D3.6: 2nd Design Guidelines for Open Sensor fabrication

Journal of Open Hardware, 2017

Without hardware, there is no science. Instruments, reagents, computers, and other equipment are essential for producing systematic knowledge. Yet, current supply chains limit access and impede creativity and customization through high markups and proprietary designs, compounded by proprietary hardware licenses and patents. Open Science Hardware (OSH) addresses part of this problem by sharing designs, instructions for building, and protocols. Expanding the reach of OSH within academic research, NGO initiatives, citizen science, and education has potential to increase access to experimental tools and facilitate their customization and reuse. We organized with others the "Gathering for Open Science Hardware" (GOSH) in 2016 to address what we see as the primary barrier to OSH: early adopters are disparate and separated by geographical and disciplinary borders which limit interaction, exchange and community building. This inaugural gathering brought together 50 of the most active developers, users, and thinkers in the OSH movement, complemented by expertise from diverse backgrounds, to seed a global community. This article provides a review of the activities and debates we conducted at GOSH 2016.

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2010

a series of events focusing on sensor devices themselves, the technology-capturing style of sensors, special technologies, signal control and interfaces, and, particularly, sensors-oriented applications. Most of the sensor-oriented research and industry initiatives are focusing on sensor networks, data security, exchange protocols, energy optimization, and features related to intermittent connections. Recently, the concept of Internet-of-things gathers attention, especially when integrating IPv4 and IIPv6 networks. We welcomed technical papers presenting research and practical results, position papers addressing the pros and cons of specific proposals, such as those being discussed in the standard fora or in industry consortia, survey papers addressing the key problems and solutions on any of the above topics short papers on work in progress, and panel proposals. The conference had the following tracks:  Gas sensors  Ultrasonic and piezosensors  Sensor devices  Medical devices a...

CAADRIA proceedings

Digital workflows from the design to the production of buildings have received significant recent attention in architectural research. The need for both integrated systems for design collaboration (Boeykens and Neuckermans, 2006) and clear and flexible communication flows for nonstandard fabrication outcomes have been identified as fundamental (Scheurer, 2010). This paper reports on the development of a digital "design system" for the design and prototyping of an acoustic enclosure for meetings in a large open work environment, the FabPod. The aim was to keep this system open for temporal flexibility in as many aspects of the finalisation of the design as possible. The system provides novel examples of both integrated collaboration and clear communication flow. (1) Acoustics is included as a design driver in early stages through the connection of digital simulation tools with design models. (2) Bi-directional information flows and clear modularisation of workflow underpins the system from design through to fabrication and assembly of the enclosure. Following the completion and evaluation of the FabPod prototype, the openness of the system will be tested through its application in subsequent design and prototyping iterations. Design development will respond to performance testing through user engagement methods and acoustic measurement.

Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 1999

Sensors cannot be developed without their matching circuits, especially when in the search for minimal dimensions: often the physical geometries become so small that the sensor performance degrades to yield only very weak signal levels. Therefore, it is mandatory in many cases to provide the measurement circuits close to the sensor site, if not on the sensor chip itself. Monitoring physical quantities from a remote and difficult to access location requires high standards for the sensors and their circuits involved: whenever long distance measurements are performed, it is essential that the data remains reliable at all times. This is a hard requirement and many sensors used in such applications cannot cope with such severe specifications, as there exists: low drift, high stability in time, immunity to cross sensitivities, etc. However, adding circuitry also allows one to add more intelligence to the sensor itself. This paper will deal with the merits of such an approach and will focus on some examples. It is also shown how the sensor design in itself can be modified to improve the interface circuit performance. Furthermore, an example is given where monitoring of parameters on free-ranging animals is envisaged, but the system can easily be modified to address the measurement tasks in, for example, chemical production plants or automotive applications.

