81

Timing Analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 83

Loading Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 84

Specification Sheets ............................................................................................................................................. 84


Signal Quality Analysis (SQA) ............................................................................................................................... 84

Safety/Electrical Hazard Checklist ....................................................................................................................... 84

Accuracy Certification .......................................................................................................................................... 85

D. Software .............................................................................................................................................................. 85

Flowcharts ........................................................................................................................................................... 85

Program Listings .................................................................................................................................................. 88

E. Resource Expenditure Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 96

Cost analysis ........................................................................................................................................................ 96

Labor Hour analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 98

F. Project purchases ................................................................................................................................................. 99

G. Other Resources ................................................................................................................................................ 103

One page project manager ................................................................................................................................ 103


LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1 - North Campus Parking ................................................................................................................................. 11

Figure 2 - South Campus Parking ................................................................................................................................. 11

Figure 3 - Project Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................... 12

Figure 4 - Patent Search Functions .............................................................................................................................. 15

Figure 5 - Objective Tree.............................................................................................................................................. 21

Figure 6 - PCSC Listing .................................................................................................................................................. 21

Figure 7 - PSSC Listing .................................................................................................................................................. 22

Figure 8 - Tracker Implementation Comparison .......................................................................................................... 25

Figure 9 – Methods Table ............................................................................................................................................ 25

Figure 10 - Pros / Cons Table ....................................................................................................................................... 26

Figure 11 - Pairwise Comparison ................................................................................................................................. 27

Figure 12 – Decision Chart ........................................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 13 – Project Schedule ....................................................................................................................................... 29

Figure 14 - Concept Design 1 ....................................................................................................................................... 31

Figure 15 - Concept Design 2 ....................................................................................................................................... 31

Figure 16 - Final Tracker Design ................................................................................................................................... 32

Figure 18 - Envelope Detector Simulation ................................................................................................................... 33

Figure 17 - Envelope Detector Circuit .......................................................................................................................... 33

Figure 19 - Tracker Circuit Prototype ........................................................................................................................... 33

Figure 21 - PVC Induction Loop (2) .............................................................................................................................. 34

Figure 23- Tracker Circuit Prototype Waveforms (Simulated Car) .............................................................................. 34

Figure 20 - PVC Induction Loop (1) .............................................................................................................................. 34

Figure 22 - Tracker Circuit Prototype Waveforms (No Car) ......................................................................................... 34

Figure 24 - 610 Loop Vehicle Detector ........................................................................................................................ 35

Figure 25 - TC-2BL44-R Inductive Burial Loop Vehicle Counter ................................................................................... 36

Figure 26. AMU1084CCHF 10"x8"x4" fiberglass enclosure ......................................................................................... 36

Figure 27 - NEMA 4X Specifications ............................................................................................................................. 37

Figure 28 - Appleton 4CS-1-2 ....................................................................................................................................... 38

Figure 29. Appleton 2510 Duplex Cover ..................................................................................................................... 38

Figure 30 - 5-15R .......................................................................................................................................................... 38

Figure 31 – Enclosure Dimensions ............................................................................................................................... 40

Figure 32 – Enclosure Materials .................................................................................................................................. 41


Figure 33 – Data Ports ................................................................................................................................................. 43

Figure 34 – Logic Converters ....................................................................................................................................... 43

Figure 35 – Atmega Functional Flow Chart .................................................................................................................. 45

Figure 36 – Image of Project PCB................................................................................................................................. 46

Figure 37 – PCB Schematic .......................................................................................................................................... 49

Figure 38 – Project Funding by Category ..................................................................................................................... 52

Figure 39 – Chart of Total Budget Spent...................................................................................................................... 53

Figure 40– Chart of Budget Spent by Category ........................................................................................................... 53

Figure 41 – Table of Example Man Hours Tracker ....................................................................................................... 54

Figure 42 - Product Bill of Materials ............................................................................................................................ 56

Figure 43 - Equation for Failure/106 hours .................................................................................................................. 57

Figure 44 – Failure Analysis of ATMEGA1284P ............................................................................................................ 58

Figure 45 - Failure Analysis of LD1117AS33 ................................................................................................................. 58

Figure 46 - Failure Analysis of LD1085V0 ..................................................................................................................... 58

Figure 47 - Failure Analysis of MAX764CPA ................................................................................................................. 59

Figure 48 – Loop Installation curb view ....................................................................................................................... 69

Figure 49- Loop Installation distance ........................................................................................................................... 70

Figure 50 – Loop Installation twisted pair ................................................................................................................... 71

Figure 51 – Local node labeled .................................................................................................................................... 72

Figure 52 – Server connection window ....................................................................................................................... 75

Figure 53 – Server connection interface ...................................................................................................................... 76

Figure 54 – Server Status Interface.............................................................................................................................. 76

Figure 55 - Original Proposed PSSCs ............................................................................................................................ 78

Figure 56 - PSSCS after ECR.......................................................................................................................................... 79

Figure 57 - Accepted ECR ............................................................................................................................................. 80

Figure 58 – Final Schematics 1 ..................................................................................................................................... 81

Figure 59 – Final Schematics 2 ..................................................................................................................................... 82

Figure 60 – Timing Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 83

Figure 61 – Safety Stickers ........................................................................................................................................... 84

Figure 62–System Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 85

Figure 63–Local Node Flowchart ................................................................................................................................. 86

Figure 64 – Server User Interface Flowchart ............................................................................................................... 87

Figure 65 – Server Message Listener Flowchart .......................................................................................................... 88

Figure 66 - Investments ............................................................................................................................................... 96


Figure 69 – Category Expenses .................................................................................................................................... 97

Figure 68 – Project Reimbursement ............................................................................................................................ 97

Figure 67 – Individual Investments .............................................................................................................................. 97

Figure 72 – Kyle Subsection ......................................................................................................................................... 98

Figure 71 – Daniel Subsection ..................................................................................................................................... 98

Figure 70 – Elliot Subsection ........................................................................................................................................ 98

Figure 73 – Complete Bill of Materials ...................................................................................................................... 102


1.0 INTRODUCTION

The University of Nebraska at Omaha (UNO) and the Peter Kiewit Institute (PKI) are excellent institutions to obtain

a world class education, however, a well known issue among student and faculty alike is the difficulty in finding a

parking spot on campus. Due to the location

close to 72nd and Dodge, it leaves very little

real estate for campus facilities on North

Campus or the Southern Campus around PKI.

With its 15,000+ students, the university has

made several adjustments to help alleviate

the problem, including changes in campus

parking policy and the addition of parking

spaces on North Campus and around the

Business Administration building, Mammel

Hall. Additionally, for the past several years, UNO has relied on the Crossroads parking garage as an off campus

satellite parking lot and has supplied a shuttle service to transport students to

North Campus. This amenity will eventually come to an end as the mall is

looking into new development opportunities.

Because the university is unlikely to add additional parking spaces, it is

important that we as engineers develop a means for allowing students and

faculty to efficiently find available parking on campus. Equipped with

knowledge and experience in computer and electronics engineering, Efficient

Student Parking developed a system which is unique and can only be

accomplished by a technically diverse group of students.

The Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P.) mission is to develop a vehicle detection system to allow people to see an

accurate representation of parking availability.

To have statistical evidence of this need, a survey to obtain data for the records as well as to demonstrate how

UNO needs to improve this facet of its campus facilities was organized. A meeting with the Parking Office Manager,

Jim Ecker, was also scheduled to further research the project environment. Additionally this served to advertise

the project for future investment by the school. As the meeting concluded, team E.S.P. was presented with a

Figure 1 - North Campus Parking

Figure 2 - South Campus Parking


detailed analysis report of the school’s parking system by the office which included all of the statistics needed and

more. Therefore, it was decided to withdraw from administering the survey to the student body as the research

became unnecessary. Using such data as total parking stall counts, student parking activity, and shuttle bus

demand we were not only able to confirm the parking issue we were able to get the support of the parking office

in completing our project.

When it comes to fulfilling the need, project E.S.P. has several potential stakeholders that would be involved as

shown below in Figure 3. The first stakeholders include our senior project officer and the department chair,

Professor Detloff and Dr. Chen. By providing the university with a reliable system able to help facilitate a more

efficient use of the parking lots, the CEEN department would gain recognition on a large scale. This would present

the board of regents the ability to implement this system for all Universities in Nebraska.

UNO parking and campus security can also be considered stakeholders as both would gain tremendous amounts of

parking and traffic data. We would generate statistics as we track parking flow and would allow them to save time

by monitoring different lots at different times of the day based on congestion. Easily overlooked are the students

and faculty, as they are small when it comes to development but will ultimately be the ones gaining from the use

of our product. Lastly, we are our own stakeholders as we have to gain not only the knowledge of how to complete

this project but also could potentially turn a profit if sold commercially. If our solution is implemented, students

and staff would not have to park or drive in circles to wait for openings effectively wasting gas, they would easily

be able to see if it was worth even entering the lot or if the next one down was open, tardiness due to parking

would be a thing of the past, and overall traffic flow would be maintained.

Stakeholder Reason for Investment Role in Project

Professor Herb Detloff Senior Project Officer Guidance and advice for project design and implementation

CEEN Department Gain department recognition

Supply test equipment and facilities

Jim Ecker - UNO Parking Office Increase parking efficiency

Referencing and advising to meet the University’s parking need

Campus Security Parking lot statistics Reference for statistics

Faculty & Students Gain parking status and ability to make decisions Primary users

Team E.S.P. Completion of capstone project Project Engineers

Figure 3 - Project Stakeholders


To accomplish such a tracking scheme, team E.S.P. has gone with a method of induction loop detectors. By

designing such a loop allows for all metal chassis of cars to be accurately detected whilst not being falsely triggered

by the many pedestrians that pass through the parking lots.

The rest of this report will be spent discussing the many engineering aspects of the E.S.P. lot detector beginning

with the in depth analysis of the issue at hand. Several other criteria include: Project Design Requirements,

Concept Development, Engineering Analysis, Economic Analysis, Reliability and Safety, Social Impact, and a

complete user’s manual.


2.0 PROBLEM FORMULATION

This section outlines the process and resources used to formulate the problem and a patent liability analysis

comparing previously designed systems and how they compare to the E.S.P. system.

2.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT

While student enrollment at UNO continues to increase, parking availability becomes increasingly scarce, and

attempts to alleviate this problem are limited. Due to restricted real-estate on campus, only a limited number of

parking facilities can be built and doing so can be an expensive endeavor.

The shuttle system at UNO has long served as a means to ease parking woes on campus. In the past, students had

resorted to parking on south campus lots or Crossroads Mall and shuttling to class from these locations.

Crossroads mall is currently expecting to expand development opportunities, thus eliminating student parking for

UNO students, faculty and staff. Additionally, a previously spacious South Campus is currently undergoing many

new developments, including a new business college and student dormitories. Because of these new additions,

many parking lots have been removed in order for these institutions to be built.

Since increasing parking availability through means of increasing volume is not an option, the only alternative is to

increase the efficiency at which students and faculty can navigate parking lots in order to easily find available

spaces. The proposed method for achieving this task is to develop a system which is able to accurately track the

number of available parking spaces in a parking lot. The data gathered from this system will be transmitted to a

central server, where the data will be made available to UNO faculty and staff.

There are many contributing factors to inefficient parking on campus. One of the most profound issues is the fact

that a student must completely traverse a lot in order to determine if there are available parking spaces. The high

volume of traffic leads to over-congested parking lots, which is not only unsafe for pedestrians and other drivers,

but also leads to higher emissions of carbon dioxide.

The goal of this project is to allow the user to know how many available parking spaces are in each lot before

entering the lot. This will be accomplished by two means: the number of available parking spaces will be displayed

on a marquee outside of each lot, and the user will be able to access the information for all lots being tracked via a

web interface.


2.2 BACKGROUND

2.2.1 INTRODUCTION – PATENT ANALYSIS

The Efficient Student Parking project (E.S.P.) utilizes induction loops to detect a vehicle passing through a parking

lot entrance to track the number of vehicles in the parking lot versus the number of established parking spaces

available in that lot. This information is then displayed via two methods, first and most obvious is a marquee or

LCD display which vehicles driving by can see the remaining spaces. The second is via the internet on a website

which shows the entire UNO campus map and a color coded overlay which describes the space availability as well.

While the use of induction loops is quite common, such as in magnetically controlled gates, at stop lights to detect

traffic and adjust light cycling times, and in some cases on roadways to determine vehicle speed, the possibility of

patent liability could possible stem from how the induction loops are built, what software is used in the sampling

and subsequent use of that data, and how the client website is constructed. This paper will discuss the results of a

patent search for products and functions which are performed by E.S.P. which might infringe upon functions

performed by an existing product or similarly performed under the doctrine of equivalence.

2.2.2 RESULTS OF PATENT AND PRODUCT SEARCH

The primary resource used to research any patent information was the U.S. Patent Office at www.uspto.gov.

Searches were conducted using the patent library as well as the application patent library with the following

search commands respectively;

General Database Application Database

Ttl/(induction and loop and vehicle) Ttl/(parking and space and finder)

Ttl/(parking and space and tracker) Ttl/(parking and lot and finder)

Ttl/(induction and loop and finder) Ttl/(parking and lot)

Ttl/(induction and loop)

Figure 4 - Patent Search Functions


As a result of these searches, several patents were discovered which were involved in or around vehicle tracking

and parking lot management. Only a few of these showed at least some similarities in function and design. Each

of these patents is outlined below with a brief abstract as taken from the U.S. Trademark and Patent Office.

U.S. PAT. NO. 4,568,9371 Induction loop vehicle detector

Filed: June 2, 1983

Abstract:

An induction loop vehicle detector comprises an oscillator circuit having a plurality of capacitors

switchable in circuit with a road loop under the control of a microcomputer to determine the oscillator

frequency. The microcomputer monitors the oscillator frequency and controls the switching of the

capacitors to periodically return the frequency to a predetermined value. A counter counts a

predetermined number of oscillator cycles and gates of h.f. clock into a second counter whereby the count

of the counter represents the oscillator period. A "vehicle detected" output is given when the monitored

frequency alters by more than a predetermined amount, representing a decrease in the inductance of the

loop. On detecting an increase in the inductance above a predetermined threshold the detector is inhibited

for a predetermined time, e.g. about 1 second, to avoid errors caused by magnetic effects.

Key Claims:

A vehicle detector comprising: an oscillator circuit having capacitance means arranged to be connected to

a road loop for determining the frequency of the oscillator circuit; means for monitoring the frequency of

said oscillator circuit; a control processor arranged to control the capacitance of the capacitance means so

as to periodically return the frequency to a predetermined value; detector means for producing an output

signal indicative of a detected vehicle when the monitored frequency alters by more than a predetermined

amount, said detector means detecting a decrease in the inductance of the road loop and in response

thereto for providing a signal indicative of the presence of a vehicle; means for detecting an increase in the

inductance above a predetermined threshold; and means, responsive to said means for detecting, for

inhibiting the detector means for a predetermined time after detecting said increase in the inductance.

U.S. PAT. NO. 5,910,7822 On-board vehicle parking space finder service

[1] Clark, Induction Loop Vehicle Detector, Available: http://www.ptodirect.com/Results/Patents?query=PN/4568937, (1983)

[2] Schmitt and Buchalo, On-board vehicle parking space finder service, Available: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5910782.html, (1999)


Filed: June 8, 1999 Abstract:

An on-board vehicle navigation system parking space finder that offers a driver a competitive edge in

finding available on-street parking. Drivers not familiar with an area are able to locate available metered

parking spaces with ease. Drivers may be informed, on demand, of what type of currency they need for

parking meters in certain areas, so they can stop for change, if necessary. Drivers will have information

about maximum time limits for different parking meters, and can use this information to select meters

with longer time limits, if necessary. Metered parking information specific to a vehicles current location, as

well as metered parking information specific to a requested location, is made optionally available to

drivers from within their vehicles.

Key Claims:

receiving a driver request to initiate a parking availability request; transmitting the parking availability

request over a wireless medium to a central site; receiving a response message representative of current

parking availability information in a geographic area from the central site, the central site collecting

parking availability information transmitted from sensor devices monitoring associated parking spaces,

said parking spaces comprising at least one on-street parking space;

U.S. PAT. NO. 4,943,8053 Conduit-enclosed induction loop for a vehicle detector

Filed: July 24, 1990

Abstract:

An induction loop and a method of making an induction loop having conduit sections connected by a

coupling assembly. The coupling assembly includes a passageway-defining body having ends for receiving

sections of conduit. An intermediate body portion includes an opening exposing an intermediate

passageway exteriorly. A lid for sealingly [sic] covering the opening includes an extension placeable [sic]

into the opening for mating engagement with corresponding wall portions of the coupling body. The body

and lid provide lateral external-pressure-withstanding structure to prevent damage to the assembled loop

by absorbing regional pressures. This structure also provides for internal-pressure-withstanding sealing

between the two so that, after completion of insertion of conductor in the conduit loop, the conduit may

be injected under increased pressure with a heated rubberized asphalt sealant which is flexible at ambient

conditions. Flexible joints in the form of short flexible conduit portions are inserted between the coupling

[3] Dennison, Conduit-Enclosed Induction Loop for a Vehicle Detector, Available: http://www.ptodirect.com/Results/Patents?query=PN/4568937, (1990)


body and the relatively rigid conduit section to permit angular displacement of the body relative to the

section.

Key Claims:

1. In an inductive loop vehicle detector having a conductor extending in a loop-shaped conduit: a

conductor-surrounding filler within said conduit; and a conduit coupling assembly joining sections of the

conduit comprising: a body defining (a) a passageway extending through said body sized to receive at

each end of said passageway an end of a section of conduit, and (b) an opening externally exposing a

portion of said passageway intermediate its ends, said opening being defined by a wall portion extending

continuously about said opening; and a lid sized to completely cover said opening and having a continuous

loop-forming extension matingly [sic] engaging said continuous wall portion when said lid is covering said

opening; and said continuous extension and wall portion being mutually adherable [sic] for sealing said

opening; said conductor-surrounding filler filling said coupling assembly; and an adhesive adhering said

continuous extension and said wall portion together.

2.2.3 ANALYSIS OF PATENT LIABILITY

While these listed patents are similar in nature to our project we do vary in a few ways which might constitute a

counter argument to a patent violation suit. First listed, the patent for the vehicle tracker using inductions loops

itself is the same but instead of measuring the frequency directly for changes as well as having the frequency

computer controlled, E.S.P is using an envelope detector to convert alterations in the oscillation frequency to a

voltage level and measure it using a microcontroller.

