Commercial Poultry System Controller



Commercial Poultry System Controller

Final Report

Dec03-04

Client:

Murray McMurray Hatchery, Inc.

Faculty Advisor:

Dr. Randall Geiger

Team Members:

2nd Semester:

Jeff Hoelscher

Zachary Schmid

Anthony Serra

Hubertus Von Crailsheim

1st Semester

Tetteh Akornor

Moses Castellano

Zachary Schmid

Brian Schmoll

Submitted:

December 17, 2003

Table of Contents

List of Figures ii

List of Tables iii

List of Definitions iv

1 Introductory Materials 1

1.1 Executive Summary 1

1.1.1 Need for Project 1

1.1.2 Project Activities 1

1.1.3 Results 1

1.1.4 Recommendation for further work 1

1.2 Acknowledgements 2

1.3 General Problem Statement 2

1.4 General Solution Statement 2

1.5 Operation Environment 2

1.6 Intended Users and Intended Uses 2

1.6.1 Intended Users 2

1.6.2 Intended Uses 3

1.7 Assumptions and Limitations 3

1.7.1 Assumptions 3

1.7.2 Limitations 3

1.8 Expected End-Product and Other Deliverables 3

2 Project Approach and Results 4

2.1 Functional Requirements 4

2.2 Design Requirements and Constraints 4

2.3 Approach Considered and One Selected 5

2.4 Detailed Design 10

2.5 End Implementation Process Description 13

2.6 End-Production Testing Description 13

2.7 Project End Results 13

3 Resources and Schedule 15

3.1 Personnel Effort Requirements 15

3.2 Other Resources 16

3.3 Estimated Project Costs 16

3.4 Gnatt Chart Schedules 18

4 Closing Materials 20

4.1 Project Evaluation 20

4.2 Commercialization 20

4.3 Recommendations for Additional Work 20

4.4 Lessons Learned 20

4.5 Risk and Risk Management 21

4.6 Project Team Information 23

4.6.1 Client 23

4.6.2 Faculty Advisor 23

4.6.3 Team Members 23

4.7 Closing Summary 23

Appendix A –Visuals from Detailed Design

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Pitman Door 7

Figure 2.2 Swing Door 8

Figure 2.3 Spindle Sliding Door 11

Figure 2.4 NetMedia LCD 11

Figure 2.5 Keypad 12

Figure 3.1 Project Schedule Semester 1 18

Figure 3.2 Project Schedule Semester 2 18

Figure A.1 Main Menu A-1

Figure A.2 Heater Menu A-1

Figure A.3 Timing System Menu A-2

Figure A.4 Ambient System Flowchart A-3

Figure A.5 Timing System Flowchart A-4

Figure A.6 BasicX-24 Board layout A-5

List of Tables

Table 3.1 – Estimated Personnel Effort Estimations 14

Table 3.2 – Actual Personnel Effort Estimations 14

Table 3.3 – Estimated Other Resources 15

Table 3.4 – Revised Estimated Other Resources 15

Table 3.5 – Estimated Prototype Budget 15

Table 3.6 – Revised Prototype Budget 15

Table 3.7 – Estimated Cost Estimates 16

Table 3.8 – Revised Cost Estimates 16

List of Definitions

Hobbyist Farmer Person whose primary source of income is not farming, but still raises livestock

Spindle Drive Screw driven shaft, a gear box

BasicX A specific brand of microcontroller board

GFI Ground Fault Interrupt

BJT Bipolar junction transistor

1 Introduction

The following sections will briefly discuss the executive summary, acknowledgements, problem, solution, operating environment, users and uses, assumptions and limitations, and expected end product.

1.1 Executive Summary

The following will briefly describe the need for this project, the project activities and their results. Recommendation for future work will also be discussed.

1. Need for the project

In hobby poultry farming, free-range chickens are best grown under tightly controlled environmental conditions. Most hobbyist poultry farmers have full-time jobs and cannot physically monitor these conditions themselves. The result of this project is an automated chicken coop that a farmer could go several days without monitoring.

2. Project activities

The project contained four main activities. The first was designing a door that can be opened and closed with an AC motor. The motor is controlled by a microcontroller that calculates what time of day to open and close the door. Second, the lights in the coop were connected to the microcontroller through a relay so the controller could turn on and off the lights at a time determined by the farmer. Third, a system was set up to control the coop’s temperature. This was done by using an input to the microcontroller from a thermostat and the controller then turns on or off a heater depending on the output form the thermostat. Finally, the microcontroller is also set up to control a ventilation fan if one is present in the coop.