The articles in this issue look at how the development and use of free and open source hardware (FOSH or simply “open hardware”) are changing the face of science, engineering, business, and law. Free and open source software (FOSS) has proven very successful and now dominates the development of software on a global scale. It is available in source code (open source) and can be used, studied, copied, modified, and redistributed either without restriction or with restrictions only to ensure that further recipients have the same open source rights. Similarly, FOSH provides the “code” for hardware—including the bill of materials, schematics, instructions, computer-aided designs, and other information needed to recreate a physical artifact. Use of FOSH can improve product innovation in a wide range of fields. In this issue authors from a variety of disciplines and work environments discuss how this open model of innovation will drive the future of engineering. First, Alicia Gibb, founder and executive director of the Open Source Hardware Association (OSHWA) and director of the ATLAS1 Blow Things Up (BTU) Lab at the University of Colorado Boulder, argues that hardware is the next step to open sourcing everything. She touches on intellectual property (IP) issues, cites the benefits of open source hardware, introduces and explains the role of OSHWA, and hints at the future of open hardware. The open source paradigm is already making deep inroads in the hardware space in 3D printing. With the development of the open source RepRap project (a 3D printer that can print itself) the cost of 3D printers has dropped to a point where nearly anyone can afford one for rapid prototyping and small batch manufacturing. Ben Malouf and Harris Kenny of Aleph Objects describe their company’s approach to the use of open hardware in every aspect of their business to create the popular Lulzbot 3D printer. Their primary product is open—and consistently wins one of the top spots in Make: Magazine’s annual 3D printer shootout, ahead of proprietary 3D printers from much larger companies with far greater resources. Lulzbot printers, and those of many other manufacturers, are rapidly increasing in sales as the number of free and open source 3D printable designs erupts on the Web, making distributed manufacturing a reality. In this context, law professor Lucas Osborn at the Campbell University School of Law takes us on a deep dive into how IP law will need to change in this new 3D printing era. After summarizing the basics of IP law and explaining why it was created, he discusses how it could both benefit and hinder 3D printing technology. His arguments will challenge readers independent of their views on patent law. For those with conventional IP leanings, he shows how IP law can hinder innovation. For those born in the Internet age, where sharing is second nature and little thought is given to licenses as long as the code is posted on Github, he offers some important lessons. He ends with a challenge for engineers to make more of an effort in helping form IP law that will benefit innovation. If these lessons on IP and open hardware replication with 3D printers are turned to experimental research in science and engineering, there is an important opportunity to radically reduce the costs of experimental research while improving it. In the next article I argue that by harnessing a scalable open source method, federal funding is spent just once for the development of scientific equipment and then a return on this investment (ROI) is realized by digital replication of scientific devices for only the costs of materials. With numerous examples I show that the ROI climbs into the thousands of percent while accelerating any research that the open paradigm touches. To harness this opportunity, I propose four straightforward and negative-net-cost policies to support FOSH development and improve access to scientific tools in the United States. The policies will directly save millions in research and STEM education expenditures, while providing researchers and students access to better equipment, which will promote advances in technology and concomitant benefits for the American economy. Thinking about the future and the changes needed to support this development in STEM education, AnnMarie Thomas and Deb Besser of the St. Thomas School of Engineering consider how engineers and engineering educators can use maker methods to introduce students to engineering and build their technological literacy. They show that the maker movement is closely tied to open hardware and sharing as well as the traits of successful engineers. Makerspaces and fabrication (fab) labs (what Gibb calls hackerspaces) are physical hubs of the maker culture. Although these trends are clearly important for the United States, this cultural change and open hardware ethos can have dramatic impacts in the developing world. Matthew Rogge, Melissa Menke, and William Hoyle of TechforTrade explain the potential for open source and 3D printing to produce many needed items in low-resource settings, where lack of infrastructure makes local production impractical and high tariffs, unreliable supply chains, and economic instability make importation costly. Saving 90 percent on medical or scientific tools is nice in my lab, for instance, but it literally saves lives in a developing world context. The issue concludes with an op-ed by Tom Callaway, a senior software engineer at Red Hat, Inc., an open source software company with revenue over $2 billion last year (up 15 percent year over year). What makes this business accomplishment so impressive is that all of the company’s software products are available for free. Although old ways of thinking demand that companies secure a monopoly and certainly not give away “intellectual property” for free, Red Hat’s success comes from offering its customers support, collaboration, control, and a high-quality product. Tom argues that the proven open source software mentality is porting to hardware, opening up incredible opportunities for humanity. He concludes, “open source and open innovation work…. They also empower society and make it possible to push the limits of what is possible. When the barriers to collaboration are lifted, people can accomplish incredible things.” As all of the articles show, open source tools in the hands of this and future generations of engineers will be incredible indeed.

Embedded Networked Sensors, 2000

We describe the architecture of software tools that aid sci- entists in designing and programming wireless sensor net- works (WSNs). The goals of our system are (1) to reduce the complexity of deployment by automatically programming a sensor network and database based on a visual description of a site and experiment and (2) to provide a simple, intuitiv e network

2016

in Venice, Italy, was an inaugural event covering related topics on theory practice and applications of sensor devices, techniques, data acquisition and processing, and on wired and wireless sensors and sensor networks. Sensors and sensor networks have a great potential of providing diverse services to a broad range of applications, not only on science and engineering, but equally importantly on issues related to critical infrastructure protection and security, healthcare, the environment, energy, food safety, and the potential impact on the quality of all areas of life. Sensor networks and sensor-based systems support many applications today above ground. Underwater operations and applications are quite limited by comparison. Most applications refer to remotely controlled submersibles and wide-area data collection systems at a coarse granularity. Other remote sensing domains and applications are using special sensing devices and services. Transducers and actuators complement the mo...

2016

The need for constant monitoring of environmental conditions has produced an increase in the development of wireless sensor networks (WSN). The drive towards smart cities has produced the need for smart sensors to be able to monitor what is happening in our cities. This, combined with the decrease in hardware component prices and the increase in the popularity of open hardware, has favored the deployment of sensor networks based on open hardware. The new trends in Internet Protocol (IP) communication between sensor nodes allow sensor access via the Internet, turning them into smart objects (Internet of Things and Web of Things). Currently, WSNs provide data in different formats. There is a lack of communication protocol standardization, which turns into interoperability issues when connecting different sensor networks or even when connecting different sensor nodes within the same network. This work presents a sensorized platform proposal that adheres to the principles of the Internet of Things and the Web of Things. Wireless sensor nodes were built using open hardware solutions, and communications rely on the HTTP/IP Internet protocols. The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) SensorThings API candidate standard was used as a neutral format to avoid interoperability issues. An environmental WSN developed following the proposed architecture was built as a proof of concept. Details on how to build each node and a study regarding energy concerns are presented.

2018

Within the framework of the EOMORES project in-situ optical sensors were installed and tested. The idea is that continuously registering optical sensors serve several purposes, of which the most important are: 1) Collect reference reflectance data during satellite overpasses to calibrate and validate satellite reflectances 2) Complement the satellite and modelling products in the EOMORES portfolio by providing high frequency point measurements of reflectance and derived water quality products The fixed position optical in-situ sensors (WISPstations) were developed by Water Insight and five advanced prototype instruments were sent to local partners and placed at various locations during 2018. The data were collected autonomously and processed in near-real time by the WISPcloud back-end system and made available to the partners for access by API. After the trial period, the process of installation, maintenance, data collection and -processing and output provision was evaluated by the ...