When compared to the most recent patent, the airport radar tracking system is dissimilar in the detection

methods, purpose and scope of the project but the general idea was similar enough to warrant a closer inspection.

Fortunately, this patent is for aircraft parking lots, also called Aprons, and will be to track aircraft on the ground at

an airport and thus is dissimilar enough to our project in which we will not have any conflict.

Additionally, the thesis product will be using mobile copper wire loops tapped together for demonstration and

prototype purposes only. Actual construction and installation would be done by cutting a trench in the concrete

and laying the wire with a concrete road sealant on top.


2.2.4 ACTION RECOMMENDED

To best avoid and mitigate patent litigation for the E.S.P. project, maintaining the scope of potential customers is a

must - an automobile parking lot detection and information distribution device. Furthermore the current

detection methods must be kept, as well as the digital controls, in order to prevent infringement upon the first

listed patent which uses several methods to measure and control equipment frequency.

2.2.5 SUMMARY

After an extensive patent search, the design team concluded that the particular method for tracking vehicles and

the service provided through a computer system to display the tracking information is a unique product and if

remaining in scope of the previously established proposal and should not subject this team or the project to any

patent litigation

2.3 PROBLEM FORMULATION

Considering the dire need for improved parking at UNO, team E.S.P. decided it was of upmost importance to

develop a new method to aid the university. By hearing complaints via word of mouth, personal experience as well

as using hard statistics provided by the parking office this issue at hand is justified and the goal to provide a

working vehicle detection system is very realistic. The statistical analysis provided by the university was derived

from a study conducted in the spring of 2011 on the parking and shuttle system on campus. The details of this

report are not authorized for public release but this data was critical in conceptualizing the underlying issue and

the causes.

Additionally, a survey for the student body and faculty/staff was created but ultimately not pursued based of the

amount of approval required to send a mass email to the entire campus and collect data.

Though several tests run throughout the semester the project will be easy to verify through data. As an extended

effort to provide a reliable system for users to use, one of the project specific success criteria is just that, to be at

least 99% accurate at detecting when a vehicle enters or exits a lot.


3.0 PROJECT DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, SPECIFICATIONS AND SUCCESS CRITERIA

3.1 INTRODUCTION

This project from its conception was to build on a set of design objectives. These objectives best described the

goals of our project and how we would design our product and subsequently directed the criteria the team set

forth to determine project success. These success criteria were divided into two groups, Project Common Success

Criteria (PCSCs), goals for which any project in the CEEN department must meet and Project Specific Success

Criteria (PSSCs). These PSSCs were first proposed by the team in the fall semester of 2011 and approved by the

Senior Project Office, Professor Herb Detloff and deal with specific projects attributes.

The only alteration to these PSSCs was made on January 23rd, 2012 on an approved Engineering Charge Request

(E.C.R.) which can be found in Appendix B for reference.


3.2 OBJECTIVE TREE

Figure 5 - Objective Tree

3.3 PROJECT COMMON SUCCESS CRITERIA

PCSC Description

Bill of Materials Create a complete bill of materials and order/sample all parts needed for the design

Schematic Develop a complete, accurate, readable schematic of the design. Include interface loading

and timing analysis.

PCB Complete a layout and etch a printed circuit board

Assembly Populate and debug the design on a custom printed circuit board

Package Professionally package the finished product and demonstrate its functionality

Figure 6 - PCSC Listing


3.4 PROJECT SPECIFIC SUCCESS CRITERIA

Marketing

Requirement

PSSC Description

1, 4 Accuracy The tracker will be able to accurately detect 99 out of 100 cars upon

entering and exiting the parking lot – proven by testing.

2,3,4 Mobile access Client will be accessible via web browser on personal computers, iOS,

and Android via web browser.

1 Reliability Local node keeps master count of lot traffic and can be retrieved by

the server at any time. Users receive accurate lot count via browser

upon refresh within 1 minute.

1,2 BIT testing System will check for component failure by using built in diagnostic

tools every 30 minutes and display errors to administrator login on

website.

1 IEEE Standard System Communication will meet communication standards for

Ethernet (IEEE 802.3)

System communication will adhere to packet and frame formatting

standards as outlined in IEEE 802.3 chapter 3.

Marketing Requirements

1 - System is reliable

2 - System is easy to use

3 - System is low cost

4 - System is adaptable

Figure 7 - PSSC Listing


3.5 DELIVERABLES

As a result of our project we will present the following deliverables:

• A tracker that can detect when a vehicle enters or exits a parking lot.

• The server on which the data will be stored will be able to handle input from multiple sources.

• The data on the server will be accessible through the local network.

3.6 CONSTRAINTS

Through the course of the project we will have the following constraints:

• Have a 99% accuracy or better detection rate of cars

• Withstand precipitation – i.e. rainproof

• If student funded, the cost of this project must be under $1,500

• If funded by UNO, this project will remain within our established budget

• Information must have accessibility through the local network

• Reliable during school hours

• Local node will be powered by 120V, 60Hz

• System cannot be attached to the vehicles, system must be discrete (ex: no Infrared tags on vehicle

pass)

• Project must be completed by the end of the semester


4.0 CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT, SYNTHESIS AND PROCESS DESCRIPTION

This section details the process by which the team developed concepts and methods to solve the identified

problem of find a parking space on campus. As a guide, the Senior Thesis textbook was used for several templates

and concept generation and reduction techniques.4

4.1 LITERATURE REVIEW

To understand the environment and the constraints dictated by the problem extensive research was done on

possible solutions and currently available technology in order to perform the most basic functions of our system.

The primary vehicle for research started at both personal experiences of each team member as well as internet

searches using the Google search engine. From this several white papers, studies, and presentations were

obtained from several specific companies that offer solutions to track a vehicle and the Department of

Transportation (DOT). The study by the DOT5 was actually the most beneficial document as it provided scientific

and technical background data for which to make well informed decisions on current technology.

4.2 CONCEPT GENERATION

As a result of the research conducted into possible and current solutions the team began to determine concepts of

operation how a possible system might work. However the first decision required was to determine if it would be

better to track the number of cars entering the parking lot or to track every individual space in the parking lot. This

was ultimately narrowed using a simple pro and con list shown below. Once the scope was specified to where the

project was going to detect the vehicles that gave the team a specific direction to go when generating solution

methods.

[4] Ford and Caulston, Design for Electrical and Computer Engineers, 2008.

[5] Federal Highway Adminstration, ”Sensor Technology", Traffic Detector Handbook, Available: www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/operations/its/06108/02.cfm


Method Strengths Weaknesses Whole Lot Tracker Decreased Cost

Centralized equipment Minimal construction

Accuracy might be questionable Implementation becomes questionable in non-standard lots Differentiation may be questionable

Individual Space Tracker

Near Absolute accuracy Able to locate individual empty spaces Doesn’t need to differentiate between cars/motorcycles

Hundreds of trackers per lot Significantly Increased Cost Requires power at every space May be damaged by snow plows

Figure 8 - Tracker Implementation Comparison

4.3 CONCEPT REDUCTION

The following diagrams show our analysis of determining the methods of detection and system communication.

Depending on the desired information we used either a Strength and Weakness Comparison chart or a Weighted

Pairwise Comparison to make our decision.

The next table shows the strengths and weaknesses comparison of all of the possible concepts generated in an

attempt to help eliminate some of the least probably solutions.

Tracking Method Local Node Communication Method Tracker/Node

Communication Method Node/Server

Display Method

Laser Detection Full PC Ethernet Ethernet Marquee Induction Loops Microcontroller Zigbee Zigbee Website Image Recognition WiFi WiFi Cell App

Ultrasonic Detection Laser RFID RADAR

Integrated

Figure 9 – Methods Table


The next table takes each PSSC and uses a Pairwise Comparison method to weight each requirement in relation to

the others.

Method Strengths Weaknesses Laser Detection Easy to implement

Cheap Provides a simple on/off interface

Easily triggered by pedestrians Visible Small range of detection

Induction Loops Good detection of vehicles Low error rate Unseen

Underground construction Expensive

Image Recognition High detection rate Vehicle differentiation

Processing heavy Difficult implementation

Ultrasonic Detection Easy to implement Cheap Wide area of detection

Does not work well with distance Human interference

RADAR Very large scan area Reliable

Expensive Very complex data processing

RFID Small footprint Easy to implement Simple high/low trigger input

Too costly to implement for all students Requires separate entity for student or on student car Short read distance

Full PC Large processing power Ease of use

Bulky Needs to be weatherproof

Microcontroller Only Small Could be concealed Cheap

Limited abilities

Ethernet Fast Cheap Common

Physical interface Distance issues

Zigbee Cheap Small Distance efficient

Interference and obstructions

WiFi Easy to incorporate Standard, already available on campus

Distance issues Speed and congestion issues

Integrated Small package Less hardware

Needs stronger node/server communication

Marquee Easy to see Convenient to traffic

Big Expensive

Website Common Easy to use Easily available

-

Cell App Extremely easy to access Gives users on demand info

Software heavy Stress on servers for data requests

Figure 10 - Pros / Cons Table


Accu

racy

Inst

alla

tion

Avai

labi

lity

Appl

icat

ion

Port

abili

ty

Pric

e

Appl

icat

ion

Visi

bilit

y

Wea

ther

proo

f

Safe

ty Mean Weight

Accuracy 1 5 3 3 5 3 1/3 1/5 1.61 0.13

Installation 1/5 1 1/3 1/3 1 1/3 1/5 1/5 0.36 0.03

Availability 1/3 3 1 3 3 1 1/5 1/7 0.84 0.07

Application

Portability 1/3 3 1/3 1 3 1 1/7 1/7 0.61 0.05

Price 1/5 1 1/3 1/3 1 1/3 1/7 1/9 0.32 0.03

Application Visibility 1/3 3 1 1 3 1 1/5 1/7 0.74 0.06

Weatherproof 3 5 5 5 7 5 1 1/3 2.85 0.23

Safety 5 5 7 7 9 9 3 1 4.83 0.40

Total 12.17 1.00

Figure 11 - Pairwise Comparison

Lastly, the list of Detection Methods shown in previous figures with the weighted values obtained above were used

in the following table to generate a value system to show which detection method meets our engineering

requirements the best.

Figure 12 – Decision Chart

Image Processing

Inductance Loops

Laser Tripwire RADAR RFID Tags

Controlled Gates

Accuracy

0.13 5 3 1/3 3 5 7

Mechanical Complexity

0.03 3 3 7 1/7 1/3 1

Availability 0.07 Application Portability

0.05 5 3 1/5 3 1/3 1

Price

0.03 3 3 5 1/5 1/3 1/7

Application Visibility

0.06 5 3 1/7 3 7 7

Weatherproof 0.23 5 5 1 5 5 1/3 Safety 0.4 5 7 1/7 7 7 1/3 Score 4.743 4.121 1.026 3.766 4.649 3.352


By the above analysis the best solution to our problem is Image Processing followed by RFID Tags and Inductance Loops. After examining each of those options, Image Processing requires more powerful computers than a microcontroller and the RFID tags have a very short range and aren’t practical in vehicle situations without major construction and impeding the traffic flow. This ultimately let the team to design and build a system based off of induction loops as the method for detecting vehicles.

Research into how to make an induction loop was derived from several textbooks which described how to design

various oscillators.6 7

[6] Beasley and Miller, Laboratory Manual to Accompany Modern Electronic Communications, 9th Ed., 2008.

[7] Jaeger and Blalock, Microelectronic Circuit Design, 3rd Ed., 2008.


4.4 PROJECT SCHEDULE

Figure 13 – Project Schedule


This Page is Intentionally Blank


5.0 DETAILED ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PRODUCT PRESENTATION

5.1 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

In order for vehicle detection to reliably work, much research was done to find the best possible solution to fit the

University’s need. As can be shown in the previous section, induction loops were determined to be the most cost

effective and reliable solution.

The first order of design was the oscillator, as a stable frequency is required. Several designs were simulated and

built on a bread board but were unsuccessful since they were not stable. Some of those designs were as follows:

Figure 14 - Concept Design 1

Figure 15 - Concept Design 2


The final circuit design consists of a stable Colpitts Oscillator going to a low pass filter to avoid any sidebands and

finally to an envelope detector to be able to read a stable DC value at the output.

To design for each of the 4 frequency oscillators needed, the following equation was used:

𝐶1 = 𝐶2 = 𝐿𝑜𝑜𝑝 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒

(2𝜋 ∗ 𝐹𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦)2

When the loop inductance was measured to be 83µH and with the desired frequencies: 60kHz, 70kHz, 80kHz, and

90kHz the capacitors were able to adjust to fit appropriately. To determine the size and shape of the loops used,

the equation from the United States Department of Transportation Report8 was used:

[8] United States Department of Transportation Report, Available: http://www.dot.gov/about.html

Figure 16 - Final Tracker Design


𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑛𝑠 ∗ 𝑀𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝐹𝑙𝑢𝑥 𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 ∗ 𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑆𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎

𝐶𝑜𝑖𝑙 𝐶𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡

So just by looking at this equation, one can see that if there are a constant number of turns, same size of area, and

constant current, that any change to the magnetic field will alter the inductance which in turn will alter the

frequency of the oscillator. After filtering out the sidebands, the envelope detector was the last important step as

a stable DC output is required. The envelop detector was simulated individually to test for minimal oscillation

amplitude and acceptable decay rate from high to low frequency states.

To further demonstrate the ability of this circuit design, it was prototyped on a bread board and several testing

measurements were taken. The figure below shows the circuit laid on the bread board for testing.

Figure 18 - Envelope Detector Circuit Figure 17 - Envelope Detector Simulation

Figure 19 - Tracker Circuit Prototype


Used a testing platform, an induction loop was built inside of a PVC pipe frame to provide project testing a

constant shape and configuration for a consistent inductance value. Figure 20 shows the 6 pass induction loop in

PVC pipe used for lab testing standing on its side as to avoid any magnetic field due to the steel beams in building’s

the floor.

Figure 22 shows the frequency

and voltage at the standing

position to be 2.9V at 68kHz.

Figure 21 shows the loop on

the ground with a metal shelf

in the middle to cause a

magnetic disturbance.

And finally, Figure 23 shows the

impact of the cart and the

voltage to now be 1.7V at

72kHz successfully

demonstrating the analog

inductance loop detector

circuit as designed.

The next logical step for the detector was to find an enclosure that would be able to operate in outdoor weather

and be big enough to fit the entire PCB and cables inside. The following document was completed as an in depth

analysis of the different types of packaging available to use.

Figure 22 - PVC Induction Loop (1) Figure 20 - PVC Induction Loop (2)

Figure 23 - Tracker Circuit Prototype Waveforms (No Car) Figure 21- Tracker Circuit Prototype Waveforms (Simulated Car)


5.2 PRODUCT PRESENTATION

5.2.1 INTRODUCTION – PACKAGING DESCRIPTION

The Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P.) project is to develop a vehicle detection system that will monitor up to four

complete induction loops using Colpitts oscillators and band pass filters to detect vehicles based on frequency

shifts. Due to the operating environment this system would need to operate in, the project needs to have very

specific packing requirements to operate safely and effectively without impeding the flow of traffic.

5.2.2 COMMERCIAL PRODUCT PACKAGING

The concept of tracking vehicles with inductive loops is not a unique concept and as such the E.S.P. project has

several commercially available products which perform similar functions and thus can provide good examples for

which to compare our team’s design. Two of these particular products are from Sen Source and their TC-BL44

Series Inductive Burial Loop Vehicle Counter and Marsh Products Inc. 610 Loop Vehicle Detector. Both of these

products use induction loops to detect vehicles and are packaged to meeting environmental conditions similar to

those set forth in our project proposal.

5.2.2.1 MARSH PRODUCTS 610 LOOP VEHICLE DETECTOR9

This product is packaged in a durable ABS plastic which is sealed and secured

using metal screws. The enclosure is secured to a frame using mounting

screws or a Velcro strap. The casing is designed with a temperature rating of

-40 degrees Fahrenheit to 180 degrees Fahrenheit.

The advantage of this product’s packaging is it makes the device completely

enclosed with signaling LED’s to view status information of the detector. The

one thing this product does not account for is the external communications

port on the right side is not covered for rain or other environmental effects.

[9] Marsh Products Inc, 610 Loop Vehicle Detector, Available: http://www.marshproducts.com/pdf/LoopVehicle.pdf

Figure 24 - 610 Loop Vehicle Detector


This product also boasts a UL approved Class 2 Plug-in the wall 12 VDC adapter and connected via screw terminals.

5.2.2.2 SEN SOURCE TC-2BL44-R INDUCTIVE BURIAL LOOP VEHICLE COUNTER10

The Sen Source product line has different product for single and dual

lane counting devices. Each of these are enclosed in a similar casing

that is adapted to meet the needs of their customers.

This enclosure is a 5.1” by 5.1” by 3” case rated at NEMA4x

standards. The casing is made of a polycarbonate material and

secured using lock tight screws. Some of their other products which

include similar functionality that the E.S.P. project is demonstrating

are enclosed in a large casing that is 9.5” by 11.25” by 7”. For

reference, the National Electric Code (NEC) lists the specific

requirements for standards such as NEMA 4x and are located in

Appendix D. The real significant of this product is that not only were

they the only company of the two to cite a specific standards specification on the enclosure but that the

specification was so rigid. Initially the team was examining NEMA 3R rated metal enclosures for cost reasons but

after analyzing the Sen Source products the NEMA 4x enclosure seemed to be a product standard we should strive

to meet if funding permits.