1.1.3 Results

With the finished project, a hobbyist poultry farmer is able to have a coop that is completely automated with respect to opening and closing the coop door, temperature control, and interior lighting. The farmer is able to control each of these functionalities through the included keypad and LCD interface to the microcontroller (i.e. when door opens, temperature in coop).

4. Recommendations for follow-on work

Wireless communication between the farmer’s home computer and the microcontroller would be a very convenient addition. Integrated camera system to visually monitor the coop may be beneficial. Having a counter on the door to ensure that all of the chickens are safely accounted for would also be beneficial. Integrating hatchery controls may be needed by some farmers.

1.2 Acknowledgement

This project was supported by Lucien Wood of Murray McMurray Hatchery, Inc. with input and advice from faculty advisor Dr. Randall Geiger.

1.3 General Problem Statement

This project revolves around assisting small hobbyist poultry farms, about 25 to 200 chickens, by automating environmental controls for free-range chickens. The first module included is a door control that allows the chickens to exit shortly after sunrise, and close the door a short time before sunset, ensuring the chickens safety overnight. Another function is temperature measurement, recording and regulation. Ventilation can also be activated as needed within the third module. Lighting inside the coop is also controlled.

1.4 General Solution-Approach Statement

The implementation of the modules includes the existing equipment for chicken growing and adding control and recording mechanisms. A modular approach has been selected, because each farmer may have different requirements for the growing of their chickens. A sunrise/sunset algorithm calculates the time to open or close the door. This module also includes a door designed specifically for this project as well as the motor to open and close it. For temperature control a digital thermostat will be needed along with heaters, vents, and fans to alter errant temperatures. Ventilation also makes use of the vents and fans in the coop. Each of these modules will be linked to a controller that records the values periodically and makes adjustments for optimal chicken growth.

1.5 Operating Environment

The system parts are located in outdoor conditions and exposed to the chickens’ feathers and droppings. The door will be exposed to outdoor conditions. The controller and door motor are inside the chicken coop; however, they are in protective boxes to the limit their exposure to this environment.

1.6 Intended Users and Intended Uses

The following is a description of the future clients that will make use this product.

1.6.1 Intended Users

The intended user is an adult or child with adult supervision. The experience level of the user could range from a novice to an experienced chicken farmer. The user will need to be able to connect all the electrical wiring of this system.

1.6.2 Intended Uses

The use of this system is primarily to control the habitat for chickens, but could be adapted to other poultry. It is used to ensure optimal growing conditions for the birds and can be adaptable to each farmer’s needs. Automation and efficiency are also included to help the farmer grow well-bred chickens. This includes record keeping so the farmer can keep track of the conditions within the coop.

1.7 Assumptions and Limitations

The following are assumptions and limitations that need to be taken into account when deciding on the final design of the product.

1.7.1 Assumptions

The following is a list of assumptions regarding the design of the product.

• Basic infrastructure is currently in place (coops, ventilation, heaters etc.)

• Hobby poultry farming, approximately 25-200 chickens

• Control unit inside chicken coop

• Installation should be understandable to any literate adult

• Final system would be economically feasible to mail, excluding a few pieces easily and cheaply located at a local hardware store

• Commercially produced system maxing out at approximately 100 systems per year

1.7.2 Limitations

The following is a list of limitations imposed on the design of the product. Updates will occur as the process continues.

• Initial budget of $100

• Fully outfitted unit costing approximately $1000

• Controller unit to use 120 volts and 60 Hertz

• Minimum of 50 sq. ft. coop, maximum of 900 sq. ft. coop

• Door should fit within standard barn stud separation

• Temperature within range of -20°F and 120°F

1.8 Expected End Product and Other Deliverables

The final product includes a microcontroller and the software to run it, a LCD screen and keypad for user interface, four relays, and a wall mounted box to contain all the previously mentioned components. A door and the motor to open and close it are also included. An instruction manual and schematic for connecting all components is provided as well. This manual also shows how to change the setting so the farmer can control all the environmental conditions. Prior to the end of the project, the client will be receiving copies of project reports.

2 Project Approach and Results

The following is a description of how the final product design was implemented.

2.1 Functional Requirements for End Product

The following are the requirements that are met by the assembled end product.

• All participants can operate the system

The project is designed for ease of setup and use by a wide array of intended users.

• Current conditions output

A display on the LCD shows the current conditions of the chicken coop. The displayed conditions will include door status, high and low temperature for the day, current temperature, heating and ventilation status. The user will also be able to view records of high and low temperature from the previous day.

