Transcript Watermelon Ripeness Sensor

Watermelon Ripeness Sensor
Melon Inc.
In Search of Perfect Melons.
Jason L. Firko
Allan Cohen
Matt Behr
Dave Bartoski
Watermelon Ripeness Sensor
Team #2 Members:
Jason Firko
Matt Behr
Allan Cohen
Dave Bartowski
Customer: Ed Kee
Advisor: Dr. James Glancey
Mission: Develop a non-destructive method and apparatus for
accurately determining the ripeness of watermelons.
Approach: Use customer wants to research and develop the most
useful solution to the problem of determining watermelon
ripeness. Develop a prototype and test it in an actual working
enviroment.
Background

Watermelon market is a large, worldwide market







Grown on 5 Continents
Grown in 90 countries
Annual production 50 Billion lbs./year
75% of the melons bought whole
Large domestic and international market
Problem with a long history - 1905 University of
Georgia Study
There are currently no accurate non-destructive
testing methods available
Design Concept Review




Introduction
Concept Generation
• Customers, Wants, Constraints, Benchmarking,
Target values, Concept generation
Concept Selection
• Evaluation against Metrics/Target Values, Concept
Development, Working Model
Schedule
• Actuals, Schedule, Budget
Customers & Wants
Name
10
Organization Rank
Mr. Ed Kee
Sponsor
John Hastings
Farmer
Jeff Wooden
Farmer
Mark Collins
Farmer
Mac k Farms
Broker
Odanna MathewsGiant Foods
Bill Roberts
Ac me
David Thorp
FDA
USDA
Karen Clark
Produc e Stand
Joe Meloneater Consumer
10
8
8
8
7
6
6
6
6
6
3
0.45
1st Want
Ac c urate
Portable
Portable
Ac c urate
Ac c urate
Ac c urate
Ac c urate
Food Quality
Food Quality
Cheap
Cheap
0.25
2nd Want
0.15
3rd Want
0.1
4th Want
0.05
5th Want
Portable
Ac c urate
Ac c urate
Durable
Fast
Cheap
Cheap
Durable
Cheap
Durable
Easy to Use
Durable
Easy to Use
Portable
Fast
Easy to Use
Durable
Easy to Use Food Quality
Food Quality
Durable
Fast
Food Quality
Fast
Food Quality
Food Quality
Durable
Easy to Use
Ac c urate
Ac c urate
Easy to Use
Food Quality
Food Quality
Portable
Customers Top Wants
1. Accuracy
2. Portability
3. Food Quality
4. Cost
5. Durable
6. Easy to Use
7. Fast
8. Versatility
9. Maintenance
10. Service Life
Constraints
Maximum - $3000 Budget
 Abide by all FDA Regulations



Food Quality
Abide by all OSHA Regulations

Safety Standards
Metrics/Target Values

Metrics
 Provide a Means of Objective Measurement
 Eliminate Ambiguity

Target Values
 Derived From Customer Wants, Functional
Benchmarking, Continued Customer Dialogue
Contact Regulatory Agencies
Listed With Related Wants (Ranked)
Metrics & Related Wants
Accuracy/Portability
 % Correct Ripeness Readings
 % Error in Sugar Content
 (False Neg./False Pos.) Readings
 Weight
 Size (Dimensions)
 # People - Transport/Operation
 Production Cost
(95%)
**
(3)
(51 lbs.)
(3’ Sides)
(1)
[$700]
Metrics (Cont’d)
Durability/Ease of Use/Speed
 Hours of Continuous Operation
[12 hrs.)
 Impact Resistance
(3 ft. Drop)
 Time to Train
[1 hr.]
 Number of Steps
[5]
 Level of Education Required
[Grade 8)
 Time/Cycle
[10 sec]
 Time per Shipment
[2 hrs.]
Metrics (Con’t)
Food Quality/ServiceLife/Versatility/Maintenance
Size of Intrusion
(1mm)
 Bacteria Introduced
*
 Visual Quality Inspection Rating
(1-10)
 Estimated Years of Service
(5 yrs.]
 # of Uses (melon types, sizes, etc.)
(4)
 Cost/Cycle (parts, upkeep, etc)
($.001/cycle)

Initial Systems Benchmarking
 Current Methods Of Watermelon Testing
Traditional - Thumping, stem color, skin color,
other traditional methods
 Destructive Testing - Sucrometer readings
 Near Infrared Testing - Experimental technique of
sensing sugar content
• Acoustic Testing - University of Oklahoma

Systems Benchmarking Cont.