5.2.3 PROJECT PACKAGING SPECIFICATIONS

The field equipment used in the E.S.P. project will consist of a single fiberglass

enclosure which meets NEMA 4x standard for outdoor electrical protection. An

AMU1084CCHF from FactoryMation11 was selected for use in our project which

features a 10” x 8” x 4” area with a polycarbonate window and hinged screw

cover which will be good for presentation and display of functionality. A

finished market product could utilize a solid cover just the same. On the

[10] Sensource, "Inductive Burial Loop Vehicle Counter", Available: http://vehicle-counters.com/PDF/TC-BL44-R-2BL44-R.pdf

[11] FactoryMation, Available:http://www.factorymation.com/s.nl/it.A/id.4754/.f?sc=2&category=16831

Figure 26. AMU1084CCHF

10"x8"x4" fiberglass enclosure

Figure 25 - TC-2BL44-R Inductive Burial Loop

Vehicle Counter


product webpage it is listed as being suitable for applications such as “Electrical and electronic controls,

instruments, components” and meets several specifications which are beneficial in outdoor settings which are

listed in the table below:

Mounting screws and all objects which penetrate the enclosure will be

sealed with weatherproof sealant or similar glue or epoxy to maintain

environmental ratings. Ideally, if funding permits, the enclosure has

an associated subpanel standoff which allows for equipment

mounting while maintaining the integrity of the enclosure. The case

itself will be mounted to a wooden 4” x 4” post using ¾” plywood

backing to mount on as the screw holes are 6-1/2” apart.

All cables which will enter into the enclosure will be contained within

½” Liquid Tight Flexible Metal Conduit (LFMC) for the prototype but

for a professional market installation typical Rigid Metal Conduit

(RMC) or Rigid Nonmetallic Conduit (RNMC) may be used in

accordance with local and national electrical standards. All conduit

connections will only demonstrate the connection type for the

prototype and thus will only extend roughly a foot from the enclosure.

Additionally, as any mounting screws and other penetrations into the

enclosure, proper precautions, connections and sealant will be used to

connect the conduit body to the enclosure.

Power connections will be made using three AWG#16 THHN wire to energize an internal NEMA 5-15R power

receptacle such as a Leviton 5320-WCP12 from Platt.com. This power receptacle will be enclosed in its own

junction box similar to the Appleton 4CS-1/213 which is 4” x 2-1/8” x 1-7/8”. This junction box will be capped with

[12] Available: http://www.platt.com/platt-electric-supply/Residential-Receptacles-15-Amp-Duplex/Leviton/5320-WCP/product.aspx?zpid=265848

[13] Available: http://www.platt.com/platt-electric-supply/Handy-Boxes-Accessories-Boxes/Appleton/4CS-1-2/product.aspx?zpid=205793

NEMA 4X Specifications

Non-corrosive

Non-conductive

Temperature-resistant

Fire-resistant

Rated NEMA 4, 4X, 12

UL listed Type 1, 2, 3, 3R, 4, 4X, 12, 13

Figure 27 - NEMA 4X Specifications


a faceplate similar to an Appleton 251014 to maintain a safe working environment when the project is de-

energized.

[14] Available: http://www.platt.com/platt-electric-supply/Handy-Boxes-Accessories-Box-Covers/Appleton/2510/product.aspx?zpid=231183

Figure 29. Appleton 2510 Duplex Cover Figure 30 - Appleton 4CS-1-2 Figure 28 - 5-15R


5.2.4 PCB FOOTPRINT LAYOUT

The PCB layout for this project will be a closely packed circuit board that will require several outside connections,

such as power, the external inductance loops, Ethernet connection and the LCD/marquee display. The PCB layout

without any routing or a silk screen can be found in figure 37 on page 48. The most recent design, version 1.7

which is based off of the version 0.7 schematics, is laid out on a 5” by 6” board.

The main consideration from this PCB design is ensuring there will be enough space inside the enclosure to install a

NEMA 5-15R outlet to power our project. This method is a simple way of allowing us to use a simple Wall Wart

power supply for the PCB and plug it directly into a typical 120VAC 15A outlet which removes the need for

installing an isolation transformer and power supply of our own.

Additionally, the orientation of the components and the PCB was a consideration as much as reasonably possible

with our project having so many external connections outside of the enclosure. While not every connection could

have been lined up along one edge of the board, the most important ones to leave the enclosure in the shortest

distance would be the induction loop wires while the power cable and Ethernet connection will have no trouble

being routed around the enclosure.


5.2.5 CAD SCHEMATICS AND ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 3131 – Enclosure Dimensions


5.2.6 MATERIALS REQUIREMENT

Item Name Description Order Location Price Number Total Cost

AMU1084CCHF Allied Enclosure 10x8x4 NEMA 4X, hinged, fiberglass.

Factorymation.com $66.00 1 $66.00

P108 Allied Enclosure, steel-white finish subpanel for AM1086

Factorymation.com $8.00 1 $8.00

Appleton 2510 Duplex Receptacle Platt.com $0.52 1 $0.52

Appleton 4CS-1/2 4”x2-1/8” J Box Platt.com $1.54 1 $1.54

Leviton 5320-WCP NEMA 5-15R Platt.com $0.70 1 $0.70

½” LFMC Liquid Tight Flexible Metal Conduit

Stayonline.com $1.35/ft 10 $13.50

3512RAC ½” Metallic Conduit Fitting Stayonline.com $2.50 6 $15.00

3/4x4x8 Pine Plywood

Lowes.com $29.97 1 $29.97

4x4x8 Douglas-Fir Lowes.com $10.12 1 $10.12

Redwood Exterior Wood Stain

1-Gallon latex Lowes.com $9.97 1 $9.97

Total $155.32

Figure 3232 – Enclosure Materials

5.2.7 TOOLS REQUIREMENT

Drill Press

Cordless Drill

Plastic Drill Bits

Wood Drill Bits

Screwdriver

Adjustable Wrench

Circular Saw with minimum 4” blade

Paint Brush

Weatherproof Epoxy or Hot Glue Gun


5.2.8 ESTIMATED WEIGHT

AMU1084CCHF Fiberglass Enclosure, 6 lb

5-15R and Enclosure, 1 lb

Electrical Components, 1 lb

1’ EMT (x6) with couplers, 1 lb

Total Weight 8 lb

5.3 HARDWARE DESIGN

After the selection of the casing, the project advanced onto designing the digital circuitry to ensure it has sufficient

communication and requirements to handle all of the incoming and outgoing data.

5.3.1 INTRODUCTION – HARDWARE DESIGN REVIEW

The Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P.) project is to develop a vehicle detection system that will monitor up to four

complete induction loops using Colpitts oscillators and low pass filters to detect vehicles based on frequency shifts.

Circuit design also consists of a 40 pin microcontroller, LCD, an Ethernet controller for communication, and outputs

available for future expansion via XBee.

5.3.2 THEORY OF OPERATION

The most critical functionality lies within the operation of the oscillator and band pass filter to yield successful

voltage readings when cars pass over the loops. Each Colpitts oscillator is designed to oscillate at different

frequencies 60 kHz, 70 kHz, 80 kHz, and 90 kHz since they will be close range to each other and will help reduce

noise. Following the oscillator, the signal goes into a low pass filter where it is actively filtered to the designed

frequency and is tunable via a potentiometer.

Logically, when a car passes over the loop it will shift the frequency of the oscillator and thus drastically reduce the

output voltage of the band pass filter. Lastly, the output of the filter goes into an envelope detector to get a near

constant peak voltage reading which will be used in the microcontroller ADC for measurements. Components for

these circuits were chosen to be all 1% resistor and 5% capacitor tolerances with a quad package high precision

low noise op-amp for the filtering for the best accuracy. In order to have the filters function properly they require

both a positive and a negative 5VDC power rail. The positive 5VDC and 3.3VDC power rails are taken care of via


basic voltage regulators (LD1085 and LD111733 respectively) but the negative rail is a special case, as the circuit

only takes in a positive DC value, and will be accomplished using the MAX764CPA. Both the oscillator and low pass

output from all four loops will be routed to a test point for ease of access for troubleshooting.

Following the envelope detector, the signal goes into one of the microcontrollers ADC ports for digital analysis.

Once this input is converted into a decimal value, it will have a programmable threshold value it will test against

which will determine the sensitivity of vehicle detection. Upon successful detection, the controller will format the

positive trigger as a command package and send it over the Ethernet via the Lantronix Xport to the server and

database. Another small component that will provide helpful data, read in through the ADC, is the MCP9700

temperature sensor to monitor ambient temperature to be sure the device is operating within the acceptable

range.

5.3.3 HARDWARE DESIGN NARRATIVE

The Atmega1284p is a powerful microcontroller that provides all of the functionality that E.S.P. requires for the

parking local node. Since there are 32 general I/O pins, the following paragraphs will break down how each port is

used and why it was chosen for that usage.

Easily using the most pin space on the controller is the 20 X 4 character LCD which will be

demonstrating the marquee functionality. As data is transmitted in 8 bit parallel, it requires

a full port dedication for communication. Nothing in the E.S.P. design requires any data

transfer over I²C so PORTC was decided to be used as the data port, seen in figure 35.

Associated pins for LCD enable and register select are PORTD pin 7 and PORTD pin 6

respectively. There is an additional pins on the LCD for Read/Write ability but was grounded

as it will never be need to be read from, as well as a contrast pot which will be available on

board. One thing to note, the connector on the PCB is actually a mirror image of the actual LCD connector as it will

be connected via ribbon cable which mirrors the pins on the other end.

One of the interior subsystems in the Atmega1284p that will be seeing a lot of action is the USART (universal

synchronous/asynchronous receiver/transmitter). As the gateway to the server from the local node, it will be in

constant communication sending and receiving commands and will have a

high priority, second only to the ADC readings. The most important thing

that was needed to take into consideration when connecting the USART

was to make sure to cross over the connection between Rx and Tx from

Figure 33 – Data Ports

Figure 34 – Logic Converters


the controller to the Ethernet controller to ensure correct data flow. Having the ability to add a future XBee also

affects the design as most XBee models do not have 5VDC I/O serial pins. Due to this issue, logic translators have

been incorporated between the USART and XBee data pins that convert the CMOS 5VDC logic of the Atmega to

3.3VDC logic of the XBee and vice versa using the Texas Instruments TXB0101 one bit bidirectional voltage level

translator. Shown above in figure 34 are the two logic converters for both Tx and Rx.

The only other major subsystem used in the microcontroller is the analog to digital channels by each of the four

induction loops and temperature sensor. Every 300 to 500milliesonds each ADC channel will check the voltage and

compare it to the threshold value to determine if a car is present. Internally, the ADC will be used in the trigger

fashion by checking the ADC interrupt flag and clearing it after it is read. Using free running mode would also be

possible but leaves room for error when needing to be read from and the value is not ready. Even though the

temperature sensor will always be outputting a voltage linear to the temperature, it will only be checked when the

server sends a testing command or if in maintenance mode (menu option). All commands will be read in through

the Ethernet controller to the USART character by character and will be handled by a USART parsing function.

Exterior to the controller will be three hardware buttons which will allow for access to a software menu. Having

this ability lets a user choose between several options such as: marquee display mode, maintenance mode –

displays loop voltages and temperature, and lot management – allows for local changes to the lot count via

up/down buttons. The casing will be needed to be opened up to have access to these on board buttons.

Lastly, programmability will lie within using the AVR ISP programmer and standard 6 pin ICSP connector. The

programming is done over the SPI bus and is the only device that will be using this serial connection. Going to a

block connector are the rest of the 8 general I/O pins that are not used as well as the 4 loop outputs that can be

used for any voltage measurements. There is also a 6 pin block connector for 3.3VDC, 5VDC, and GND which can be

used for testing purposes.

5.3.4 SUMMARY

As this hardware review comes to a close, it can be seen that the E.S.P. hardware has been clearly described and

outlined above. To summarize, the main components are the Atmega controller, Lantronix Xport controller, and

the induction loop circuits. Along with the hardware needs comes the controller subsystems and software

including: ADC channels, USARTs, menu system, and full port access for LCD. Special consideration was taken for

each device to be sure it was powered by the correct voltage level as well as the data pin tolerance and voltage

swing allowed. To briefly reiterate, the microcontroller uses 5VDC, filter op-amp uses 5VDC and -5VDC, and the

Xport will be using 3.3VDC; all devices are 5VDC tolerant.


5.3.5 SCHEMATIC

Attached on the next page is the entire set of hardware schematics for the E.S.P. project. All components follow

IEEE standard 91-198415 with the only exception being bidirectional signals. Below, in figure 3, is a basic overview

of data flow and power of the hardware.

[15] Texas Instruments Explanation of Logic Symbols [Online]. Available: http://www.ti.com/lit/ml/sdyz001a/sdyz001a.pdf ,1996.

Figure 35 – Atmega Functional Flow Chart


5.4 PCB DESIGN

5.4.1 INTRODUCTION – PCB DESIGN

The Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P.) project is to develop a vehicle detection system on a single printed circuit

board (PCB) to be enclosed at a single location near the parking lot. Using a single board design requires

considerations for the following issues: component spacing, heat dissipation, design flow placement, and trace

width and size. Team E.S.P. will draw PCB design techniques from previous experience and instructor suggestions

to design a complete working circuit board.

5.4.2 PCB LAYOUT DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS - OVERALL

The PCB design for E.S.P. will be a total of 30 in² (5” x 6”) and will contain all components needed, including the

Ethernet controller and loop oscillator circuits. The biggest factor of the PCB design layout is the placement of the

components. Components are laid out on the board in order of signal flow

and ease of use. For example, one can see in the figure to the right that all

components relating to the loop circuits are located on the bottom middle

part of the board, all resistor values are located in the same order for all 4

loops, and each potentiometer is conveniently located in a clutter free

area for easy access. This allows for anyone using the equipment to not

only find what they are looking for quickly but also allows for a better

understanding of how that section of components are working. In the case

of the loops, it is a priority that the inductance loops are not interfered

with by any on board noise and therefore are placed at the very edge. This also applies to the maintenance

buttons located conveniently at the top of the board as well as the ISP programmer pins located at the top to

prevent the programmer dangling over the entire board. There are also test points to allow for much more

convenient access to important parts of the analog signals for testing than as they would be by trying to have a volt

meter on the right of the board on an unmarked soldered pin. Lastly, both the power and Ethernet connections are

located on the left side of the board for ease of access.

Figure 36 – Image of Project PCB


For all component signal traces, the standard 10 mil trace width will be used and will be routed with 15 mil trace

spacing. According to the millhouse at Advanced Circuits16 these specifications are well within those required to

make a PCB. All other specifications used at Advanced Circuits such as silkscreen text width, board size and

thickness, and drill hole/pad size will be followed to ensure a successful PCB is created. One large PCB design

concern is the Ethernet controller and the heat dissipation required by the device. Special consideration is given to

it by having a 1 square inch top and bottom ground plane around the device connecting both of its shield pins to

ensure that the device does not overheat when transferring large amounts of data at a high rate.

A consideration was given to the size of the board versus the amount of space needed for traces concluding with

using mostly through-hole components as fewer vias were needed and traces could be routed more efficiently

without components on both sides of the board.

5.4.3 PCB LAYOUT DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS - MICROCONTROLLER

The microcontroller, Atmega1284, is a 40 pin through-hole microcontroller that is powered by 5 VDC and controls

all logic components in the project. Due to this fact, the Atmega is placed very close to the middle of the board to

help prevent any signals from being extremely far from the controller. Clocking is accomplished using the crystal

oscillator method with a 16kHz crystal connected to the x1 and x2 pins of the µC. These circuit components are

placed very close to the actual controller as the further away they are the noisier the clock signal will be.

There are also two separate voltage inputs for the microcontroller; one is the analog voltage input. Each of these

voltage/ground pairs has a 100 nF bypass capacitor from +5VDC to ground to eliminate any EMI or voltage spikes

and are placed as close to the Atmega as physically possible. The AVCC also has a ferrite bead going to +5VDC to

help separate the digital versus analog supply voltages. Ground between the two has also been considered and will

only be connected at one point via a solder-able connector, seen on the PCB layout in Appendix A at the top right

of the board. Having only a single point of connection greatly cuts down on the chance of creating a ground loop

between the power/analog/digital grounds. This 100nF bypass cap strategy has also been followed throughout all

the rest of the digital components: XBee, Xport, and -5VDC regulator.

[16] Advanced Circuits ,PCB Design Specifications [Online], Available: http://4pcb.com/pcb-design-specifications/, 2007.


5.4.4 PCB LAYOUT DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS – POWER SUPPLY

All components need power in some form or another so the method of delivery of power is a very important

design factor. Due to this fact and the concept that these traces will be the ones to help to dissipate heat leads to

the idea of thicker board traces for the power and ground lines. The size of these traces has been decided to be at

least 25mil thick as it has been demonstrated to be successful in the past on several occasions. The idea was

considered to have a dedicated layer for both power and ground but resolved to be too much of an extraneous

expense since it is not required for the board to have 4 layers. Another thing to note is the layout of the power

circuitry – located on the left side of the PCB. The local node board will get its source of power from a standard

7.5V 1A wall wart via a DC jack on the PCB. This will then be fed into the 5VDC and -5VDC regulators going to the

majority of the chips. The 3.3VDC power rail will be sourced out of the 5VDC regulator to help conserve on the

voltage drop and reduce the heat on the 3.3V regulator. In another attempt to reduce heat from the 3.3V

regulator, since it will be sourcing quite a bit of current for the Ethernet controller, will be to have a small ground

plane around it.

5.4.5 SUMMARY

In summary, the Efficient Student Parking lot tracker is a compact single PCB package that will perform all logic

calculations on board and have the ability to communicate via Ethernet to a central server. Signal width and traces

were taken into consideration and sized and routed accordingly to have the optimal data transfer. Power and

ground traces and width were also considered and were designed to be bigger than the signal traces as to help

dissipate more heat and are routed as to not couple with the signal traces. Again, to help with voltage spikes and

EMI, bypass capacitors were placed as close to the digital devices as possible. Lastly, it was made sure to have

mounting screws on each of the 4 corners to allow for the board to be mounted inside of the NEMA 4X case.


5.4.6 PCB LAYOUT

Figure 37 – PCB Schematic

Finally finishing the hardware design and physical board design we moved onto the embedded software for the

E.S.P. local node. The following document goes into a deeper explanation of how we incorporated our software

design into the hardware and server.


5.5 FIRMWARE LISTING

5.5.1 INTRODUCTION

The goal of Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P) is to develop a vehicle detection system that allows people to see an

accurate representation of parking availability. Of the different components that make up this project, each relies

heavily on the use of software for communication and automation. The microcontroller on the local node will

detect vehicles enter and exiting the parking lot as well as communicate with the server. The local node will be

programmed using an AVR programmer and will be coded in embedded C.

The server will interface with users, administrators, and the local node. This will run as a desktop application and

will be programmed in Java. Finally, the client will interface with the server. It will run as an embedded Java applet

and will be embedded in the web page.