• Menu for modifications

The micro-controller LCD display grants access to a menu where settings may be modified by the user. The user can change desired coop opening time, lighting activation, desired temperature range for ambient and brooder sections, and desired coop closing time.

• Control doors, vents, heaters, and fans

The system can control equipment to adjust the current environment within the coop. Doors and lights will respond to user inputs. When a sensor reads a parameter out of bounds, the program will activate the appropriate component to correct the aberration.

• Algorithm

A software algorithm is used to calculate sunrise and sunset for any location and time of year.

2.2 Design Requirements including Constraints

The following are the required objectives that have been met and the conditions the product is able to withstand that are necessary for a successful project.

• Modular design

To facilitate the needs of different customers the system is modular allowing a customer to purchase different features for a different final cost.

• High reliability

The system is highly reliable because the project is designed to be a convenience for the farmer. The reliability of the door is of especially high importance as one failure may allow access from predators, causing future problems for the customer in removing these pests.

• Low maintenance and high durability

This is a significant investment for a customer and should not require excessive attention. In addition, should the device be defective, it would be returned to the seller, thus eating in to the profits made from the sale.

• Simple operation

Target customers are hobbyists and would like a simple device that adds convenience to their project.

• Design interfaces with pre-established equipment

This product is an add-on to a pre-existing coop and must cooperate with equipment already in place.

• Adverse weather conditions

Some of the sensors are exposed to outdoor conditions and, therefore, designed to withstand extreme weather.

• Contact with animals

The entire unit, including the microcontroller, is in close proximity to animals, specifically various brands of poultry.

• Minimal cost

The users are hobbyists and may not have a cost concern for the convenience, as a commercial product the client may have concerns if it is too expensive. Modular design helps match product to customer desires and budget.

• Power

The system runs on standard 120 volts and 60 Hertz.

• Outputs

The system sends output commands to one door, a radiant heater, a ventilation system, and a lighting system.

2.3 Approach considered and one selected

This section discusses the different technical approaches and the results.

• Sunlight Optimization

The following are possibilities to ensure proper light exposure.

o Phototransistor – An advantage of using a phototransistor is that the controller can get a reading of the actual amount of sunlight. The disadvantage is that determining the times of sunrise and sunset could be very inaccurate. This was dismissed because of the inaccuracy of determining the sunrise or sunset.

o Sunrise-Sunset Calculation – The advantage of this is that it will give nearly exact times for sunrise and sunset. The disadvantage is that it will take up memory inside the microcontroller that is already limited to begin with. This was selected for the design because of its accuracy.

• Adverse Conditions

The following is a possible approach to solve the problem of the system being exposed to adverse conditions.

o Plastic Casing – The advantage of plastic casing is that it would keep out most of the elements that might affect the functionality of the controller and relays. The disadvantage is that the casing would need to be custom made. And for this reason, it was not chosen.

o Fuse Box – The advantage of this case is that it is inexpensive and easy to find at Lowe’s. The disadvantage is that some custom drilling is needed on the case. This was the case chosen because of price and availability.

• Power

The following are possible approaches to regulating the amount of power going into the controller.

o Build Custom Power Supply – There aren’t any advantages to this. The disadvantages are: It will take too much time and is not necessary. There is a possibility that this might decrease the flexibility of the controller. This was not selected because there aren’t any advantages to this.

o Buy a Power Supply – The disadvantage is that a purchased power supply might be expensive. Another disadvantage is that there is the possibility of a power supply not existing for the specific voltage range of the controller. The advantage is that purchasing a power supply will allow for allocating more time toward another part of the project. This was selected because of the time advantage and the finding of a power supply that provides power within the voltage range.

o Battery – The disadvantage is that the battery will run out at some point and the system will not work. The advantage is it is cheap and easy. This was not selected because of its short life span.

• Thermosensors

The following are possible design choices for controlling chicken coop temperature

o Thermostat (programmable or non-programmable) -- The advantages to a thermostat are that the temperature control is already handled by a prefabricated device, which lessens the amount of programming needed in the microcontroller. With a programmable thermostat there are many additional features that wouldn’t be included the microcontroller. The disadvantages are that the final product would have to include instructions on how to use the thermostat device alongside the use of the use of the microcontroller. The control of differences between the brooder temperature and ambient temperature would also be impossible as the controller would not be able to record the actual temperatures in the air.

o Thermometer -- The advantage of a thermometer is that the microcontroller would be able to read the actual temperature of the chicken coop. This would allow the microcontroller to regulate the control of the heating elements better, for example if the brooder temperature was the primary recording the device would know not to turn on the heating elements to adjust the ambient air temperature. The disadvantage is more work in programming, but this is not important when placed against the loss of a customer’s flock because of poor temperature control. Therefore, the product will be using a thermometer in the microcontroller design. The cons are that this would require more programming inside of the microcontroller. This is a minor concern, though, when considering the cost of killing a flock of chickens a user is trying to raise. To this end the final product will be using a digital thermometer to return temperature values to the microcontroller.

