CICEET Progress Report for the period 3/15/05 Through 9/15/05

Project Title: Enhancement and Demonstration of Satellite Telemetry System for Real Time Water Monitoring Throughout the NERRs Network
Principal Investigator(s): M. Blake Henke
Additional Investigator(s): Stan Mantel
Project Start Date: We started the project on September 1, 2004, even though funding was not provided until late November.

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Tasks to meet objectives
N/A. The tasks stated above are explicit enough.

Progress on Tasks
The electronics board we were using a year ago has been redesigned to utilize a smaller and less expensive microprocessor. This is long since done.

The 12 demo units are built at this writing. [Please see Remote Access Satellite Sensor Link (RASSL) Figures 1-3. These show what the hardware looks like.] The electronics board will reside inside a small NEMA housing, which itself will be housed inside a fiberglass NEMA 4 housing, along with the rechargeable NiMH battery. See Figures 2-3 for close-up views of the RASL packaging and battery configuration. Each RASL unit will also feature a 10W solar panel to provide a trickle charge to the battery. This configuration will provide reliable power for extended autonomous deployments.

In April of 2005, we ran into a snag regarding our demo units for the CICEET project, but it is one that we have now overcome with good communications, as described below.

The issue was this: Each of the NERR demo sites configures their sondes in a slightly different manner for deployment. Despite the fact that we established a “standard” sonde configuration for the NERR sites with YSI’s advice, and the advice of some of the individual demo sites, there was apparently still some discrepancy and variation at the site level that we must be able to accommodate in our RASSL devices. The VA NERR site at Gloucester Point, for example, needs to have its sondes reporting the following information, in “unattended mode.” (as shown below). [NOTE: Not all of the sonde information needs to be transmitted hourly, and can be logged at the RASSL unit.]

What we need transmitted (at the VA NERR site):
1. Date
2. Time
3. Temp
4. SpecCond
5. Salinity
6. Dissolved oxygen %sat
7. Dissolved oxygen mg/L
8. pH
9. Turbidity
10. Chl
11. Depth
12. Battery

What we need archived (at the VA NERR site):
1. DO charge
2. pH mvolts
3. sonde battery
4. flourescence

The MD site needed the same information (as above) transmitted and logged EXCEPT the pH mvolts. They apparently do NOT set up their sondes to report this. So we needed to configure the MD RASSL devices to deal with that variation.

The various demo sites all reported back to us in early May with the sonde configuration information that they needed our RASSL units to be able to accommodate. We received so much variation in the responses that we elected (though reluctantly) to program a new feature into our RASSL devices. We elected to program them to utilize something called the “Z command” that is common on all YSI sondes. When given the “Z command,” all YSI sondes report their current configuration.

So we programmed our RASSL devices to interrogate the attached sonde (at power up) and to determine how it is configured. With that information, we then programmed our RASSL devices to configure the “transmitted message” as we have in the past (i.e., with all 12 parameters listed above being transmitted through the system). All other data parameters coming out of the attached sonde will be logged on the RASSL, no matter what they are and/or what combination of parameters exist. In cases where the YSI sonde is outputting fewer than the 12 parameters that are part of our “transmit message,” we will still transmit the same message format, but zero’s will appear in fields that are not being sampled at the sonde.

This change in software and firmware programming took all of the summer months to accomplish and to test fully. This has now been done.

The 2 demo units have now been provided to the VA NERR site, and they will be deployed within 2 weeks time.

The 2 demo units for the MD NERR site will be shipped to them shortly (i.e., week 10/3 latest). And we will be meeting with the DE NERR site on 10/13/05 to deliver their 2 demo units and to select the 2 deployment sites.

Our plan is to deliver the remaining 6 RASSL units to the 3 other demo sites (i.e., SC, GA, FL) in the subsequent weeks, and to have all of the sites operational by the end of November of this year.

Difficulties
All described above, but the bottom line was that we needed to change our software and firmware of our RASSL units significantly in order to meet the needs of the 6 demo sites. We have now done that. But this change cost us the entire summer.

We initially resisted instituting the “Z command” as we knew it would be a formidable task. But the fact that each of the 6 demo sites configured their sondes in slightly different ways forced us to make this change now, in order for the demo project to proceed.

In the long run, this software/firmware change will be a good thing in that the RASSL devices are now more capable and more flexible. Now, no matter how a sonde is configured, our RASSL device will be able to determine that and to react accordingly.

Project Objectives for Next Reporting Period
1. Get all 12 demo units installed and operational, and monitor progress while paying for the airtime fees for the next year per unit per site.
2. Add additional ports on our hardware to allow users to hook up multiple sondes to a single RASSL device.

Objectives
Deliver and install all 12 demo units.

Tasks to Meet Objectives
Not applicable.

Work Plan for Next Reporting Period
Deliver and Install all 12 RASL units by the end of November 2005.
Add additional data ports to the RASSL hardware so that multiple sondes can operate through a single RASSL unit.

Overall Project Timeline Update
While we intended to have all demo units installed and operational by June of 2005, we had to slip that deadline in order to make the changes to our software and firmware, as noted above.

Preliminary Data
None to report. There will be some in the next progress report.

Dissemination
Conferences:
Restore America’s Estuaries, Seattle, WA (exhibitor)

Contact with End Users:
Visit with Padilla Bay NERR site personnel, October 2005. Continued contact with Dr. Willy Reay of the Gloucester Point NERR site.

Expenditures
We had to divert the airtime fees for the 1st year of the project to engineering time to make the changes outlined above. As a result, we will be able to provide airtime to all of the demo sites for 1 year only, as opposed to the originally planned 2 years. We will discuss this matter with CICEET staff shortly, as we may want to extend the project for a 3rd year of data collection.

End User Advisor Feedback
Name: William Reay
Organization: Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary
Location: Gloucester Point, VA
Phone number: 804-684-7119
E-mail: wreay@vims.edu

1) At this stage, what are the potential applications for this research? Please discuss how you and others could potentially use the technology.
We anticipate the real value of this system will be delivery of water quality and weather data from remote locations that are not conducive to alternative telemetry technologies. From a research perspective, data from these locations will allow us to target field activities to coincide with relatively short-term events (e.g., algal blooms, low DO events. Etc.). The ease of installations and the compactness of this technology is an asset for short-term deployments.

2) Please discuss how you and others could potentially use the technology.
See above with respect to research activities. Regarding monitoring programs, we anticipate that this technology will allow us to deliver real-time data from remote sites during extreme “bad” weather conditions.

3) What, if anything, has changed about this project’s potential applicability since the last reporting period (not applicable for the first Progress Report).
While firmware and software modifications required time investment by North Star Science and Technology, LLC, I feel that there was significant gain in product improvement to justify any delay in field deployments at the reserves.

4) Do you see key challenges that the researchers may want to address or keep in mind?
None yet.

5) Does this report offer you enough information to adequately address the above questions?
Yes. I would like to reiterate that the PI has remained in constant contact with me throughout this project and has made good efforts to improve both the product and grant delivery.