5.5.2 SOFTWARE DESIGN NARRATIVE

The code on the microcontroller is separated into different display modes. The functionality of this is to display the

information in real time to the LCD of the board. During these states, the board will still be able to detect cars via

interrupts triggered by the ADC. This code has been thoroughly tested and is sitting at a 100% success rate.

The board will also be able to send any messages to the server through the USART and Ethernet. This is checked

repeatedly in each state as communication is a very high priority. Messages needing to be sent are stored in a

buffer within the Xport module and wait until the microcontroller is ready to process them. The Xport is a very

convenient module as it is very “black box” in terms of the programming. All configurations were completed using

a telnet interface such as speed of data transfer, IP address, and USART data modes.

The server consists of 3 modules: the main console, the Ethernet/communication module, and the

database/logging module. The main console initiates the Graphical User Interface (GUI) and sets up the entire

configuration needed for Ethernet communication. All data is routed through the main console, while the other

modules either run on separate threads or are called at some point in the main console.

The Ethernet/communication module is isolated in its own specific process, or thread. This module constantly

listens for messages from the local node. This is important, as the communication and GUI need to run in parallel -

to keep the GUI from hanging and the communication module from missing messages. When data is received, it

sends a message to the main console containing the parsed data, which is then formatted and logged.


Lastly, the logging/database module is driven by the main console. When data is received from the communication

module, a request to log the information is sent from the main console which is then written to a database

scheme, and can be access for initialization.

5.5.3 SUMMARY

Progress was continuously being made on the firmware and software throughout the entire design process. Both

the local node embedded code using AVR Studio and java code using Eclipse were kept using different version

controlled formats to be sure there were records of code growth.

Because of the design of the project, it is not crucial that there were many interrupt driven functions. Due to the

speed of our microcontroller, a polling system is not only sufficient, but it exceeds the level of performance that

was expected from this project. Polling systems can often lead to hanging programs or bugs; however the 6 state

design circumvents all these issues and runs smoothly.

Because the AVR IO library handles all of the initialization of ports and the memory management, it is not entirely

important that this is outlined. The microcontroller we selected has more than sufficient space for variables due to

the 1284Kb of onboard RAM. Additionally, the complexity and length of the code is within reasonable limit, which

further prevents needing to worry about insufficient space for the code.

Although an important module, the Xport Ethernet controller source is disclosed from the user and the

microcontroller interfaces with it directly via the USART. Knowing this, the actual process in which the device

formats the packets individually or how it handles the buffer is not the important issue, rather it is making sure it is

correctly programmed to function properly.

Finally, a large portion of our code is for the server. This module is programmed via Java and interfaces with the

microcontroller by means of sockets. Due to the capability of the server, the interfaces for administration and

communication run efficiently with very little overhead.

Overall, the software turned out beautifully with every bit of functionality that was desired from the planning

stage. Several roadblocks were avoided due to modular coding and making sure to comment copiously for ease of

understanding.


6.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

6.1 COST ANALYSIS

While never deemed as part of the project success criteria, one of this projects objectives were to design and build

a low cost solution to the stated problem and goals. This section provides the details of the project’s expenses as

tracked during the course of its design. Furthermore, there is a breakdown of development cost versus the cost of

materials to build an individual unit.

All purchases made for the project were tracked using a spreadsheet hosted on Google Documents and

subsequently displayed on the project website17. At the onset of the project, the team determined that all

purchases would be logged by the Resource Manager and any purchases over $25 would have a receipt provided

for records.

The budget set for this project was set at $1,500 funded in equal thirds by each engineer participating in the

project. Rather than place $500 into a bank account, detailed records were kept on the amount of funds invested

by individual and then a payout was paid from each member to level commitment. By design, the Resource

Manager then broke out the budget into subgroups to track what the budget was being spent on. Listed below is a

table showing the funding allocation and description for the different sections of the project, followed by two

charts depicting the budget allocation by the end of the project.

Budget

Last Updated: Category Allocated Dispersed % Group

Hardware Components $600.00 $272.53 46.26% parts System Software Components $100.00 $0.00 0.00% software licenses System

Design Equipment $200.00 $209.90 104.95% PCBs and model expenses (other than parts), enclosures System

Testing Equipment $150.00 $50 33.93% testing only parts, breadboards Operating Demo Equipment $200.00 $238.86 119.43% poster board, final proposal report Operating Operating Equipment $50.00 $18.26 36.53% generator fuel, patent fees Operating Miscellaneous $200.00 $104.70 52.35% office supplies, report expenses Operating Total $1,500.00 $900.16 60.01% Systems $900 $487.43

Operating $600 $412.73

Figure 38 – Project Funding by Category

[17] Available: https://sites.google.com/site/scoutsystems2012/project-expenses


Figure 39 – Chart of Total Budget Spent

Figure 40– Chart of Budget Spent by Category


While this project was completed without charging man-hours to a budget, the Resource Manager kept detailed

records of time investment using a spreadsheet on Google Documents which was then displayed on the project

website. As the project evolved, each engineer kept track of their hours individually and updated the spreadsheet

weekly before the One Page Project Manager (OPPM)18 was sent out on Thursdays. Man hours were tracked by

specific WBS task item and which was in turn used to generate several reports as to where engineers were

investing their time. The Resource Manager then used this to ensure the team was being tasked appropriately and

equitably. The following is a table as an example of how the man-hours were entered into the spreadsheet

followed by several charts demonstrating the division of labor across WBS tasks.

Daniel's Man Hours Total: 182.5

Date Hours Description

WBS Number

6/13/2011 3.0 Website construction, prepare agenda for 6/15/2011 1.0

6/17/2011 1.0 Create Project Flow Chart 1.0

6/17/2011 1.0 Create Project Network Diagram 1.0

6/19/2011 3.0

Website updates, Proposal and Communication Document updates. 1.0

7/1/2011 2.0 Research Topic 1 - Trackers and Tramissions 2.1

7/7/2011 4.0 Research Topic 1 - Trackers and Tramissions 2.1

9/18/2011 0.5 Meeting with Student Body President 1.1

9/22/2011 0.2 Paperwork 1.0

9/26/2011 1.0 Generated "Use Cases" for project 2.2

10/2/2011 8.0 Project Definition 2.2 10/6/2011 2.1 IRB Paperwork 2.1 10/10/2011 1.5 WBS and Gantt Chart 2.3 10/13/2011 2.0 CITI Training for IRB 2.1 10/20/2011 1.0 Meeting with Parking Office 1.1 10/23/2011 4.5 Project Plan 2.3 10/25/2011 1.0 Project Management 1.0 10/28/2011 1.0 Project Management 1.0 11/1/2011 1.0 Project Management 1.0 11/2/2011 1.5 Project Management 1.0 11/6/2011 8.0 Project Plan 2.3 11/8/2011 1.0 Meeting 1.1 11/10/2011 0.3 Project Definition Presentation 1.1 11/10/2011 1.0 Project Plan 2.3

Figure 41 – Table of Example Man Hours Tracker

[18] Available: https://www.oppmi.com/index.cfm


In summary, this project has resulted in the following summary of expenses:

Prototype cost = $446.67

Project cost = $900.16 - $446.67 = $453.49

Documented engineer hours = $20 x 665 = $13,300

Total cost for design and manufacture of 1,000 units = $446.67 x 1000 + 495.57 + $13,300 = $460,465

Sale price per unit with %10 mark up = $460,465* 1.10 / 1,000 = $506

Lifetime operational costs were calculated using a lifespan of 10 years for the product coupled with an averaged power usage

and kilowatt hour charges from the power company. As a final approximation, if 13 units were purchased for the single

entrance lots and 8 were purchased for the other 4 special case and multi-entrance lots, assuming $500 for each physical node

installation, the total cost would be about: ($447 + $500) * 21 = $20,000. If the university added $2 to each parking pass it

would more than cover the cost of the entire system implementation.

6.2 BILL OF MATERIALS

The following table is a listing of all of the purchased materials required to build one complete unit of this product.

Device Name Value Supplier Supplier Part Number Quantity Price USD Total

ATMEGA1284P NA Mouser 566-ATMEGA1284P-PU 1 5.82 5.82

AC plug NA Mouser 693-6100.4225 1 1.36 1.36

Switch SPST - Pow Mouser 612-600SP1S3M1Q 1 2.86 2.86

Switch DPDT - S Mouser 506-1977223-6 5 0.63 3.15

Power Reg 5V Mouser 511-LD1085V50 1 1.5 1.5

Power Reg 3.3V Mouser 511-LD1117AS33 1 0.85 0.85

Neg Power Rail MAX764 Mouser 700-MAX764CPA 1 6.46 6.46

Power 2.1mm Mouser 163-179PH-EX 1 1.04 1.04

LEDS Blue Mouser 941-C4SMKBJSCQ0T0352 2 0.21 0.42

Ferrite Bead NA Mouser 710-742792112 1 0.31 0.31

Crystal 16MHz Mouser 520-HCU1600-20DNX 1 1.09 1.09

Capacitors 100n Mouser 581-TAP104K035SCS 9 0.46 4.14

Capacitors 20p Mouser 581-12061A200JAT2A 2 0.35 0.7

Capacitors 10u Mouser 581-TAJB106K006R 4 0.2 0.8

Capacitors 22n Mouser 871-B32529C6223J 4 0.24 0.96

Capacitors 1n Mouser 594-H102K25X7RL63J5R 8 0.06 0.48

Capacitors 100n Mouser 21RZ310-RC 4 0.08 0.32

Capacitors 150n Mouser 871-B32529C154K189 2 0.14 0.28

Capacitors 68n Mouser 871-B32529C1683J289 2 0.1 0.2




Capacitors 120u Mouser 647-UPW1H121MPD1TD 1 0.18 0.18

Capacitors 68u Mouser 667-EEU-FR1V680B 1 0.2 0.2

Resistors 51 Mouser 660-mf1/4DC51R0F 4 0.06 0.24

Resistors 330 Mouser 660-MF1/4DCT52R3300F 1 0.06 0.06

Resistors 3.3k Mouser 660-MF1/4DCT52R3301F 4 0.06 0.24

Resistors 16k Mouser 660-MF1/4DCT52R1602F 4 0.06 0.24

Resistors 100k Mouser 660-MF1/4D52R1003F 4 0.06 0.24

Diode 1N5817 Mouser 511-1N5817 1 0.12 0.12

Diode 1n4004 Mouser 512-1N4004 5 0.09 0.45

Power 2.1mm Mouser 163-179PH-EX 1 1.04 1.04

Headers Male (1x20) Mouser 649-68000-420HLF 3 0.52 1.56

Headers Female (2x6) Mouser 517-929852-01-06-RA 2 1.52 3.04

Headers Female (2x7) Mouser 649-66953-007LF 2 2.84 5.68

Headers Female (1x10) Mouser 855-M20-7821046 4 1.09 4.36

Socket 14 pin DIP Mouser 649-DILB16P-223TLF 1 0.2 0.2

Socket 8 pin DIP Mouser 649-DILB8P223TLF 1 0.06 0.06

Socket 40 pin DIP Mouser 649-DILB40P223TLF 1 0.38 0.38

Inductors 47u Mouser 542-77F470-RC 1 0.2 0.2

Transistor NPN Mouser 512-2N3904TA 4 0.07 0.28

Trim Pot 500 Mouser 652-3266W-1-501LF 4 3.58 14.32

Trim Pot 2k Mouser 652-3266W-1-202LF 8 3.25 26

XPORT NA Mouser 515-XPP1003000-01R 1 67.78 67.78

Male I/O Header Mouser 571-5104338-2 2 1.61 3.22

Female I/O Clamp Mouser 571-1658620-2 2 1.29 2.58

Logic Converter 5 <-> 3.3 Mouser 595-TXB0101DBVR 2 0.86 1.72

Temperature NA Mouser 579-MCP9700A-E/TO 1 0.34 0.34

Quad Op AMP NA Mouser 595-OPA4228PA 1 8.47 8.47

BJT 2N3904 Mouser 863-2N3904G 4 0.34 1.36

AC Adapter 9VDC Mouser 412-109051 1 11.33 11.33

Copper Wire Stranded Amazon Coleman Cable 500' 1 40 40

LCD NA CrystalFontz CFAH2004K-YYH-JP 1 22.44 22.44

Case NA Factorymation AMU1084CCHF 1 74 74

Screws NA SparkFun PRT-10453 1 1.5 1.5

Standoffs NA SparkFun PRT-10463 1 3.95 3.95

Inductor connect NA SparkFun PRT-10571 4 0.75 3

Frame & Bucket NA Lowes NA 1 57.75 57.75

PCB NA 4PCB NA 1 55 55

$446.67

Figure 42 - Product Bill of Materials


7.0 RELIABILITY AND SAFETY ANALYSIS

7.1 INTRODUCTION

The goal of Efficient Student Parking (E.S.P) is to develop a vehicle detection system that allows people to see an

accurate representation of parking availability. One of the E.S.P top priorities is to provide the university with a

reliable method to facilitate the efficient use of campus parking lots. In order to maintain a product that is

frequently used, the E.S.P project must be consistent and dependable.

Another key component of the successful completion of this project is the ability to complete and maintain a

product that is safe for the end user. Certain features, such as the ability to access the information via mobile

device, create safety hazards to users if access inappropriately. In order to minimize these risks, safety violations

need to be identified and handled appropriately.

7.2 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

When analyzing the reliability of our product, it is important to focus on the components that are most likely to

fail. Another focal point of reliability includes the core of the system, in this case, the microcontroller.

The components selected for reliability analysis of our system include the microcontroller (Atmega1284P), the

Ethernet controller (X-Port), and the 3.3v, 5v, and -5v voltage regulators (LD1117AS33, LD1085V0, and

MAX764CPA). These components were selected because of the high susceptibility for failure and the critical

functions that each component serves. All devices will follow the same equation for λp, which were found using the

Military Handbook for Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment19 :

𝝀𝒑 = (𝑪𝟏𝝅𝑻 + 𝑪𝟐𝝅𝑻) ∗ 𝝅𝑸𝝅𝑳

Figure 43 - Equation for Failure/106 hours

[19] MIL-HDBK-217F, Available: www.sre.org/pubs/Mil-Hdbk-217F.pdf


Parameter Name Description Value Comments

C1 Die Complexity 0.14 8-bit microcontroller

πT Temperature coeff. 0.98 Max operating temp 85

C2 Package failure rate .024 40-pin PDIP

πQ Quality factor 10 Commercial

πL Learning factor 1 Years in production >2 years

λp (𝑪𝟏𝝅𝑻 + 𝑪𝟐𝝅𝑻) ∗ 𝝅𝑸𝝅𝑳 1.607 1.607 failures/106 hours

Entire design: MTTF 6.22 × 105ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 ~70.98 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠

Figure 44 – Failure Analysis of ATMEGA1284P


C1 Die Complexity 0.02 Linear device: 101 - 300 transistors

πT Temperature coeff. 58 Linear BJT: 125

C2 Package failure rate .0016 4-pin SMT: (non-hermetic)





Figure 45 - Failure Analysis of LD1117AS33


C1 Die Complexity 0.01 Linear device: <100 transistors

πT Temperature coeff. 58 Linear BJT: 125

C2 Package failure rate .0012 4-pin DIP





Figure 46 - Failure Analysis of LD1085V0



C1 Die Complexity 0.02 Linear MOS: 101 - 300 transistors

πT Temperature coeff. 7.2 Linear MOS: 70

C2 Package failure rate .0034 8-pin DIP





Figure 47 - Failure Analysis of MAX764CPA

The devices references above are all crucial components of the system. If the microcontroller fails, it is quite

obvious that the entire system will fail. If the voltage regulator fails, best case scenario, the device would lose

power. Although unlikely, it would be possible that the input voltages of the regulator could short to the output,

causing all the connected devices to be overpowered. This would likely lead to failure and breakdown of many

components.

The LD1117AS33 voltage regulator shows the least reliability and would need to be replaced, on average, every 9.1

years. Because the scope of our project only focuses around the design of a prototype, this will not be a problem

for our demonstration; however it would be crucial to use a device that has greater mean time to failure for any

planned long term system integration.

7.3 SAFETY ANALYSIS

In order to ensure that the project is safe for all users, we conducted extensive research on meeting industry

standards, specifically the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA). When designing the enclosure

for the local node, it was important that the case meet the NEMA 4x standard for outdoor electrical protection.

NEMA 4X

“NEMA 4X enclosures are typically made of stainless steel or plastic. These NEMA enclosures are used in

harsher environments than standard NEMA 4 units. Applications where corrosive materials and caustic

cleaners are used necessitate the use of a NEMA 4X enclosure. Applications include food, such as meat/

poultry processing facilities, where total wash down with disinfectants occur repeatedly and petro-chemical

facilities, including offshore petroleum sites. NEMA 4X is used when protection from the worst

environments is required. NEMA 4X industrial enclosures are available in sizes from small wall mounts to


two-door floor mount models. Hubbell Wiegmann metal NEMA 4X enclosures are made of 304 stainless

steel”20

This enclosure meets specific specifications that we found important for satisfying out safety requirements. This

includes being non-corrosive, non-conductive, temperature-resistant and fire-resistant.

In order to ensure that all high voltage wires are properly insulated, all cables attached to the enclosure will enter

through liquid tight flexible metal conduit (LFMC). Power connections will be attached to NEMA 5-15R power

receptacles. This receptacle will insulate all conductive wiring from the external surfaces of the enclosure.

For the demonstration purposes, we used electrical metallic conduit (EMT) to make short runs down from the

enclosure to demonstrate what the system might look like when installed. EMT was also selected for the

demonstration prototype over LFMC due to the straightness and rigidity which short sections of LFMC might look

unprofessional.

7.4 FAILURE MODE, EFFECTS, AND CRITICALITY ANALYSIS

The system schematic can be broken up into four subsystems: power, microcontroller, XPORT Ethernet controller,

and tracker circuit. The power subsystem corresponds to the 3.3V and 5V voltage regulators. This subsystem is at

most risk for critical failure due to the risk of overheating components which could cause a fire. In order to

mitigate the risk of such events, it is important to place fuses between the regulators and the power source. Heat

sinking the devices will also reduce the risk of fire.

The remaining subsystems, although crucial to system operation, have little to no risk of injury or costly

replacements. Most failures stemming from these subsystems would be of marginal to negligible risk of

catastrophic system damage.