• Output

The following are possible approaches to providing output commands to the components in need of control.

o Multiple Wire Hookups – It is possible to have multiple wires between the controller and the components. The disadvantage is that this approach will provide for difficult assembly. Another disadvantage is providing the necessary voltage to each component. An advantage doesn’t exist. This was not selected because of its complexity.

o Box of Outlets with Switches – The disadvantage is that the price of the system will increase. An advantage is that it allows for modularization. The disadvantage is doing the actual implementation. This was not selected because it would require developing a new product that would be hard to reproduce in large quantities.

o Relays – The disadvantage of using relays to control the output is putting the four relays together on a board. The advantages are that relays are very inexpensive, easy to buy in large quantities, and are a very common electrical component. The approach was selected because of its price and ease of use.

• Door

The following are possible approaches for the door to the coop.

o Pitman lever lift mechanism – As displayed in figure 2.1, a lever is mounted at the shaft of a gear motor. This lever has a pitman at the other end. The pitman lifts the guillotine style door up and down. The gear motor turns 180° to open and close the door. The microcontroller controls the motor that runs the mechanical arm and pulls the door up or releases the door down. A disadvantage of this mechanism is that it is easily stalled. Another disadvantage is that power to the door is always on which creates a safety concern. This was not selected because of these reasons and because the client has this door style currently and would like it replaced.

o Swing door mechanism – As displayed in figure 2.2, this is a door that swings up to 180° in or out the coop. It is driven from a linear motor. An advantage is that the linear motor closes the door smooth and allows a chicken that is in the door during the closing operation to escape. The cylinder is controlled from the microcontroller and there are two sensors that control the end positions. Another advantage is that in the closed position there would be an electro-mechanic bar to hold this door closed and makes it impossible to open it for predators. A disadvantage is that this type of door takes up a lot space with opening and closing. This system was not selected because of a lack of space in the chicken coop or outside the chicken coop to swing. The client also does not prefer this style of door.

[pic]

Figure 2.2 Swing door design

o Spindle Sliding door mechanism-- In this mechanism a linear spindle drive opens a one square foot door. An AC motor drives the linear spindle. This spindle has a stroke of 13” and opens or closes the guillotine style door. An advantage is that the spindle allows a smooth and slow door drive and speed. Depending on the flank lead of the spindle and the rpm of the motor it is easy to control the speed of the door. The microcontroller controls one switch that controls the end positions of the door. Another advantage is that the electric spindle drive stops when there is a resistance in movement of the door. A disadvantage is that the spindle is self-locking and does not allow opening it without the motor. This was selected because of the advantages of the spindle, the minimum of space that is necessary for this door and also because the client said that there will be never a chicken in the door, when it closes slowly.

[pic]

Figure 2.3 Spindle Sliding door design

• Microcontroller

The following are the possible selections that were considered when the microcontroller was chosen.

o Programmable Relay – The advantage of a programmable relay is the ease of installation. It also contains nearly all of the project’s requirements in one unit since the relays are enclosed with a microcontroller. The biggest disadvantage was lack of functionality (i.e. very limited mathematical capability). This was not selected because of the lack in functionality.

o OOPic-R – The disadvantage is the price. Another disadvantage is that many of the components on the board are not needed (i.e. speaker). One advantage was that it could be programmed in C and the programming software was free-downloadable. This was not selected because it was too expensive and was overkill for this project.

o BasicX-24 – The disadvantage is that it has to be programmed in Basic, which the group was not familiar with. The advantage is that it is cheap, yet will be able to provide the necessary functions for the project. There are also discounts given when ordered in quantity. This was selected because of its price and functionality.

• LCD

The following are the possible selections that were considered when the LCD was chosen.

o Serial LCD – The disadvantage is that this type of LCD is that it is expensive. The advantage is that there were more companies that sold this type of LCD and only one I/O pin is needed. This was selected because it frees up I/O pins.

o Parallel LCD – The disadvantage is that this type of LCD might have not been as easily interfaced with the board because it needs at least 4 I/O pins. The advantage is that it was inexpensive. This was not selected based on the I/O issue.