Related Procedures (Fruits and others)
Thumping/Resonance
Acoustic testing
Ultrasonic testing
Optoelectrics
Intrusive testing
Nuclear magnetic resonance
Electronic sniffing
Tires, Fruits
Acoustic Emission Testing
Materials, Medical
Apples
Medical(Syringes)
Fruits, Medical
Strawberries
Concept Generation - Framework
Sensor is Critical Function/Element
 Concept Generation Primarily Deals With
This Element

Functional Benchmarking
Details of the Critical Element

Acoustic/Impact Tests-Sound signature and Resonance
• Acoustic Sensors- microphones, AE sensors
• Impact Devices- pendulums, hammers,spring loaded, etc.
• Acoustic data acquisition devices

Testing of Rind Quality
• Accelerometers and related tracking devices

Resistivity Testing
• Available info. Of resistivity of biological materials
• Probes, measuring devices, necessary equipment
Functional Benchmarking (Cont’d)

Ultrasonic testing
• Use on biological materials
• Available Machines

Sizing Devices
• Oversized calipers
• Scales

Sampling devices and methods
• Syringes, automated sucrometers
Concept Generation





ACOUSTIC RESONANCE
ELECTRICAL
PROPERTIES
ULTRASOUND
NUCLEAR MAGNETIC
RESONANCE (NMR)
SONIC TESTING - SINGLE
FREQUENCY





SONIC TESTING - WHITE
NOISE
INFARED
ENERGY IMPACT
STRAIN GAUGE
FLUID EXTRACTION
Concept Evaluation/Selection
Process

Is this a viable solution?
Evaluate in terms of ranked metrics
 Presentation - Time Constraints


Method - Comparison with metrics(related wants)
 Strong in metrics
Weak in metrics
 Notes on concept

SSD and Testing results lead to selection
Concept Evaluation
Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
Out of Budget - $60,000 - $1,000,000

Sonic Testing- Single Frequency
 Food Quality, Speed
Easy to Use, Accuracy, Maintenance, Cost
 Difficult to Use- Need Proper Environment
Concepts Evaluation (Cont’d)

Sonic Testing- White Noise
 Food Quality
Speed, Cost, Accuracy, Portability, Easy to Use
Need Controlled Conditions

Infrared
 Accuracy, Speed, Food Quality
Expensive(Cost & Maintenance], Easy, Portability
High Power, Auxillary Equiptment Needed
Concept Evaluation (Cont’d)

Energy Impact
 Quick, Easy, Food Quality, Portability, Durability
 Accuracy
 Related to External Properties, Not Internal

Strain Gauge
 Portable, Food Quality
 Easy to Use, Speed, Accuracy
 Related to Rind Properties

Fluid Extraction With Syringe
 Accuracy, Portability, Easy to Use
 Food Quality, Maintenance
 Intrusive
Ultrasound
Testing - CCM
 Catch 22

High Frequency - Cannot Penetrate Rind
 Low Frequency - Cannot Sense Density Changes
Other Problems - Air Pockets, Seeds


 Food Quality, Service Life, Versatility
 Accuracy, Portability, Cost, Speed

Not a Viable Sensing Mechanism
Electrical
Properties
Resistance Testing
 RC Modeling
 Data Normalized For Physical Parameters &
Sugar Content

 Portability, Cost, Maintenance, Service Life
 Accuracy, Food Quality, Speed

No Correlation Found - Not a Viable Sensing
Mechanism
Steady State Voltage Difference vs. Sugar Content
Electric
Testing
Steady State Voltage Difference
(mV)
500
450
400
350
300
250
LC2-WC2
200
150
100
50
0
8
9
10
% Sugar Content
#7 - Charging
4300
4200
y = 19.28Ln(x) + 4132
4100
VA
VB
4000
Log. (VA)
Log. (VB)
y = 17.048Ln(x) + 3863.8
3900
3800
3700
0
50
100
150
11
12
Acoustic Resonance Testing
Based on Traditional
Method
 Acoustic Properties have
been used to indicate
ripeness

Accuracy, Portability, Food Quality,
Cost, Easy, Fast
 Maintenance

Concept Selection

Acoustic Testing
• Scored Highest in SSD - Received 8.9 / 10.0
• Historical Basis - Benchmarking
• Four main parts: Sensory, Data Acquisition, Data
Analysis, Display/Interface
• Focus on Sensory Portion of Design Development
Concept Selection - Metrics
Want/Metric
Accuracy
Portability
Cost
Speed
Food Quality
# of Uses
Value
>present
30lbs, 1 Person, 2’ sides
$950
<10sec
0 Bacteria, Non-Intrusive
Local Varieties
Concept Selection - Testing
• Performed Testing - 18 melons
– All melons were in ripe range (8 - 12% sugar)
• Determined Repeatability and Reliability
– Impact Height, Turning, Repeated Testing
Concept Selection - Testing
Conclusions
 Audible Signature Noticeable
 No Negative Data
 Need Further Testing - Variety


Grow green melons
Possible Correlations Secondary Spikes
 Damping Characteristics