7.5 SUMMARY

Despite extensive planning and consideration of reliability and safety, it is apparent that there are available design

changes that could be implemented in order to further improve the dependability this project. In contrast, it seems

[20] NEMA Standards, Available: http://www.automationdirect.com/adc/Overview/Catalog/Enclosures/Metal/NEMA_4-z-12


that extensive effort has been put forth in order to nearly completely mitigate the risk of safety concerns. There is

almost zero risk of danger when it comes to the physical harm of the end user when using this product.

Additionally, in accordance with MIL-HDBK-217F, the reliability analysis has shown that certain components suffer

the risk of failure within 10 years of manufacture. This is unacceptable for the final product, which should require

little to no maintenance during system operation. By recognizing these shortcomings early, simple redesign

consisting of minor part replacement could greatly reduce the risk of early component failure before the product

could be pushed to market.


8.0 SOCIAL/POLITICAL/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

8.1 INTRODUCTION

The Efficient Student Parking project (E.S.P.) utilizes induction loops to detect a vehicle passing through a parking

lot entrance to track the number of vehicles in the parking lot versus the number of established parking spaces

available in that lot. This information is then displayed via two methods, first and most obvious is a marquee or

LCD display which vehicles driving by can see the remaining spaces. The second is via the internet on a website

which shows the entire UNO campus map and a color coded overlay which describes the space availability as well.

This project poses some social and environmental impacts if implemented across several parking lots and is

consistently utilized among potential clients and customers. Politically, this project has little influence with the

exception of broad stroke and naïve delusions of the minimal effects the system will have on consumption of oil

and time saving methods.

8.2 SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

One of the most evident ethical issues also is based around one of the key features for the E.S.P. system, which is

the mobile access of the information.

Having the ability to pull up a webpage, or ultimately a cell phone application, is great for speedy and accurate

information about parking availability in a lot, however, the team theorizes that this will surely lead to individuals

driving and using the webpage/application in order to find the best information while approaching the parking lot.

This leaves a challenge to where a very visible marquee display becomes incredibly necessary to make it easier to

check the sign rather than the phone while approaching the parking lot.

Questions have also arisen as to limiting the functionality of a cell phone application, such as using the GPS to

determine if they are moving fast and thus driving and not allowing the information to be displayed. However, this

system would only work if it was an application and not for a webpage, plus this removes the ability for a

passenger to check the system for spaces as they too would be moving quickly according to a GPS and would not

be able to tell the difference between the driver and passenger.

Realistically, the best solution will be to provide a warning label on the webpage and utilize a popup with warning

messages for the application about not using the system while driving.

On the actual system hardware normal precautions are taken to label high voltage areas and limit access to the

system as required preventing bodily harm and system tampering. Additional precautions for embedding the


inductance loops in the ground can be made by adding a water tight seal around the PVC frame and inside the PVC

pipes as they lead underground.

8.3 POLITICAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

While the E.S.P. system is a groundbreaking use of technology to improve quality of life and decrease vehicle

emissions due to reduced circling and idling, the system has little impact on the political atmosphere of the planet.

The system will only reduce emissions a small amount compared to the actual drive to the parking lot location and

even then, will only impact the patrons of that particular customer and has no effect on the rest of the drivers on

the road.

The system also has very little impact on a civil scale. E.S.P. does not track personal data, nor is any of the data

stored for counting purposes identifiable to any particular vehicle, let alone any individual person. The system

could be tampered with, in terms of physical or hacking, but a malfunctioning system would not prevent people

from using the parking lot, or even just driving into the lot period.

8.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

The team examined this aspect in two particular categories, dependant environmental impacts, meaning events or

changes that occur because of the system being in place, and independent environmental impacts which are a

result of manufacturing and other effects from the system directly.

Independent impacts solely correspond to electrical components used, such as if they contain lead, arsenic or

other toxic materials and the general consumption of resources, such as copper and electrical power to run the

system. Fortunately, power consumption of this system is very minimal and estimates show that the system will

draw less than 5W. Unfortunately, some of the toxic materials become unavoidable, such as the manufacture of

the printed circuit board, the microcontroller components, and the use of leaded solder. Simply put however, it is

intended that the E.S.P. circuit board be repairable with very simple component swapping by using chip sockets

where possible and through-hole components.

Dependant impacts are where the system can show some societal benefit. The implementation of the E.S.P.

system can reduce the amount of “lot circling” and vehicle idle times from an average estimated 8 minutes on the

University of Nebraska at Omaha campus. This cuts down on oil consumption of customers and reduces drive time

to find a parking lot location with favorable use of the tracking system.


8.5 SUMMARY

Efficient Student Parking offers a few possible environmental improvements and social impacts due to reduced

drive-to-park time and engine idling as student and drivers look to find a parking lot. However the only major issue

encountered is an ethical dilemma as the system could promote the use of cell phones while driving, especially

near school campus where there are a large volume of pedestrians. It was determined that using a marquee sign

best mitigates this tendency as well as placing key warning labels or messages on the client side view of the

program to warn users of the dangers of using a phone while driving.


9.0 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This final section of the report provides a discussion and reflection of the entire project by the engineers. It

discusses a brief review of the concept and the final solution as well as sections for final conclusions, lessons

learned and recommendations for future revisions.

9.1 PROJECT REVIEW

As team’s fourth year at UNO comes to a close it is almost easy to see how this project has come to fruition.

Situated in the center of a large metropolis, UNO has limited space to building parking lots, areas and structures

which generate no revenue and permit no education to take place. Yet in spite of this problem attendance

continues to rise causing a greater and greater push to help alleviate parking issues. While parking structures cost

significant funding, our team set out to help engineer a way to efficiently utilize the parking that is already

available at UNO.

After a full semester of brainstorming, concept generation, analysis and concept selection, the project has

developed a system which uses induction loops, a method which is accurate, relatively cheap, easy to maintain and

does not activate from pedestrians. Called E.S.P., a clever abbreviation often used for Extra Sensory Perception,

allows any student, staff or faculty to see the status of parking across the entire campus quickly and accurately. It

is this project’s goal to have this or a similar system implemented across campus which desperately needs a real-

time management system.

9.2 CONCLUSIONS

At the culmination of this project, the engineering team can count many successes but as any engineer worth their

salt, there are some things that could have been executed better.

One of the team’s greatest successes was our execution of the processes and management of the tasks. Though a

thoroughly discussed Gantt chart and AON chart the team had reasonable estimations for the tasks. Once more,

each week the team took those WBS tasks and broke them out for the week into smaller subtasks which were

directed by the lead engineer. This allowed for an overall progress estimation while still allowing for a detailed

development plan and schedule and ultimately the project was completed ahead of schedule. For a more detailed

breakdown of the progress please refer to the appendix section for the One Page Project Managers (OPPM).

The two of the most difficult sections of this project were the analog tracker circuitry and the development of the

client. The tracking circuitry was incredibly difficult to generate a stable sine wave and get a reasonable voltage


level on the ADC of the microcontroller. The team eventually conceived an oscillator circuit that contained several

tuning potentiometers to adjust to these various situations. Additionally, as we learned from our experiences in

prototyping these circuits we discovered some changes to the filtering and amplification of the signal which during

testing resulted in a very large, very stable circuit which dropped around 1.5V at the ADC. This seemingly perfect

design was shattered when the PCB was ordered and populated. During the model testing phase we encountered

a miniscule voltage shift of 150 mV with a car driving over the induction loops. This was eventually handled with

some minor changes to the PCB circuits as reflected in the Colpitts v3.8 design but it was unfortunate that the

performance of the prototype circuit couldn’t be duplicated in the final design.

With regards to the client application, our initial development efforts went into making a Java Applet however it

was soon discovered that when attempting to deploy it and verify it on a PC web browser there were some

limitations. The first discovery was that the client was using socket communication to transfer data, something

that is normally considered very insecure and requires a signed certificate to verify against to run. Normally, in a

commercial setting, these signatures are obtained from RSA or other highly respected companies, but given time

and funding constraints this was proving inopportune. After attempting to generate a certificate of our own, the

team’s software engineer discovered though additional research that even if we could get the certificate running

Android OS runs a java-like instance and thus the Applet wouldn’t work. This forced the team to generate the

webserver and host the information there which ultimately fixed the issues at hand.

9.3 RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations from this project can be categorized into two subsections, recommendations for continued

development of the project and recommendations to future capstone design projects.

If the opportunity was to arise to develop another iteration of this project, it is the recommendation of this team

to incorporate a few minor changes in the local node design. First, the power system could use a redesign, as

during the final model testing the team was noticing several noise signals below 10k which in turn was being

amplified by the active low pass filter. Spacing the power supply equipment farther away from these sensitive

analog circuits would most likely solve the problem as the noise continued to get worse the closer they were to the

power regulators. Additionally, based on some reliability analysis detailed earlier in this report, the 3.3V and 5V

regulators used in this design have demonstrated a low mean time to failure and could be preplaced with a more

expensive, yet stable, version.

In spite of the few draw backs, the E.S.P. system is ready for expansion and if given the opportunity, this team

recommends the development and integration of a marquee system, expansion and integration of additional local


nodes for dual entrance lots as well as the configuration of another local node to serve as a handicap parking space

tracker, to help accommodate the parking lot configurations which were initially outside the scope of this project.

While the previous recommendations are specific to this project, team E.S.P. has several points of advice to pass

on to future design teams in the CEEN department at UNO. First is to not short yourself on planning. Team E.S.P.

spent extensive amounts of effort determining the right solution for the problem and detailing how that solution

was going to be met which in turn made the development of the project run relatively smoothly and contain only a

few minor issues. Additionally, record keeping alleviates a huge burden when a team reaches the eventuality of

redesigning some part of their project. To facilitate this, team E.S.P. used Microsoft OneNote as a massive

repository for everything from links, notes, equations, pdf scans, report drafts, pictures and videos. OneNote was

crucial in showing the evolution of the design process and this project would have taken significantly more effort

to complete. Finally, in parallel with using OneNote, having set standards for labeling and documenting designs

and software makes it very easy to note when changes are made and what changes have occurred, which gets to

be an even more significant issue in larger groups.


10.0 USER’S MANUAL

University of Nebraska-Lincoln

College of Engineering


CEEN 4990


By

Daniel Hamrick

Kyle O’Doherty

Elliot Triplett

Local Node

User Manual and Installation


10.1 INTRODUCTION

Each loop consists of a six turn 18AWG stranded copper wire loop in rectangular slots in the pavement and sealed

with an epoxy to protect against weather and pressure. The saw-cut rectangles will be cut perpendicular to the

street curb. Lead wires from the loops will be underground until they can be connected to the local node via a loop

extension cable. The rest of this document will go further in depth on the process to go through to achieve

maximum sensitivity from loop installation as well as basic local node maintenance. All techniques and figures for

loop installation are taken from Marsh Products Inc21 with the only exception being the change in loop dimensions.

10.2 CONSIDERATIONS

1. No loop should be within 5’ from any exterior magnetic interference (dumpster, storage tank, etc)

2. No loop should be within 2’ of any reinforcement rods in the surrounding pavement

10.3 INDUCTION LOOP INSTRUCTIONS

10.3.1 PREPARING FOR INSTALLATION

1. Make sure the pavement is thicker than 1-1/2” so the slot will not cut through

2. Dig a trench at least 2” deeper than the pavement’s surface running between the curb and the location

where the lead sires will rise from the ground

3. Cut a slot through the curb to install a ½” to 1” PVC conduit in the trench. Make the cut deep enough to

put the centerline of the conduit

1-1/4” to 1-1/2” lower than the

surface of the pavement

4. Snap a chalk outline of the loop

on the pavement

5. Place Line #1 on the centerline

of the conduit slot in the curb

[21]Marsh Products Inc, 610 Loop Vehicle Detector, Available: http://www.marshproducts.com/pdf/LoopVehicle.pdf

Figure 48 – Loop Installation curb view


10.3.2 CUTTING THE PAVEMENT SLOTS

1. Cut the slots on all sides and corners to an even depth of 1-1/4” to 1-1/2” using a concrete saw with a

3/16” blade

2. Clear debris from the slot with compressed air

3. Allow both the surface and slots to dry completely

10.3.3 FORMING THE LOOP

1. Measure off 10’ of loop wire plus the distance between the curb and the location where the loop lead

wires exit the ground. This is the length of the two loop lead wires.

2. From that point on the wire, start forming the loop at the curb and insert the wire into the Line #1 slot.

3. With a wooden stick, press the wire firmly into place as it is inserted, so there is no space between each

layer.

4. Continue inserting clockwise into loop slots until there are 6 continuous turns and a return to the curb

5. Avoid damaging the insulation by excessive stress or abrasion

6. Anchor the ends of the loop in the curb slot to prevent them from being twisted during installation

7. Cut the second lead wire to the same length as the first.

10.3.4 PREPARE THE LOOP LEAD WIRES

1. With a variable speed electric hand drill, twist the two lead wires together at least 20 turns per foot

2. Pass the twisted pair of lead wires through the conduit

Figure 49- Loop Installation distance


3. Test the loop wire for continuity and leakage resistance to earth ground. If leakage resistance is not 10MΩ

or higher, replace the entire loop

4. Do not attempt to repair faulty vehicle detector loop wire

10.3.5 SEALING THE LOOP

There are two types of Wire Loop Sealant: A two part sealant that comes in a 1 gallon can which requires mixing,

and a single part sealant that comes in a tube and requires a cartridge gun for dispensing. Follow the directions on

the container for which ever product you received.

NOTE: If using the two part sealant, combining the two parts of the loop sealant starts a chemical reaction that will

eat through a plastic container. Mix the sealant in a metal container. Also when the reaction occurs the sealant

becomes very hot. Use caution to avoid burns.

Figure 50 – Loop Installation twisted pair


10.4 LOCAL NODE MAINTENANCE

All references to the Local node will refer to this image below for the corresponding user input/output

10.4.1 CONNECTIONS

1. Connect the twisted pair from the curb to the local node via the screw terminals shown as Loop 1 – 4. Be

sure to securely tighten the loops for a solid connection

2. Connect a straight through Ethernet cable from the local area network to the local node via the Ethernet

connection on the top left of the PCB.

3. Connect the DC power supply to the PCB end extension cord ( wall wart can range between 7 – 30 VDC)

and turn the power switch to the on position.

4. The title screen will appear and ask if you would like to retrieve server data. If this is the first time of use

this can be ignored until the main menu appears with the lot availability.

Figure 51 – Local node labeled


5. Securely close the enclosure by fastening the screws located on the top and bottom of the right side of

the enclosure to weatherproof the node. Congratulations, this node has been installed correctly and can

now be communicated with remotely via the server application.

10.4.2 TUNING

Each of the induction loops must be successfully tuned once installed to be sure they are as sensitive as they can

be. This can be done with the DC and gain pots on the bottom of the PCB. The easiest way to do this without any

expensive analog measuring tools is to park a car above a loop and adjust the pots so that the PCB reads ‘!CAR’ and

shows nothing once the car passes over it. Always be sure to reset the loop readings after any tuning is done to be

sure the detection algorithm stays correct. This can be done by going into the Loop Voltages menu and holding

button 2 until the screen appears to freeze, then release and the values have been effectively ‘zeroed out’.

10.4.3 MENUS

The menu structure provides a full screen menu for each available function. To move to the next available option

click button 1. Different menu functions have different options and can be adjusted using buttons 2 and 3

depending on the option displayed on the bottom of each screen. Car detection and server communication is

enabled for all menu options to be sure no command or car is not detected and processed correctly.

1. The main menu displays the name of the product, the lot Identification number, and the total spots

available.

2. This menu allows the administrator to custom change the total amount of cars currently in the lot.

3. Adjust max menu allows the administrator to custom change the maximum size of the lot capacity

4. Menu number 4 is a read only menu for any loop troubleshooting as it displays the real time voltages

being read from each of the 4 loops. Should a car pass over any loop while in this menu will display a ‘!’

when it detects something is close and a “!CAR” when it is fully aware of a vehicle presence.

5. If for some reason the administrator would like to change the unique identification number used for

server communication it can be done here in the UID menu.

6. The last of the local node menu options is the sensitivity menu. This allows the administrator to select

between 50mV and 300mV of detection sensitivity with 25mV increments.





CEEN 4990


By

Daniel Hamrick

Kyle O’Doherty

Elliot Triplett

Server

User Manual and Installation


10.5 SERVER USER MANUAL

The server operates on any operating system and runs as a standalone java application. Lantronix device installer is

needed for locating IP of Local Node. Apache HTTP Server is needed for hosting of web client. Server based

operating system is recommended, however not required. Although the java application will run on any operating

system, Lantronix device installers requires Microsoft Windows XP/Vista/7.

10.6 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

3. Java JRE 6.0

4. Windows XP/Vista/7 operating system

5. Recommended 2GB RAM and 2Ghz processor

6. Active internet connections with non-restrictive firewall (open on port 4444)

7. Apache HTTP Server 2.4.2

8. Lantronix device installer

10.7 STARTUP AND OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS

10.7.1 STARTUP

(Note: Server requires latest JRE. Install can be found at http://www.java.com/en/download/index.jsp )

1. Start software by running executable jar file (server.jar)

a. Make sure to allow access around firewall

2. If successful, the following screen should appear

Figure 52 – Server connection window

3. Use Lantronix device installer to get the IP address of the local node on the network

http://www.java.com/en/download/index.jsp


a. Lantronix device installer install can be downloaded at http://www.lantronix.com/device-

networking/utilities-tools/device-installer.html

b. Run Lantronix device installer from Start->All Programs->Lantronix->Device Installer

c. Click the button in order to locate the local node

4. Enter the IP address into the E.S.P. Server Application under the IP field and click “Connect”

Figure 53 – Server connection interface

5. Upon successful connection, the device will request the Local Node’s status, and the information will

be logged

10.7.2 ADMINISTRATION

Information about the Local Node can be viewed under the status interface. Administrative changes

(such as altering the current lot count) can also be made from this tab.

Figure 54 – Server Status Interface

Status: This displays the current connection status of the Local Node.

Refresh: Clicking this button requests data from the local node, and updates the fields on this page.

Lot ID: This field denotes the Lot ID of the Local Node in which the current status is displayed.

UID: This field contains the current UID (Unique Identifier). This value is used in order to determine

duplicate messages and for logging and troubleshooting. The current UID can be change by altering

http://www.lantronix.com/device-networking/utilities-tools/device-installer.html

http://www.lantronix.com/device-networking/utilities-tools/device-installer.html


this value and clicking the “Set UID” button. This sends a message to the local node to reflect this

change.