2.4 Approach considered and one selected

• Software -- At the heart of this project is that software that controls the operation of each physical system. This section will talk about the menu system, heating routines, and timing routines that will be used.

o Menu – The routines which relay information to the user and accepts user inputs.

o Main menu --What the user will spend their most interaction with is the menu system for the controller system. Figure A1 in the appendix shows an outline of the main menu system. The main menu immediately branches off to the three major subroutines: manual overrides, ambient heat control, and time control. Exiting from the main menu returns to status display.

o Temperature menu -- The menu system for the ambient temperature control will be discussed here. Figure A2 in the appendix shows the flow in this menu. Branching off of this menu is an option to return to main, as well as options to view current temperature, yesterday’s high and low and to modify the desired range. Yesterday is defined as midnight to midnight. Temperature will be displayed in Fahrenheit as default with an option to switch to Celsius. When the option to modify is chosen, the adjust specifications menu for the heater comes up. This allows the user to dictate desired range of operation and display the last time a change was made to the desired range.

o Timing Menu -- The first module the client asked for was the timing systems routine. There are two components to the timing systems: a light which turns on and off at set points during the day to control the chickens’ sleeping habits and to ensure the chickens receive the desired amount of light during the day. Figure A3 in the appendix shows the flowchart for this menu. Upon first activation of the system, the user will be immediately taken to the physical menu modification to input the current information regarding his location. The user may also return here later if he moves or otherwise has a change in this information. The information needed here is the current day and time, the latitude, and either longitude or when the sunrise was for the current day. From these values the program is able to calculate all future sunrise and sunset times. Going back up to the timing menu, there are also options to return to main and for the door opening/closing timing and the lighting on/off timing. These timings are set relative to sunrise and sunset. The light goes on x minutes before sunrise and shuts off y minutes after sunrise while the door opens at z minutes after sunrise. The light goes on again p minutes before sunset, shuts off q minutes after sunset and the door closes r minutes after sunset. Those are all variables in the control of the user.

o Manual Override Menu – The end user is given the control to change any state without waiting for system to acknowledge the need for the change. The user has access to the door, lights, heater and ventilation controls. Upon arriving in this menu, or upon completion of any manual override, the user is asked for another change or to be returned to the main menu. A change to the door or light status remains in effect until the door or light respectively was already scheduled to change state. At that time, the state is changed to the expected value. Under the door menu within the manual override menu is the option to disable the door from opening for extended periods of time.

• Routines

This section describes the routine that the microcontroller programming will execute during operation. A watering routine is not necessary because chickens are allowed as much water as they wish.

o Ambient heater and ventilation -- The ambient heater and ventilation system serves the goal of maintaining the ambient temperature level within a certain range. The flowchart for this is Figure A4 in the appendix. The program will monitor the thermometer set up for the ambient temperature and turn on heating or ventilation as appropriate when the temperature leaves the desired temperature range.

o Timing systems -- Because both the lighting and doors use the sunrise and sunset information, these two are grouped together as the timing system. The flowchart showing these two operating side by side is Figure A5 in the appendix. This routine runs continuously off the system clock waiting for times set by the user relative to sunrise/sunset. At the appropriate times the door opens or closes or the light turns on or off. It is possible to override a door open command for if the weather outside will be inappropriate for the chickens to go out into. When a door override is given, the door routine stays waiting for the next sunrise and never makes it to the logic governing door closing which is important because of the door’s design. Modifications can be made on the fly but the only expected modifications would be changing the length of light given.

• Circuit Board -- The circuit board consists of a BasicX-24 chip, 4x16 parallel LCD Display and a 3x4 keypad consisting of numbers 0-9, #, and *. The microcontroller’s parametric consist of: 400 Bytes of RAM, 32K Bytes of EEPROM, 10-bit A/D converter, and 21 I/O pins. The schematic for the BasicX-24 is shown in Figure A6 in the appendix. There is also a 5-volt power supply that powers the board and an RS-232 port for downloading the code. Also on the circuit board there are four relays for each external module of the system to plug into. The controller sends signals to the relays to turn on and off the power to the external components.

• LCD -- The LCD being used is from NetMedia and can be purchased with the microcontroller. It is able to display 2 lines consisting of 16 characters each. This is used to display information regarding the system and aids the farmer in setting up and maintaining the system. A picture of the LCD is displayed in Figure 2.4.