Working Model

Two Component Working Model
(i) - Experimental Set up - Dr. Sun’s Lab
(ii) - Working Model
Planned Schedule
Task
Continued Research, Consulting & Testing
Acoustic Testing and Collection of Data
Analysis of Acoustic Data
Electrical Properties Initial Tests
Electrical Properties Apparatus Setup
Electrical Properties Data Collection
Analysis of Elec. Prop. Data
Determine if Ultrasound is possible
Test Extractrion with Needle
Do Destructive Evaluation of All Melons
Corelate Data
Arrange for Another Shipment of Melons
Determine and Arrange for Other Testing
Perform Further Testing
Draw Conclusions From New Tests
Prepare for Preliminary Design Report
Finalize Ideas & Prepare for Presentation
Duration
27 days
Start Date
October 28, 1998
Finish Date
December 3, 1998
4 days
5 days
1 day
1 day
4 days
4 days
3 days
1 day
1 day
5 days
1 day
4 days
4 days
3 days
3 days
7 days
October 28, 1998
November 3, 1998
October 28, 1998
October 28, 1998
October 29, 1998
November 4, 1998
October 28, 1998
November 3, 1998
November 4, 1998
November 9, 1998
November 5, 1998
November 5, 1998
November 11, 1998
November 17, 1998
November 20, 1998
November 25, 1998
November 2, 1998
November 9, 1998
October 28, 1998
October 28, 1998
November 3, 1998
November 9, 1998
October 30, 1998
November 3, 1998
November 4, 1998
November 13, 1998
November 5, 1998
November 10, 1998
November 16, 1998
November 19, 1998
November 24, 1998
December 3, 1998
Actual Schedule
Task
Continued Research, Consulting & Testing
Duration
37 days
Start Date
October 28, 1998
Finish Date
December 3, 1998
Determine design of Thumping Device
Construction of Thumping device
Testing of Thumper
Redesign,fix and test Thumper
Finalize Testing Proceedure
Reliability and Repeatability Testing
Final Acoustic Data Acquisition
Acoustic Data Analysis
3 days
2 days
1 day
4 days
2 days
1 day
1 day
3 days
October 28, 1998
October 31, 1998
November 2, 1998
November 3, 1998
November 8, 1998
November 12, 1998
November 13, 1998
November 19, 1998
October 30, 1998
November 1, 1998
November 2, 1998
November 6, 1998
November 9, 1998
November 12, 1998
November 13, 1998
November 21, 1998
Electrical Properties Initial Tests
Determine Most Important Parameters
Finialize Testing Proceedure
Electrical Properties Data Acquisition
Analysis of Elec. Prop. Data
1 day
9 days
2 days
1 day
3 days
October 28, 1998
October 29, 1998
November 7, 1998
November 18, 1998
November 19, 1998
October 28, 1998
November 6, 1998
November 8, 1998
November 18, 1998
November 21, 1998
Rule Out Ultra Sound as a Solution
Arrange for Another Shipment of Melons
Arrival of New Shipment (18 melons)
Destructive Analysis of Melons
Corelate Data
Prepare for Preliminary Design Report
Finalize Ideas & Prepare for Presentation
3 days
1 day
1 day
1 day
3 days
6 days
7 days
October 28, 1998
November 2, 1998
November 12, 1998
November 20, 1998
November 19, 1998
November 18, 1998
November 27, 1998
October 30, 1998
November 2, 1998
November 12, 1998
November 20, 1998
November 21, 1998
November 23, 1998
December 3, 1998
Future Critical Tasks
 Continue iterative concept evaluation
 Develop further the data acquisition & analysis
• Determine if we Can use a PCI or ISA card for data acquisition tasks
 Order used laptop or microprocessor to perform our calculations
 Determine software or computer code / learn
 Obtain a shipment of melons of varying ripeness
 Grow watermelons in greenhouse & Obtain shipment of melons
 Perform further acoustic testing and refine correlation
 Refine the thumping device through continued testing
 Take a tour of the farm and working environment
 Attend the watermelon growers convention
Estimated Budget

Microphone
Microprocessor/Laptop
Analog To Digital Converter
Digital Scale
Linear measuring Device
Base Plate w/attachments
Adjustable Thumper
Adjustable Microphone Mount
Testing/Analysis Hours
Testing Materials
Machine Shop Hours
$ 2.99
$ 350.00
$ 300.00
$ 100.00
$ 50.00
$ 40.00
$ 20.00
$ 10.00
120 Hrs.
$700.00
40 Hrs.

Total cost for Initial Concept Prototype
$ 872.99










Conclusion - Project Status






Refinement of Wants/Benchmarking/Metrics
Concept Generation
Testing and Evaluation
 Physical Testing
 Metrics
Concept Selection/ Design
Working Model
Future Activities - Scheduled
Project Goal
Satisfied
Customers!