Voltages: These are the current loop voltages of the local node. This field will highlight green if the

loop voltages are at an acceptable level. If the loops are disconnected, this field will highlight red.

Temp: Displays the current temperature on the board. If the temperature exceeds the acceptable

level, this field will highlight red.

Lot Count: This field denotes the current number of cars in the parking lot. This value can be

incremented or decremented using the “+” and “-“ buttons, or set manually by altering the field and

clicking the “Set” button.

Lot Size: This field denotes the number of available parking spaces in the lot. This value can be

administratively changed by altering the field and clicking the “Set” button. A message indicating this

change will be sent to the Local Node, and the new value will be reflected.

10.7.3 LOGGING AND TROUBLESHOOTING

All messages sent between the server and the Local Node are logged. The server also logs when a

disconnection occurs. These logs can be viewed in either the “Log” tab, or within the log file. The log file is

located at <GET LOG PATH>. New log files are created daily and are indentified with a unique filename.


11.0 APPENDICES

A. NOTES

B. ENGINEERING CHANGE REQUESTS

PSSCs before Engineering Change Request

Marketing Requirement

PSSC Description

1, 4 Accuracy The tracker will be able to accurately detect 99 out of 100 cars upon entering and exiting the parking lot – proven by testing.

2,3,4 Mobile access Client will be accessible via web browser on personal computers, iOS, and Android via web browser.

1 Reliability Local node keeps master count of lot traffic and can be retrieved by the server at any time. Users receive accurate lot count via browser upon refresh within 1 minute.

1,2 BIT testing System will check for component failure by using built in diagnostic tools every 30 minutes and display errors to administrator login on website.

1 IEEE Standard System Communication will meet standards for both Ethernet (IEEE 802.3) and XBee (IEEE 802.15.4) protocols.


1 - System is reliable 2 - System is easy to use 3 - System is low cost 4 - System is adaptable

Figure 55 - Original Proposed PSSCs


PSSC after the change request

Marketing Requirement

PSSC Description

1, 4 Accuracy The tracker will be able to accurately detect 99 out of 100 cars upon entering and exiting the parking lot – proven by testing.

2,3,4 Mobile access Client will be accessible via web browser on personal computers, iOS, and Android via web browser.

1 Reliability Local node keeps master count of lot traffic and can be retrieved by the server at any time. Users receive accurate lot count via browser upon refresh within 1 minute.

1,2 BIT testing System will check for component failure by using built in diagnostic tools every 30 minutes and display errors to administrator login on website.

1 IEEE Standard System Communication will meet standards for both Ethernet (IEEE 802.3)


1 - System is reliable 2 - System is easy to use 3 - System is low cost 4 - System is adaptable

Figure 56 - PSSCS after ECR


Figure 57 - Accepted ECR


C. ELECTRICAL SPECIFICATIONS

SCHEMATICS

The next two documents show the most current schematics for the local node. These are what are currently on the

printed circuit board.

Figure 58 – Final Schematics 1


Figure 59 – Final Schematics 2


TIMING ANALYSIS

Shown below is the timing diagram of the ATmega1284P instruction and Arithmetic Logic unit computations taken

from the datasheet. This timing is the most critical in the system as it is run several times very quickly and must be

completed before the car leaves the loop detection area. The only other timing element in the E.S.P. system is the

Lantronix Xport Ethernet controller which runs at 12 MIPS and capable of 921, 600 serial baud speed, plenty more

than is needed for the local node requirements.

Figure 60 – Timing Analysis


LOADING ANALYSIS

This system was designed well within the specifications of each individual component with respect to the device

loading and fan-out. The largest concern, as it drives the rest of the components power, is the 5 VDC regulator.

This LD108550 is able to take in a large variety of input sources, between 7 – 30VDC and is able to supply a

constant 5VDC output for up to 3A, more than enough to supply all the digital and analog circuitry. Second in the

power chain is the 3.3VDC regulator. The LD111733 is able to take in the output of the 5VDC regulator and supply

up to 800mA. The only device currently using this 3.3VDC rail is the Lantronix Xport with a maximum current draw

of 350mA, well within the range of the regulator. Finally, the -5VDC power rail is accomplished through the

MAX764 chip for the analog circuitry. As the only device using this rail, the quad OP amp pulls very little, in the

micro amps, from the maximum 250mA output from the MAX chip.

SPECIFICATION SHEETS

Datasheets from over 30 devices were used in this project and would be ridiculous to append here as it would be

several hundred pages. The main device data sheets used were the ATmega1284P data sheet, all 3 power

regulators, and the Xport user guide, all common devices and thus not included in this report.

SIGNAL QUALITY ANALYSIS (SQA)

Signal quality for digital outputs goes smoothly from 0 – 5VDC as seen on the oscilloscope for all Atmega I/O pins.

Only transmission cable used is a 5 foot Ethernet cable which is well within the maximum cable run length.22

SAFETY/ELECTRICAL HAZARD CHECKLIST

The following labels are used on the enclosure to assure

that the safety requirements for users are met.

[22] IAW ANSI/TIA/EIA standards for category 5e copper cable, document TIA/EIA 568-5-A

Figure 61 – Safety Stickers


ACCURACY CERTIFICATION

All measurements for analog testing were done using a standard volt meter, oscilloscope, and induction measuring

tool for the loops. Measurements for the digital devices were done using a logic analyzer. All measurement

devices were property of University of Nebraska and are calibrated by a Precision Measurements Laboratory

(PMEL) certified technician. The actual accuracy of the vehicle detection, as provided by the E.S.P. accuracy PSSC,

was completing using acceptance test ESP-PSSC-01 on April 7th, 2012.

D. SOFTWARE

FLOWCHARTS

Figure 62–System Overview


Figure 63–Local Node Flowchart


Figure 64 – Server User Interface Flowchart


Figure 65 – Server Message Listener Flowchart

PROGRAM LISTINGS

Efficient Student Parking consists of two very different entities, a local node controlled by a small microcontroller,

and a larger server to house all the data as well as a client application. Hundreds of lines of code were put into

both aspects so only major component software is included in this section.

LOCAL NODE SOFTWARE

Below is the main software file that consists of the states for each maintenance mode as well as the main display.

#include "CEEN4990.h" int main(void) Atmega_init(); // Initialize Inputs/Outputs _delay_ms(1); LCD_init(); // Initializes LCD _delay_ms(1); ADC_init(); // Initializes ADC _delay_ms(1); USART_Init(50); // Initializes USART _delay_ms(10); INT_INIT(); // Initializes Interrupts


_delay_ms(1); sei(); // Enables interrupts //Opening Splash screen LCD_print_string(" T E A M E S P "); LCD_print_string(" CEEN "); LCD_print_string(" University of NEB "); LCD_print_string(" SW Version 1.0 "); _delay_ms(1000); LCD_clear(); char lotID = '2'; // Sets lot identification int sense = 200; // Sets sensitivity to 200mV int lotcount = 0; // Resets lot count int lotsize = 0; // Stores total spots available unsigned int UID = 1; // Variable used to store UIDs unsigned int oldUID = 0; // Variable used to store old UIDs int state = 0; // Variable for state machine int changemade = 1; // Tests code for value changes buttonpress = 0; // Tests for button 1 press force = false; // Forces USART receive bool bootup = false; // Sets if user wants boot information double timer = 0.0; // Timer for timeout period Reset_Bools(); // Resets loop detection variables in = false; out = false; Read_Loops(); // Gets Loop initial values //Upon boot up, local node will request info from the server if user requests // ____________________ // //|Request server info?|// //|Button 2 : YES |// //|Button 3 : NO |// //| |// // ____________________ // LCD_print_string("Request server info?"); LCD_to_line_2(); LCD_print_string("Button 2 : YES"); LCD_to_line_3(); LCD_print_string("Button 3 : NO"); while (timer < 10000) if (Get_SW_2()) bootup = true; break; else if (Get_SW_3())


break; timer += 0.5; LCD_clear(); //If user requests boot up info if (bootup) // ____________________ // //|Requesting Info... |// //|New UID is: X |// //|New lot size is: X |// //|New lot count is :X |// // ____________________ // LCD_print_string("Requesting Info..."); // Board sends R1*UID*0 // Sends request for UID count USART_Send_Command(requestUID,&UID,&lotID); force = true; // Board receives Get_Command // Gets response from server LCD_to_line_2(); LCD_print_string("New UID is: "); LCD_print_int(UID); LCD_to_line_3(); LCD_print_string("New lot size is:"); LCD_print_int(lotsize); LCD_to_line_4(); LCD_print_string("New lot count is:"); LCD_print_int(lotcount); _delay_ms(2000); LCD_clear(); //Infinite while loop... while (1) switch(state) case 0: // Marquee Mode while (buttonpress == 0) // While button 1 not pressed oldUID = UID; Get_Command // Runs Car Test Run_Car_Test if (oldUID != UID) // If something changed changemade = 1;


if (changemade == 1) //Send_Status // Prints Demo Menu Print_Demo(&lotID,&lotcount, &lotsize); changemade = 0; state = 1; // Moves to next menu changemade = 1; _delay_ms(300); // Needed to handle interrupt buttonpress = 0; case 1: // Adjust Lot // If changing manually, can cause issues with server changes while (buttonpress == 0) oldUID = UID; // Check for command Get_Command // Runs Car Test Run_Car_Test if (oldUID != UID) // If something changed changemade = 1; if (Get_SW_2()) // If button 2 pressed lotcount++; // Increase lot count changemade = 1; Send_Status else if (Get_SW_3()) // If button 3 pressed lotcount--; // Decrease lot count changemade = 1; Send_Status if (changemade == 1) // Prints Lot Count Menu Print_lot_count(&lotID,&lotcount); changemade = 0; state = 2; changemade = 1; _delay_ms(300); buttonpress = 0; case 2: // Adjust Max while (buttonpress == 0) oldUID = UID;


// Check for command Get_Command // Runs Car Test Run_Car_Test if (oldUID != UID) // If something changed changemade = 1; if (Get_SW_2()) // If button 2 pressed lotsize++; // Increases lot size changemade = 1; Send_Status else if (Get_SW_3()) // If button 3 pressed lotsize--; // Decreases lot size changemade = 1; Send_Status if (changemade == 1) Print_max_count(&lotID,&lotsize);//Prints Max Size Menu changemade = 0; state = 3; changemade = 1; _delay_ms(300); buttonpress = 0; case 3: // Voltage & Temp while (buttonpress == 0) Print_Loops(&sense); // Prints Voltage Loops oldUID = UID; // Check for command Get_Command // Runs Car Test Run_Car_Test if (oldUID != UID) // If something changed changemade = 1; Send_Status if (changemade == 1) changemade = 0; //Send_Status //Resets Loops initial values


if (Get_SW_2() == 1) Read_Loops(); state = 4; // Moves to next menu changemade = 1; _delay_ms(300); buttonpress = 0; case 4: // UID while (buttonpress == 0) oldUID = UID; // Check for command Get_Command // Runs Car Test Run_Car_Test if (oldUID != UID) // If something changed changemade = 1; if (Get_SW_2()) // If button 2 pressed changemade = 1; Send_Status else if (Get_SW_3()) // If button 3 pressed // Decreases by 2 because it sends out the status UID -= 2; changemade = 1; Send_Status if (changemade == 1) Print_UID(&UID); // Prints UID Menu changemade = 0; state = 5; // Moves to next menu changemade = 1; _delay_ms(300); buttonpress = 0; case 5: // Sensetivity // Caps between 50 and 300mV // +/- 25mV each button push while (buttonpress == 0) oldUID = UID; // Check for command Get_Command // Runs Car Test Run_Car_Test


if (oldUID != UID) // If something changed changemade = 1; if (Get_SW_2()) // If button 2 pressed if (sense <= 300) sense += 25; changemade = 1; Send_Status else if (Get_SW_3()) // If button 3 pressed if (sense >= 75) sense -= 25; changemade = 1; Send_Status if (changemade == 1) Print_Sensitivity(&lotID, &sense); // Sensetivity Menu changemade = 0; state = 0; changemade = 1; _delay_ms(300); buttonpress = 0; default: // Marquee Mode state = 0; buttonpress = 0; // End switch // End infinite loop return 0;

The other important piece of code is how the cars are detected by the system. The code is written in a modular

fashion so that it is very adaptable for each need. Any algorithm relating to the method of car detection is in a

single function. Currently, each loop is defaulted to a value once laid on the concrete, and then when something

disturbs the field, the voltage goes down. This value is then compared against the defaulted value subtracting the

sensitivity change. If this change is greater than the sensitivity then there is a vehicle in the loop. Depending on the

loop orientation, this either sets a first flag to alert the system that something has entered or it will clear the flag


letting the system know that a vehicle has successfully passed in or out, which in turn changes the current lot

count.

//Function : Car_Test //Author : Kyle O'Doherty //Called by : Each state in Main //Purpose : Tests for any cars //Returns : None //Flags : Changes boolean input values //Started : 2-14-12 //Updates : 3-23-12 completely re-did function // : 3-27-12 added in check for < 5000 roll over void Car_Test (unsigned int * UID , char * lotID, int * lotcount, int * lotsize, int *sense) // Checks for a sensitivity level change // Keeps unsigned rollover in mind with the < 5000 check if ((Get_Loop_1() < (loop1 - *sense)) && ((loop1 - *sense) < 5000)) in = true; if (Get_Loop_2() < (loop2 - *sense) && ((loop2 - *sense) < 5000)) two = true; if (Get_Loop_3() < (loop3 - *sense) && ((loop3 - *sense) < 5000)) three = true; if (Get_Loop_4() < (loop4 - *sense) && ((loop4 - *sense) < 5000)) out = true; //If car is detected going out if (two && out) (*lotcount)--; USART_Send_Status(UID , lotID, lotcount, lotsize, sense); out = false; //If car is detected going in if (three && in) (*lotcount)++; USART_Send_Status(UID , lotID, lotcount, lotsize, sense); in = false; //Resets detection parameters Reset_Bools();


E. RESOURCE EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS

COST ANALYSIS

Much of the cost analysis can be found in the Economic Analysis section on page 51. Below are listed more charts

concerning the financial data and cost breakdown. After completing the project in its entirety, team E.S.P. was well

short of the proposed budget.

Investments

Last Updated: Investor Name Invoice Number Investment Date Amount

Daniel Hamrick 11-10-06-001 October 6, 2011 $7.48 Daniel Hamrick 11-11-16-001 November 16th, 2011 $19.25 Daniel Hamrick 11-11-17-001 November 17th, 2011 $4.54 Elliot Triplett 11-12-28-001 December 28th, 2011 $44.70 Daniel Hamrick 12-01-02-001 January 2nd, 2012 $15.23 Kyle O'Doherty 20378401 January 30th, 2012 $182.13 Kyle O'Doherty 501473 February 26th, 2012 $13.59 Kyle O'Doherty 4829615 February 26th, 2012 $84.24 Daniel Hamrick 351-0073215 February 27th, 2012 $85.44 Kyle O'Doherty 749546 February 29th, 2012 $50.61 Daniel Hamrick 12-03-31-001 March 31, 2012 $58.15 Daniel Hamrick 12-03-31-001 March 31, 2012 $17.09 Kyle O’Doherty 12-04-07-001 April 4, 2012 $33.15 Kyle O’Doherty 12-04-07-002 April 4, 2012 $18.90 Kyle O’Doherty 12-04-09-001 April 9, 2012 $22.50 Daniel Hamrick 12-04-10-001 April 10, 2012 $38.50 Kyle O’Doherty 12-04-11-001 April 11, 2012 $139.09 TOTAL AMOUNT INVESTED $869.71

Daniel $280.80

Kyle $405.12

Elliot $44.70

EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION $289.90

Daniel -$9.10

Kyle $115.22

Elliot -$245.20

Figure 66 - Investments


The following graphs are just more visual representations of where the money was spent and which engineer was

the one responsible for the investment.

Figure 69 – Individual Investments Figure 68 – Project Reimbursement

Figure 67 – Category Expenses


LABOR HOUR ANALYSIS

Hours were kept individually as well as for the team as a whole. When the project was completed, the entire count

of man hours for both semesters totaled to 665. Shown below are individual breakdowns of where each engineer

spent most of their time.

Figure 72 – Elliot Subsection

Figure 71 – Daniel Subsection

Figure 70 – Kyle Subsection


F. PROJECT PURCHASES

The following table consists of all of the purchases made during this project. Items on the product bill of materials and not on this list indicate that particular

item was provided though use of one of the engineers or the University of Nebraska. The product bill of materials still remains the master list of components,

the required to make one product and can be found on page 54. Shown below are the entire expenses that team E.S.P. encountered throughout the project.