• Keypad – The Keypad being used is the Digikey #GH5001-ND. It is a 3x4 matrix output keypad containing the numbers 0-9, #, and *. This is used to interface with the microcontroller and aids the farmer in setting up and maintaining the system. A picture of the keypad is displayed in Figure 2.5.

• Door opening and closing -- The door mechanism is based on linear spindle drive system.

o The door opening (for chickens) measures one foot in height and one foot in width and is driven by an electric spindle drive which is controlled by a microprocessor.

o A time set by the user, based on sunrise/sunset calculations, activates the motor

o The AC motor runs with 800 rpm the spindle has a flank lead of 3mm.

o After ten seconds the spindle stops in its full extended position.

o The torque of the motor is calculated that the spindle will stop when there is a defined resistance of 20N.

o Two magnetic switches control the lowest and highest position.

o The motor is time and switch controlled from the controller. So it stops either in the end position or after the maximum programmed time is over.

o If there is a resistance in the door, the microcontroller will open it to allow the resistance escape.

2.5 End Implementation Process Description

There were three major projects within the implementation process. The first was connecting the microprocessor board to the relays and sensors and placing the unit inside the fuse box. They were secured using screws. The second project was assembling the door. Some of the door parts were custom created and assembling the motor, spindle drive and door itself encountered minor difficulties. The initial spindle drive sample received was deemed to large for the project’s scope. A spindle was ordered that fully matched specifications. The third project within implementation was downloading the software code to the microprocessor. This was accomplished using a development tool purchased along with the microprocessor board. A major weakness encountered throughout the implementation process was that parts had been ordered late and the implementation time slipped heavily into the testing time.

2.6 End-Product Testing Description

Two testing phases were used on this project. The first phase was a lab test of the system; the second was a field test of the system. The first phase consists of unit testing the microcontroller, unit testing the door and motor, and integration testing of all the components. Most of these tests were completed by members of the group in the senior design lab. The unit testing of the microcontroller involved simulating the inputs that would be received by the system and monitoring the system’s outputs. This test mainly confirmed that the software worked as expected. The unit testing of the door involved the motor, door, and sensor. This test confirmed that the sensor knows when the door is closed, and the door opens and closes correctly. The integration testing involved combining all of the components involved in the end product. Most of these tests were performed by the group members but some were conducted by the faculty advisor to involve a third party. This test mainly confirmed that the temperature sensor triggers the heater and vent relays, that the correct time triggers the door and lights, and that the LCD and keypad allow the user to manually override all features.

The field test took place at the client’s personal chicken coop. This test was mainly performed by the client in order to test a third party’s use of the system. This test mainly confirmed the temperature sensing capabilities, the correctness of the time keeping capabilities, and the ability to with the adverse conditions. Close contact was maintained with this tester and his feedback was important to make sure the system was performing up to expectations.

2.7 Project End Results

After replacing three out of four team members during the semester break, the new team was forced to redo much of the research and development that had been accomplished during the first semester’s work. Bringing the new team members up to speed significantly delayed the project, but in the end most goals were met. The door design was completed and built. The microcontroller was programmed and connected. The heater control was reduced from modifying an existing heater, thus creating a special heater specifically designed to interact with this system, to merely controlling a heater through an on/off relay. The integrated feeding system was rejected after it was determined to be too expensive to be commercially feasible.

3 Resources and Schedules

This section contains estimations regarding time and money that will be spent on this project.

3.1 Personnel Effort Requirements

The following tables are the revised and initial estimates that each member will be expected to contribute for time. When the personnel effort was first estimated, the team members were Tetteh Akornor, Moses Castellano, Zachary Schmid, and Brian Schmoll. At the semester break, the team changed to Jeff Hoelscher, Zachary Schmid, Anthony Serra, and Hubertus Von Crailsheim.

Table 3.1 – Estimated Personnel effort estimations

|Names |Project Plan |Project Poster |

| Project Poster |21 |$50.00 |

| Software |0 |Donated |

|Totals |21 |$50.00 |

Table 3.4 – Revise Estimated other resources

|Item |Team Hours |Money |

| Project Poster |21 |$50.00 |

| Software |0 |$20.00 |

|Totals |21 |$70.00 |

Table 3.5 – Estimated prototype budget

|Item |Money |

| Sensors |$ 25.00 |

| Microcontroller |$150.00 |

| Door materials |$100.00 |

| Radiant heaters |$194.00 |

| Feed distribution |$ 50.00 |

|Totals |$494.00 |

Table 3.6 – Revised Prototype budget

|Item |Money |

| Sensors |$ 45.00 |

| Microcontroller board |$ 80.00 |

| LCD |$ 25.00 |

| Keypad |$ 11.50 |

| Power relays (4 total) |$ 15.00 |

| Door and frame |$ 12.00 |

| Door motor |$ 20.00 |

| Door spindle |$ 38.00 |

| Fuse box |$ 15.00 |

|Totals |$261.50 |

3.3 Estimated Project Costs

Though the group members are not actually expecting to be paid, an estimated cost of just above twice minimum wage for their labor has been included. When the costs were first estimated, the team members were Tetteh Akornor, Moses Castellano, Zachary Schmid, and Brian Schmoll. At the semester break, the team changed to Jeff Hoelscher, Zachary Schmid, Anthony Serra, and Hubertus Von Crailsheim.

Table 3.7 – Estimated cost estimates

| |Design Only |Prototype |

|Item |Estimated cost without |Estimated cost with |Estimated cost without |Estimated cost with labor |

| |labor |labor |labor | |

|Materials | | | | |

| Poster |$50.00 |$50.00 |$50.00 |$50.00 |

| Document Binding |$15.00 |$15.00 |$15.00 |$15.00 |

| Software |Donated |Donated |Donated |Donated |

| Telephone & Postage |$10.00 |$10.00 |$10.00 |$10.00 |

|Subtotal |$75.00 |$75.00 |$75.00 |$75.00 |

|Prototype Components | | | | |

| Sensors | | |$25.00 |$25.00 |

| Micro-controller board | | |$150.00 |$150.00 |

| Door materials | | |$100.00 |$100.00 |

| Radiant heaters | | |$194.00 |$194.00 |

| Feed distribution | | |$50.00 |$50.00 |

|Subtotal | | |$494.00 |$494.00 |

|Labor at $10.50/hr. | | | | |

| Akornor, Tetteh | |$1176.00 | |$1176.00 |

| Castellano, Moses | |$1323.00 | |$1323.00 |

| Schmid, Zachary | |$1281.00 | |$1281.00 |

| Schmoll, Brian | |$1323.00 | |$1323.00 |

| Hoelscher, Jeff | |x | |x |

| Serra, Anthony | |x | |x |

| Von Crailsheim, Hubertus | |x | |x |

|Subtotal | |$5103.00 | |$5103.00 |

|Total Estimated Cost |$75.00 |$5178.00 |$569.00 |$5672.00 |

Table 3.8 – Revised cost estimates

| |Design Only |Prototype |

|Item |Estimated cost without |Estimated cost with |Estimated cost without |Estimated cost with labor |