Part Name Units

Total Cost Category Part Number Order Location

Invoice or Order Number Purchaser

Frosted Front Report Cover 1 $7.48 Demo N/A Staples 11-10-06-001 Daniel 11 x 17 Paper 1 $19.25 Demo N/A Staples 11-11-16-001 Daniel

11" x 17", color, double sided (AON, WBS, Gantt) 3 $12.04 Demo N/A Kinkos 11-11-17-001 Daniel Aluminium Dry Erase Board 1 $34.23 Misc N/A OfficeMax 11-12-28-001 Elliot Expo Dry Eraser 1 $4.27 Misc N/A OfficeMax 11-12-28-001 Elliot Expo II 4Ct Chisel Asst 1 $6.20 Misc N/A OfficeMax 11-12-28-001 Elliot 1" PVC Coupling 1 $1.41 Testing 49336 Lowe's 12-01-02-001 Daniel 1" PVC 90 deg Elbow 3 $4.36 Testing 49395 Lowe's 12-01-02-001 Daniel 1" PVC Tee 1 $3.64 Testing 49571 Lowe's 12-01-02-001 Daniel 1" x 10' PVC Pipe 3 $24.84 Testing 33181 Lowe's 12-01-02-001 Daniel 1" PVC 90 deg Elbow 3 $4.36 Testing 49395 Lowe's 12-02-18-001 Daniel 1" PVC Tee 1 $3.64 Testing 49571 Lowe's 12-02-18-001 Daniel 1" x 10' PVC Pipe 1 $8.66 Testing 33181 Lowe's 12-02-18-001 Daniel

100' 16/2 landscape Cord 1 $18.26 Operating 122852 Lowe's 12-02-18-001 Daniel

40 Pin Socket 2 $0.62 Hardware 517-4840-6000-CP Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

14 Pin Socket 2 $1.36 Hardware 571-1825093-3 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Temperature Sensor 3 $1.02 Hardware 579-MCP9700A-E/TO Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Voltage translator 4 $3.44 Hardware 595-TXB0101DBVR Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Ribbon Cable, 3' 3 $1.59 Hardware 517-3302/14FT Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

Headers & Wire Housings MLTRY PLRZD RECPT 14 NOVO 4 $5.16 Hardware 571-1658620-2 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle


Headers & Wire Housings 100x100 HDR 2x007P VRT LPRO 4 $6.44 Hardware 571-5104338-2 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle XPort Ethernet Module 1 $54.50 Hardware 515-XP100200S-04R Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Trimmer Resistors - Through Hole 3/8 10Kohms 10% 0.5W Square 2 $2.56 Hardware 652-3386P-1-103LF Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Trimmer Resistors - Through Hole 1/4 SQ 1Kohms 10% 0.5W

11 $8.25 Hardware 652-3362P-1-102LF Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle BJT NPN 2N3904 8 $0.56 Hardware 512-2N3904TA Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Inductor 47uH 5% 3 $0.60 Hardware 542-77F470-RC Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Headers & Wire Housings 10 PIN SIL VERTICAL SOCKET TIN 10 $9.90 Hardware 855-M20-7821046 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Headers & Wire Housings 12P STRT BRD MNT SKT 2 ROW 10MICRO AU

2 $3.04 Hardware 517-929852-01-06-RA Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Headers & Wire Housings 20P SR UNSHRD HRD TIN OVER NI

4 $2.08 Hardware 649-68000-420HLF Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Diode - Rectifiers 1N4004 400V 1A 8 $0.72 Hardware 512-1N4004 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Diode - Schotky 1N5817 20V 1A 3 $0.36 Hardware 511-1N5817 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 100k 1%

8 $0.48 Hardware 660-MF1/4D52R1003F Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 51k 1%

8 $0.48 Hardware 660-MF1/4DC5102F Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 13k 1%

8 $0.48 Hardware 660-MF1/4DC1302F Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 2.2k 1%

8 $0.72 Hardware 660-MFS1/4DCT52R2201 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 1k 1% 8 $0.48 Hardware 660-MF1/4DC1001F Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 10k 1% 1/4W 8 $0.48 Hardware

660-MF1/4DCT52A1002F Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 330 1% 1/4W 3 $0.18 Hardware 660-MF1/4DCT52R3300F Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

Capacitor Aluminum Electrolytic Leaded 68uF 35VDC 3 $0.60 Hardware 667-EEU-FR1V680B Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

Capacitor Aluminum Electrolytic Leaded 120uF 50V 105c 3 $0.54 Hardware 647-UPW1H121MPD1TD Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

Capacitor Polyester Film 0.039uF 100V 5% 4 $0.40 Hardware 871-B32529C1393J189 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Capacitor Polyester Film 0.047uF 100V 5% 4 $0.40 Hardware 871-B32529C1473J189 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Capacitor Polyester Film 0.068uF 100V 5% 4 $0.40 Hardware 871-B32529C1683J289 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Capacitor Polyester Film 0.15uF 63V 10% 4 $0.56 Hardware 871-B32529C154K189 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Capacitor Multilayer Ceramic Leaded 0.1uF 50V Z5U 20% 2.5mm L/S 8 $0.64 Hardware 21RZ310-RC Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Capacitor Ceramic Disc .2LS 1000pF 500V 10% 16 $0.96 Hardware 594-H102K25X7RL63J5R Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Capacitor Polyester Film 0.022uF 400V 5% 8 $1.92 Hardware 871-B32529C6223J Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Capacitor Tantalum Solid SMD 6.3V 10uF 10% 5 $2.40 Hardware 581-TAJB106K006R Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle


Capacitor Ceramic AVX Multilayer 20pF 100V 5% 4 $1.40 Hardware 581-12061A200JAT2A Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Capacitor Tantalum AVX Solid 0.1uF 35V 10% 15 $6.90 Hardware 581-TAP104K035SRW Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle ECS Crystals 16MHz 20pF 1 $1.09 Hardware 520-HCU1600-20DNX Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Ferrit Bead Wurth EMI/RFI 31ohms @ 100MHz 3 $0.93 Hardware 710-742792112 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

LED Through Hole 4 $0.84 Hardware 941-C4SMKBJSCQ0T0352 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle

DC Power Connector PCB 2.1MM 2 $2.08 Hardware 163-179PH-EX Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Maxim Integrated Products DC/DC Sw 5/12/15/AdjV 3 $19.38 Hardware 700-MAX764CPA Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle ST Low Dropout regulators 3.3V 1.0A Positive 2 $1.70 Hardware 511-LD1117AS33 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle ST Low Dropout regulators 5.0V 3.0A Positive 3 $4.50 Hardware 511-LD1085V50 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle TE Connectivity Pushbutton Switches 9 $5.67 Hardware 506-1977223-6 Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle E-Switch Slide Switch 2 $5.72 Hardware 612-600SP1S3M1Q Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Atmel Microcontroller 128KB Flash 2 $11.64 Hardware 556-ATMEGA1284P-PU Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Shipping 1 $5.96 Hardware Shipping Mouser.com 20378401 Kyle Screw - Phillips (1/4", 4-40) 10 pack 1 $1.50 Design PRT-10453 SparkFun.com 501473 Kyle

Standoff - Metal Hex (3/8", 4-40) 10 pack 1 $3.95 Design PRT-10463 SparkFun.com 501473 Kyle Screw Terminals 2.54mm Pitch (2-Pin) 6 $4.50 Hardware PRT-10571 SparkFun.com 501473 Kyle Shipping 1 $3.64 Hardware Shipping SparkFun.com 501473 Kyle

Mounting Hardware, Nylon Hex Nut (4-40) 8 $1.52 Design 561-G440 Mouser.com 4829615 Kyle

Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 1k 1% 1/4W 8 $0.64 Hardware 71-CCF551K00FKE36 Mouser.com 4829615 Kyle

Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 16k 1% 1/4W 8 $0.48 Hardware 660-MF1/4DCT52R1602F Mouser.com 4829615 Kyle

Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 3.3k 1% 1/4W 8 $0.48 Hardware 660-MF1/4DCT52R3301F Mouser.com 4829615 Kyle

Resistor Metal Film Through Hole 51 1% 1/4W 8 $0.48 Hardware 660-MF1/4DC51R0F Mouser.com 4829615 Kyle

Trimmer Resistor - Through Hole 1/4 2kohms 10% SQ w/standoff 8 $28.64 Hardware 652-3266W-1-501LF Mouser.com 4829615 Kyle

Trimmer Resistor - Through Hole 1/4 500ohms 10% SQ w/standoff 16 $52.00 Hardware 652-3266W-1-202LF Mouser.com 4829615 Kyle Shipping 1 $4.54 Hardware Shipping Mouser.com 4829615 Kyle

Enclosure, Fiberglass 10x8x4, NEMA 4x, Hinged clear cover 1 $66.00 Design AMU1084CCHF Factorymation.com 351-0073215 Daniel


Enclosure, Subpanel, Steel 1 $8.00 Design P108 Factorymation.com 351-0073215 Daniel Shipping 1 $11.44 Design Shipping Factorymation.com 351-0073215 Daniel

PCB, two sided, 6" x 5" 1 $33.00 Design 749546 AdvancedCircuits.com 749546 Kyle

Shipping 1 $17.61 Design Shipping AdvancedCircuits.com 749546 Kyle

1/2" EMT 10' Sections 1 $1.68 Design 72711 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel

1/2" EMT Compression Connector, 5 pack 1 $2.75 Design 75650 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel 1/2" EMT Compression Connector 1 $0.56 Design 20346 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel 1/2" EMT Compression Coupler, 5 pack 1 $3.91 Design 141823 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel 1/2" EMT Compression Coupler 1 $0.56 Design 20346 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel Galvanized Carriage Bolt, 1/4" x 2" 6 $0.91 Design 67332 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel Galvanized Hex Nut, 1/4" 6 $0.24 Design 67340 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel Galvanized Washer, 1/4" 10 $0.40 Design 61814 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel 4" x 4" x 6' Treated Wood Post 1 $6.44 Design 121 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel Tan Wingnut Wire Connectors. 25 pack 1 $3.22 Design 47595 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel Stripmaster 10-22 Gauge Wirestripper 1 $24.02 Misc 34029 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel Fast Set Concrete bag 1 $3.81 Design 10437 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel 5 Gallon Plastic Bucket 2 $9.25 Design 356492 Lowe's 12-03-31-001 Daniel LENOX 3/4" Bi-Metal Arbored Hole Saw 1 $9.12 Misc 348124 Lowe's 12-03-31-002 Daniel BOSCH 36TPI Sheet Metal Jigsaw 1 $7.97 Misc 14958 Lowe's 12-03-31-002 Daniel Lowes Red Paint 1 $33.15 Design

Lowe's 12-04-07-001 Kyle

Mcdonalds 1 $18.90 Misc

McD's 12-04-07-002 Kyle Red Neck Ties 3 $22.50 Demo

Amazon 12-04-09-001 Kyle

Sticker Paper 1 $14.97 Demo 7.18103E+11 Staples 12-04-10-001 Daniel 3M Translucent Business Cards 1 $23.53 Demo 51141335711 Staples 12-04-10-001 Daniel 36" x 48" Display board 1 $139.09 Demo

Fed Ex Kinkos 12-04-11-001 Kyle

Figure 73 – Complete Bill of Materials


G. OTHER RESOURCES

ONE PAGE PROJECT MANAGER

During the actual design and implementation part of the capstone project, a one page project manager document was developed each week and turned in as

evidence of progress. On the left side of the document is listed the objectives as major categories and how they relate to the Major Tasks. On the right hand

side of the report is a listing of all the owners associated with that task in order of priority. The center of the document shows all of the bubbles needed in

order to complete the project on time and what week they are associated with. As the semester continued, more and more bubbles were filled in designating

that tasks were completed on time (on or to the right of the date line) or behind schedule (to the left of the date line). Lastly, the bottom section lists the costs

associated with the project as well as a short overview of the week in a few short sentences.


This page is intentionally left blank.





CEEN 4990


By

Daniel Hamrick

Kyle O’Doherty

Elliot Triplett

Master Test Plan


CHANGE LOG

Version Date Engineer Description of Alteration

1.0 1/2/2012 Daniel Created Master Test Plan

1.1 1/4/2012 Daniel Added Testing Standards section and ESP-Tracker-06/07

1.2 1/5/2012 Daniel Added Change Log, updated ESP-Tracker-06

1.3 1/9/2012 Daniel Added ESP-Tracker-08, Node-01 through -04, added Test Status

Summary page

1.4 1/27/2012 Daniel Minor formatting changes. Updated ESP-Tracker-07

1.5 2/6/2012 Daniel Added ESP-Prototype-01/02 and ESP-Server-02

1.6 4/7/2012 Daniel Updated several test cases.

1.7 4/10/2012 Daniel Updated some PSSC tests.

1.8 4/12/2012 Daniel All tests completed.


TESTING STANDARDS

All test cases generated will follow a set of standards in layout and nomenclature in uniformity for better archiving

and comprehension. As test cases are generated using these standards, placed into this document and then

printed for the office Project Binder.

SECTION DIVISION

All tests will be sorted into their perspective sections. Each section is relative to the type of tests conducted and if

a test is to be repeated for accuracy in different phases of the project, such as during system testing then once

again in integration testing, a test case will be filed in each section. The sections and their descriptions are as

follows:

System Testing

This section will contain hardware testing cases for component parameters, such as for the inductance loops that

are required to be constructed, as well as the test cases which involve the microcontrollers and their

programming.

Interface Testing

The Interface testing section will host the test cases for the server and database tests. These are separate from

the Integration Testing as it will only involve the server and database components and will not interact with the

hardware components.

Integration Testing

This section consists of tests which will combine hardware and software parts of the project and will test the

interoperability of the system and its subsequent capabilities.

Acceptance Testing

This section includes the tests which must be completed at the end of the project and determine the success of the

project with regards to our established goals set forth in the Project Proposal.


NAMING CONVENTION

All tests will be named in the following format to ensure readability and organization among test cases.

ESP – Tracker – 03

<Project Name> - <Function or Subsystem> - <##>

The numbering at the end of the naming convention will be sequential in terms of test case creation date, NOT

sequential in terms of completion order. The Function or Subsystem section is a general identifier and will only be

held to strict adherence if a newly written test falls into the same category as a previously written one.


TEST STATUS SUMMARY

Test Category Test ID Date Completed Test Summary

System Tests ESP-Tracker-01 April 7th, 2012 Pass

ESP-Tracker-02 April 7th, 2012 Pass with Notes

ESP-Tracker-03 January 2nd, 2012 Pass

ESP-Tracker-05 January 2nd, 2012 Pass with Notes

ESP-Tracker-06 N/A Cancelled

ESP-Tracker-07 January 27th, 2012 Pass with Notes

ESP-Tracker-08 January 9th, 2012 Fail

ESP-Prototype-01 January 18th, 2012 Pass

ESP-Server-01 March 16th, 2012 Pass

ESP-Server-02 N/A Cancelled

ESP-Node-01 March 16th, 2012 Pass

ESP-Node-02 April 7th, 2012 Pass

ESP-Node-03 April 7th, 2012 Pass

ESP-Node-04 N/A Cancelled

Interface Tests ESP-Web-01 April 12th, 2012 Pass

ESP-Web-02 April 12th, 2012 Pass

Integration Tests ESP-Systen-01 April 7th, 2012 Pass with Notes

ESP-Systen-02 April 7th 2012 Pass

ESP-Systen-03 March 31st, 2012 Pass

ESP-Systen-04 April 7th, 2012 Fail

Acceptance Tests ESP-PSSC-01 April 7th, 2012 Pass

ESP-PSSC-02 April 12th, 2012 Pass




ESP-PSSC-06 February 24th, 2012 Pass


EXAMPLE TEST SHEET

Test Writer:

Test Case Name:

Test ID #:

Description:

Type:

Tester Information:

Name Of Tester:

Date:

Hardware Version:

Time:

Set up:

Step

Action Expected Result Pass

Fail

N/A

Comment

Overall Test Result


SYSTEM TESTS

Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Tracker Detection Test ID #: ESP-Tracker-01 Description: Test tracker to identify various

sizes of metal Type: Black Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Dan H., Kyle O., Elliot T. Date: 7 April 2012 Hardware Version: V1.6 PCB

Embedded Software: Combined Board 4-7

Time: 1400

Set up: Deploy tracker in parking lot with appropriate power. Tester 1 monitors tracker data, Tester 2 runs test.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 A person walks over induction loop

Tracker does not register a vehicle X

2 Drive a CEENbot over the induction loop


No available working CEEnbot

3 Move a 11” x 17” baking pan over loop


4 Drive a motorcycle over loop

Tracker does not register a vehicle X No available motorcycle

5 Drive a small sedan over loop

Tracker registers a vehicle X

6 Drive a 4 wheel-drive truck over loop

Tracker registers a vehicle X No available pickup truck.

Overall Test Result X

System good


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Tracker Accuracy Test ID #: ESP-Tracker-02 Description: Test tracker to identify vehicle

at various speeds Type: White Box



Time: 1330

Set up: Deploy tracker in parking lot with appropriate power. Tester 1 monitors tracker data, Tester 2 runs test.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Drive vehicle at 5 mph over induction loop

Vehicle registered by Tracker module X

2 Repeat step 1 at 10 mph











System good


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Test Loop Parameters Test ID #: ESP-Tracker-03 Description: After building a loop in PVC

pipe, test the parameters of the loop to model on schematics

Type: White Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Daniel Hamrick Date: 2012-01-02 Hardware Version: PVC Loop v1.1 Time: 1630 Set up: Build a 4’ x 4’ rigid PVC conduit and run #18 AWG stranded wire four times

through the frame. Strip and tin the ends of the wire.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Use a Digital Multimeter to measure the resistance of the loop.

Obtain the unit’s resistance.

X

Loop was measured at 1.3 Ohms from end to end.

2 Use an inductance measurement device to measure the loop’s inductance.

Obtain the unit’s inductance.

X

Loop was measured at 83 uH from end to end.


This will allow accurate model generation for the electrical designs.


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Test Loop Parameters

Part 2

Test ID #: ESP-Tracker-05

Description: Test variations in PVC loop with different configurations

Type: White Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Daniel Hamrick, Elliot Triplett,

Kyle O’Doherty Date: 2012-01-02

Hardware Version: PVC Loop v1.1

Time: 1900

Set up: Use previously created PVC loop and find metal objects of various sizes to pass over/in front of inductance loop to measure changes in the inductance of the loop.

Step

Action Obtained Result Pass

Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Stand loop on its end, measure inductance (L)

Measured 83 uH X

Baseline value established in ESP-Tracker-03 verified

2 Lay loop flat on ground and measure L

Measured 74 uH X

Change is most likely due to metal/concrete in floor of building.

3

With loop flat on ground place 1 chair inside loop, measure L

Measured 74 uH

X

Change was most likely too small

4

Repeat step 3 with 2,3 and 4 chairs inside loop

2) 73.5 uH 3) 73.5 uH 4) 73 uH X

Consistent with theoretical behavior, L decreased with a metal disruption of magnetic field.

5

Stand loop on end and pass metal object parallel to the loop between 1 to 2 feet away

Lowest value measured 81.5 uH with object parallel and centered to loop X

Noted a moderate decrease in inductance, proves theoretical expectations in dealing with loop as well as rough estimate for drop in value as a vehicle passes

6

Repeat step 5 with object going perpendicular to loop

Lowest value measured 79 uH X

Unrealistic approach vector for a vehicle and our system, good data however.

Overall Test Result

X

Will begin to use a value of 83 uH with a 3 uH drop to model inductance loop and vehicle variations.


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Test Loop Parameters

Part 3


Description: Test variations in PVC loop with different configurations

Type: White Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Dan H.

Date: 2/25/2012

Hardware Version: Colpitts V3.7

Time: 1300

Set up: Use previously created PVC loop, Colpitts Oscillator operating at 60kHz and an oscilloscope to measure frequency. Use PVC loop in the LC tank of oscillator. Setup system in outside parking lot.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1

Measure oscillator frequency (f) while lying flat on the parking lot.

X

2

Using a 2001 Mitsubishi Eclipse GS drive the vehicle over the loop, measure f on oscilloscope.

X

3 Using a 2012 Ford Escape XLT repeat step 2.

X

4 Using a 2001 Pontiac Grand Am GT, repeat step 2.

X

5 Using a 2004 Dodge Intrepid, repeat step 2.

X

Overall Test Result

X

Unable to get a functioning oscilloscope outside to measure the frequency. Ultimately not necessary once changed to a LPF.


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Calculate Tracker Parameters


Description: Test various parameters of tracker electrical design to meet expectations outlined in Proposal

Type: White Box


Date: 1/27/2012

Hardware Version: Colpitts v3.4 Schematic v0.3

Time: 1300

Set up: Will need the PSpice program and schematics as well as scratch paper and a graphing calculator. Provide a softcopy of testing results where appropriate.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1

Schematic labels Schematic has labels for author, project, subsystem, sheet #, version and published date

X

Analog Section: Good Single Board: Needs version date on PCB layout, needs a better title, author and shows 1/1 sheets when there is 2.

2

Verify naming conventions.

All components are properly numbered/labeled and visible on schematic. In/out pins are labeled.

X

Need to label potentiometers on silk screen and buttons for controller. Missing Test Points from Analog Circuitry. (1st POT is DC bias, 2nd is BPF Freq)

3 Determine current through each resistor

Power dissipation under 0.25W X

R1 has highest dissipation at 16mW

4 Determine current though all transistors/ICs

Power dissipation within tolerances X

2N3904 handles up to 625 mW and we are using 3.7 mW.

5 Determine input resistance

N/A X 1038 Ohms

6 Determine output resistance

N/A X 36 Ohms from Oscillator and 100k Ohms Out Overall

7 Determine power consumption

N/A X 25.3mW calculated from voltage sources.

8 Determine oscillation frequency

61 kHz X

63.4 kHz


Minor adjustments needed, ready to order parts.


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Colpitts Oscillator Proof of

Concept Test ID #: ESP-Tracker-08

Description: Build a colpitts oscillator from a PSpice schematic/simulation which differs from MATLAB theoretical calculations

Type: White Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Daniel Hamrick Date: 2012-01-09 Hardware Version: Colpitts Tracker v2.1 Time: 1800 Set up: Build a colpitts oscillator v1.0 and v2.1 and use the PVC test loop in the LC

tank. Prepare an oscilloscope to measure frequency.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1

Using V1.0, measure the free running frequency at the output node.

60 kHz measured frequency.

X

2 Measure the Vp-p at the output node.

250 mVp-p measured. X

3

Using a metal object (such as the metal cart) measure frequency change as it passes though magnetic field.

N/A

X

4 Repeat step 1 using V2.1 hardware.

60 kHz measured frequency. X

60kHz signal buried in there but very unclean.

5 Repeat step 2 with V2.1 hardware.

250 mVp-p measured. X

50mV signal with significant amounts of noise

6 Repeat step 3, using V2.1 hardware.

N/A X

Overall Test Result

X

This proof on concept testing showed the design failed but the purpose of it was a success as we can now avoid this particular design.


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Verify Analog Circuitry

Test ID #: ESP-Prototype-01

Description: Measure and verify voltage and currents in analog circuitry with Spice results from ESP-Tracker-07

Type: White Box


Elliot T. Date: 1/18/2012

Hardware Version: Colpitts V3.4

Time: 1600

Set up: Build analog circuits on bread board for all 4 oscillators and repeat all steps for all 4 analog sections.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1

Measure oscillator frequency for all 4 oscillators while adjusting potentiometer.

60kHz, 70kHz, 80kHz, 90kHz

X

2

Verify BPF independently of Oscillator for center frequency.

60kHz, 70kHz, 80kHz, 90kHz tuned by the potentiometer X

3

Verify envelope detector independently for ripple and decay rate

Ripple is less than 10mV and decay is less than 10ms X

4

Connect oscillator and BPF, tune BPF to center frequency, measure resistance of pot.

N/A

X

5

Connect all sections together, measure output voltage.

Positive voltage between 4 and 5V. X

Overall Test Result

X

System good, but note that if BPF isn’t tuned on center frequency, voltage could go up rather than down.


Test Writer: Elliot Triplett/Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Packet Handling Test Test ID #: ESP-Server-01 Description: Verifies that Ethernet packets

are received correctly and handled correctly

Type: White Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Kyle O. Date: 3/16/2012 Hardware Version: V1.6 PCB Time: 2200 Set up: Deploy backend server locally.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Prepare server to receive and analyze packets

System in idle state X

2 Send a Local Node Status Packet to server

Server records status from local node and attached tracker module

X

3 Send out a Command Packet to Local Node

Packet sent out has accurate data and formatting

X


System good


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Communication Speed Test ID #: ESP-Server-02 Description: Measures maximum

communication rate between server and Xport

Type: White Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: N/A Date: N/A Hardware Version: N/A Time: N/A Set up: Deploy backend server locally and connect sample Xport to network.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1

Establish that server transmits 2 bytes (one ASCII character) at a time with a 20 msec delay between transmissions.

X

2 Verify Xport receives character and displays it properly.

X

3

Set up a test message 10 characters long numerically going from 1 to 10.

X

4

Test transmissions decreasing the transmission delay from 20 msec until Xport begins to display errors in the transmitted message, record delay speed.

X

5 Calculate datarate speed, 16 bits * 1/delay.

X

Overall Test Result

X

Test cancelled due to other measurement difficulties and other methods of testing


Test Writer: Kyle O’Doherty Test Case Name: Verify Local Node Functionality

Test ID #: ESP-Node-

01

Description: Test various parameters of the digital and power components to verify specifications met.

Type: White box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Kyle O.

Date: 3/16/2012

Hardware Version:

V1.6 PCB

Time: 2100

Set up: Will need print out of schematics and PCB for component identification, multi-meter, calculator, and notebook for any notes.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1

Voltage

Supply holds steady at 5V and 3.3V

X

2

Current

Measured current from supply is less than 1.25A

X

Overall Test Result

X

System good


Test Writer: Kyle O’Doherty Test Case Name: Verify Local Node Functionality

Test ID #: ESP-Node-02


Type: White box


Date: 4/7/2012

Hardware Version:

V1.6 PCB Embedded Software: Combined Board 4-7

Time: 0945

Set up: Will need print out of schematics and PCB for component identification, multi-meter, calculator, and notebook for any notes. External LCD for print out of info may be needed.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1

LCD

Characters can be sent to the LCD and displayed correctly. X

2

Temperature

Temperature can be read on the LCD and is accurate within 3 degrees centigrade. X

Used temperature from weather.com

3

Buttons

Both selection buttons work properly and increase or decrease values accordingly. X


System good


Test Writer: Kyle O’Doherty Test Case Name:

Verify Local Node Functionality

Test ID #: ESP-Node-03


Type: White box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester:

Dan H.

Date: 4/7/2012

Hardware Version:

V1.6 PCB Embedded Software: Combined Board 4-7

Time: 0930

Set up: Will need print out of schematics and PCB for component identification, multi-meter, calculator, and notebook for any notes. External LCD may be needed for any output to the screen.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1

Xport

Xport is initialized and can communicate with the PC properly. X

Tested and verified functioning properly


System good


Test Writer: Kyle O’Doherty Test Case Name:

Verify Local Node Functionality

Test ID #:

ESP-Node-04


Type: White box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester:

N/A Date: 4/7/2012

Hardware Version:

N/A

Time: 0900

Set up: Will need print out of schematics and PCB for component identification, multi-meter, calculator, and notebook for any notes. External LCD may be needed for any output to the screen.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Xbee

Xbee is initialized properly and is ready to transmit and receive data.

X

Overall Test Result

X

Invalid test due to project change ESP-ECR-20120123 removal of XBee requirement


INTERFACE TESTS

Test Writer: Elliot Triplett Test Case Name: Web App Input Validation

Test Test ID #: ESP-Web-01

Description: Verifies correct input and operation of web application. Application should run continuously and not break from any user input. Application should accept all forms of user input and alert the user of any invalid input

Type: Black Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Elliot T. Date: 4/12/2012 Hardware Version: Time: 0900 Set up: Runs on web client

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Input all data types into each form. Include all forms of ASCII

All error handling should be done correctly. Web application should continue to run

X

2 Navigate through all options provided on interface.

Each transition should be allowed without breaking/stopping client. Expected operation is outline in the user’s manual.

X


System good


Test Writer: Elliot Triplett Test Case Name: Web App Profile Validation

Test Test ID #: ESP-Web-02

Description: Verifies correct loading of profiles and validates login authorization. System should also perform correct read/writes of data to the database.

Type: Black Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Elliot T. Date: 4/12/2012 Hardware Version: Time: 0920 Set up: Runs on web client

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Input username and password for correct validation. Also input all forms of characters into forms.

Correct validation should occur. Correct database access should be granted. X

2 Verify that correct login accesses the correct database during startup. Verify that shutdown saves correctly to the database.

All information should be stored in the correct file format, make correct connect. Database should have test entries into the database.

X


System good


INTEGRATION TESTS

Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Tracker Accuracy #1 Test ID #: ESP-System-01 Description: Test the local node for when a

vehicle stops over the tracker for a period of time.

Type: White Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Dan H., Elliot T. Kyle O. Date: 7 April 2012 Hardware Version: V1.6 PCB


Time: 1130

Set up: Deploy tracker and local node in parking lot with appropriate power. Tester 1 monitors system data, Tester 2 runs test.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Drive vehicle over tracker at 10 mph.

Baseline test. Current fluctuations measured and node registers a vehicle.

X

2 Drive vehicle over tracker and stop centered for 1 second before accelerating off tracker.

Tracker current maintains fluctuation for duration. Local Node recognizes this and registers only one vehicle.

X

3 Drive vehicle and stop over tracker for 5 seconds.

Same as above. X


Same as above. X


Local node registers tracker as being defective and properly report the status to the server. X

This functionality isn’t coded in such a way that this test would work. Low voltage levels are set at a threshold around 500 mV, far lower than any car can change it.

6 Drive vehicle over half of inductance loop

Local node registers a vehicle X

7 Drive 1 vehicle over the loop and a 2nd less than 3 seconds later

Local node registers two separate vehicles X

Overall Test Result X System good


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: System Durability Test ID #: ESP-System-02 Description: Test system reliability in a

variety of simulated weather conditions.

Type: Black Box



Time: 1500

Set up: In an outdoor parking lot, setup tracker/local node with monitoring equipment to check behavior. A vehicle to drive over tracker. A 5 gallon bucket, water source, several bags of ice. WARNING: Take precautions in setting up system to ensure that the system is protected from water damage while the inductance loop is exposed to water/ice.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Drive over tracker with dry pavement and loop.

Baseline test. X

2 Drive over tracker after dumping 1 bucket of water over loops.

Vehicle checked in.

X

3 Drive over tracker after dumping 3 buckets of water over loops to get standing water.

Vehicle checked in.

X

4 Drive over tracker after covering loops with ice.

Vehicle checked in. X


System good


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Induction Loop Patterns Test ID #: ESP-System-03 Description: Test integration of local node

and analog circuits to determine which configuration is the most accurate.

Type: Black Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Dan H., Kyle O. Date: 31 Mar 2012 Hardware Version: V1.6 of PCB Time: 1300 Set up: In a parking lot, set up local node and 4 operational induction loops. Configure

local node to display voltages on the LCD and watch for the “CAR” detection signal. Accuracy is measured by the voltage drop detected and the location on the car where the first detection occurs.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Drive over a x4 PVC loop

150 mV drop, detection from middle of car sometimes

X Unreliable

2

Drive over a x6 PVC loop

200 mV drop, detection from middle of car X

Reaffirms the use of x6 passes per induction loop, PVC was strong enough to drive over but too wide in shape

3 Drive over a x6 operational loop in a 4x4 square shape

300 mV drop, detection from middle of car near engine block

X A slightly better result, also easier to drive over when not in PVC.

4 Drive over a x6 operational loop in a circle shape

250 mV drop, detection area only in very middle of vehicle

X Contrary to what we theorized, the circle doesn’t perform as well as the square

5 Drive over a x6 op loop in an octagon shape, 2 ft sides

250 mV drop, barely registered car in the middle X

Not a good configuration

6 Drive over a x6 op loop in a 3x5.5 rectangle shape

300 mV drop over nearly the entire length of vehicle X

This result was so exceptional, it was retested with 2 loops and performed very well

7 Drive over a x6 op loop in a Q-configuration

X

Required a new loop to be built and after the success of step 6 this step was not done.

8 Drive over a x6 op loop in a D-configuration

X

Required a new loop to be built and after the success of step 6 this step was not done.


New operational configuration is a 3’ x 5.5’ rectangle with x6 passes.


Test Writer: Daniel Hamrick Test Case Name: Local Node Detection

Sequence Test ID #: ESP-System-04

Description: Test integration of local node and server to detect vehicles entering from various directions

Type: White Box

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Dan H., Kyle O., Elliot T. Date: 7 April 2012 Hardware Version: V1.6 of PCB


Time: 1430

Set up: In a parking lot, set up local node and 4 operational induction loops. Configure local node to display voltages on the LCD and watch for the “CAR” detection signal. Loops are identified by number, top left being 1, top right 2, bottom left 3, bottom right 4.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1 Drive car over loops 1 then 3

Vehicle In X


Vehicle Out X


Vehicle In X


Vehicle Out X

Overall Test Result

X

After running this test, we realized that we decided against trying to code this in the system back in February due to the complexity of the decision tree.


ACCEPTANCE TESTING

Test Case Name: PSSC Detection Accuracy Test ID #: ESP-PSSC-01 Description: Demonstrate the accuracy

requirement of 99% for project success criteria.

Type: Acceptance

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Dan H., Kyle O., Elliot T. Date: 7 April 2012 Hardware Version: V1.6 Hardware


Time: 1200

Set up: Tracker will be set up in PKI North Lot. Generator will be needed to provide power to tracker and local node. Induction loops will be laid out across parking lot entrance and covered with duct tape to hold in place. Tester will monitor local node’s data to verify when a vehicle is detected.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1. Car enters lot Spaces available will decrement X

2. Car exits lot Spaces available will increment X

3. Record the results for 100 cars entering or exiting parking lot

At least 99 cars should be detected by the tracker and local node X

Overall Test Result

X

Noted an inconsistency during test where two cars entered/exited at the same time. Isolated error to a programming implementation on the local node. Software corrected and change verified.


Test Case Name: PSSC Mobile Access Test ID #: ESP-PSSC-02 Description: Demonstrate capability to

view current E.S.P. data on various devices

Type: Acceptance

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Daniel H., Elliot T. Date: 4/12/2012 Hardware Version: Time: 1030 Set up: Requires a cellphone with iOS, one with Andoid OS, and a computer with Firefox

and Google Chrome installed.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1. Using Firefox on a laptop or desktop, connect to web site.

Client will display on website. X

2. Using Google Chrome on a laptop or desktop, connect to web site.

Client will display on website.

X

3. Using an iOS enabled mobile device, connect to web site.

Client will display on website X

4. Using an Android OS enabled mobile device, connect to web site.

Client will display on website. X


System good


Test Case Name: PSSC Reliability Test Test ID #: ESP-PSSC-03 Description: Demonstrate reliability

through system update delay monitoring

Type: Acceptance

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Daniel H., Elliot T. Date: 4/12/2012 Hardware Version: Time: 1100 Set up: Tracker will be set up in PKI North Lot. Generator will be needed to provide power

to tracker and local node. Induction loops will be laid out across parking lot entrance and covered with duct tape to hold in place. Tester will need mobile device to connect to website and computer to monitor local node data.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1. Log in to website and monitor lot information

Current information for lot is displayed X

2. Car enters or exits lot

Local node registers vehicle and updates data within 10 seconds

X

3. Update website data every 20 seconds for up to 3 minutes

Within 1 minute, client and local nodes value will be synchronized X

4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 ten more times

Updates will continue to be posted in less than 1 minute from detection

X


System good


Test Case Name: PSSC Administration Test Test ID #: ESP-PSSC-04 Description: Demonstrate administrative

functionality of the client system

Type: Acceptance

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Elliot T. Date: 4/12/2012 Hardware Version: Time: 1230 Set up: Internet connected device and local node attached to the marquee display for

reference.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1. Connect to client using administrative login

Client grants access to administrative functions X

2. Manually set spaces filled

Marquee displays accurate remaining spaces

X

3. Manually set maximum spaces available

Marquee displays accurate remaining spaces

X

4. Request lot activity Client displays lot activity for vehicle entering/exiting lot

X

5. Request system status

Client displays tracker, local node and marquee operational status

X


System good


Test Case Name: PSSC BIT Test Test ID #: ESP-PSSC-05 Description: Demonstrate system’s ability

to perform self tests and diagnostics.

Type: Acceptance

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Elliot T. Date: 4/12/2012 Hardware Version: Time: 1330 Set up: Tracker will be set up in PKI North Lot. Generator will be needed to provide power

to tracker and local node. Induction loops will be laid out across parking lot entrance and covered with duct tape to hold in place.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1. Disconnect induction loop one

Tracker will identify malfunctioning equipment, notify the server through the local node and send an email to the admin

X

2. Reconnect induction loop

System status shows normal X

3. Repeat step 1 and 2 for induction loops 2 through 4

Same as in Step 1 and 2. X

4. Disconnect tracker from local node

Local node will alert server of the change in connections, and send an email to the admin

X

5. Reconnect tracker module

System status shows normal X

6. Connect to client using admin login and request status report

Server will generate status report which will outline all connections, including local node and trackers.

X

7. Verify Status Report

System status report shows errors induced into system during test

X


System good


Test Case Name: PSSC IEEE Test ID #: ESP-PSSC-06 Description: Demonstrate system’s ability

to transmit over an Ethernet connection

Type: Acceptance

Tester Information: Name Of Tester: Elliot T., Kyle O. Date: 24 February 2012 Hardware Version: V1.6 PCB


Time: 2100

Set up: Built local node, computer and crossover Ethernet cable.

Step


Fail

N/A

Comment

1. Boot up laptop and begin running embedded testing webpage

Software functions

X

2. Connect crossover cable to board and computer

Nothing X

3. Power on local node, select the “Change UID” menu, increment and decrement the UID as appropriate.

Status message is sent to computer, testing webpage receives Ethernet packet in IEEE standard 802.3 and displays the message

X


System good