| |labor |labor |labor | |

|Materials | | | | |

| Poster |$40.00 |$40.00 |$40.00 |$40.00 |

| Document Binding |$15.00 |$15.00 |$15.00 |$15.00 |

| Software |$20.00 |$20.00 |$20.00 |$20.00 |

| Telephone & Postage |$10.00 |$10.00 |$10.00 |$10.00 |

|Subtotal |$85.00 |$85.00 |$85.00 |$85.00 |

|Prototype Components | | | | |

| Sensors | | |$ 45.00 |$ 45.00 |

| Microcontroller | | |$ 80.00 |$ 80.00 |

| LCD | | |$ 25.00 |$ 25.00 |

| Keypad | | |$ 11.50 |$ 11.50 |

| Power relays (4 total) | | |$ 15.00 |$ 15.00 |

| Door and frame | | |$ 12.00 |$ 12.00 |

| Door motor | | |$ 20.00 |$ 20.00 |

| Door spindle | | |$ 38.00 |$ 38.00 |

| Fuse box | | |$ 15.00 |$ 15.00 |

|Subtotal | | |$261.50 |$261.50 |

|Labor at $10.50/hr. | | | | |

| Akornor, Tetteh | |$ 210.00 | |$ 210.00 |

| Castellano, Moses | |$ 304.50 | |$ 304.50 |

| Schmid, Zachary | |$1218.00 | |$1218.00 |

| Schmoll, Brian | |$ 336.00 | |$ 336.00 |

| Hoelscher, Jeff | |$1071.00 | |$1071.00 |

| Serra, Anthony | |$1081.50 | |$1081.50 |

| Von Crailsheim, Hubertus | |$1102.50 | |$1102.50 |

|Subtotal | |$5323.50 | |$5323.50 |

|Total Estimated Cost |$85.00 |$5408.50 |$346.50 |$5670.00 |

3.4 Gantt Chart Schedules

The two Gantt charts below show a number of different things. The first chart, Figure 3.1, shows the activities estimated, revised, and performed during the 1st semester. The second chart, Figure 3.2, shows the activities estimated, revised, and performed during the 2nd semester. Each item in the chart is followed by a descriptor which indicates what type of activity was performed and by whom it was performed. The descriptor ‘Original’ describes the original time estimation by the 1st semester team. The descriptor ‘1st Revised’ describes the revised time estimation by the 1st semester team. The descriptor ‘2nd Revised’ describes the revised time estimation by the 2nd semester team. The descriptor ‘1st Actual’ describes the actual time the activity took for the 1st semester team. The descriptor ‘2nd Actual’ describes the actual time the activity took for the 2nd semester team.

[pic]

Figure 3.1 – Project schedule for first semester

[pic]

Figure 3.2 – Project schedule for second semester

4 Closure Materials

4.1 Project Evaluation

There were five measurable milestones established that covered the five main areas of the project: project definition, research, design, implementation, and testing. These milestones were each given a percentage based on how the group felt the area would rank in comparison a 100% complete project. Project definition was given 10%, research was given 10%, design was given 15%, implementation was given 40%, and testing was given 25%. These numbers were the original estimation. They changed greatly as the project progressed. The percentages have been changed to: project definition 10%, research 25%, design 20%, implementation 30%, and testing 15%. All of these milestones were completed and fully met. The research and design milestones were exceeded because these areas took up a lot of the group’s time and extensive R&D was done in order to make the best possible product. Overall, this project was a success. The second semester team put in the extra effort in order to meet the client’s deadline.

4.2 Commercialization

The client requested that the results of this project be commercially packaged in a manner that can be easily sold through a mail order catalog. The group’s final deliverable to the client was an all inclusive package containing all of the components described above. The unit purchasing cost for the client would be $261.50 (see Table 3.8). At a 300% markup, which was stated as desirable by the client, the street price of the complete package would be $784.50. This product is targeted towards a hobbyist chicken farmer who doesn’t have the time to check on livestock every morning and every night.

4.3 Recommendations for Additional Work

Wireless communication between the farmer’s home computer and the microcontroller would be a very convenient addition. Integrated camera system to visually monitor the coop may be beneficial. Having a counter on the door to ensure that all of the chickens are safely accounted for would also be beneficial. Integrating hatchery controls may be needed by some farmers.

4.4 Lessons Learned

The following is a description of the lessons learned by both groups during both semesters.

4.4.1 What has gone well

The communication and interaction of the 2nd semester team went extremely well. The communication between the group and the client also went well.

4.4.2 What has not gone well

The communication and interaction of the 1st semester team did not go well. The documentation was something that all team members put off and journals were not kept up to date. The fact that three team members left at the end of the first semester greatly delayed the project. Another aspect that did not go well was internet research. A lot of time was spent only searching for items on the internet and when it came down to ordering, most of the items were found in catalogs.

4.4.3 Technical knowledge gained

A lot of technical knowledge was gained in the areas of electric motors and microcontroller implementation. Knowledge was also gained in embedded design and circuit board layout. Two of the team members also had to learn to program in Basic for the microcontroller.

4.4.4 Non-technical knowledge gained

Most of the knowledge gained was in the area of communication. The team learned how to work well together and also how to communicate with advisors and clients. The team also learned to start documentation early and to share copies of individual’s work. The group also learned that discussing and ordering parts from vendors is a time consuming and tedious process.

4.4.5 What would be different

The biggest change the group would make would be procrastination. All groups have trouble with time management and this group was no different. Having a compressed 2nd semester helped keep procrastination to a minimum though.

4.5 Risk and Risk Management

4.5.1 Anticipated potential risks and management thereof

One risk that will have an impact on the project is the loss of a team member. If a team member leaves the group, the other team members must have access to the work that that team member worked on.

Another risk would be the possibility of falling behind schedule. This could result in an unfinished project or an error-prone product. A way to minimize the risk is producing an accurate schedule at the beginning of the project. This will help in determining how far behind schedule the product is and what parts of the project can have less time devoted to it.

Misunderstood design requirements could also be a possible risk. To handle this risk the team will keep in constant contact with the client for the duration of the project. Consulting with the faculty advisor will also help in minimizing this risk.

There is also the risk of going over budget. Since this has been a commercial product from the beginning, it is very important that the client is able to resell this product at a descent price. To reduce the risk, extensive research needs to be done in order to find the best component and the best price.

4.5.2 Anticipated risks encountered and management thereof

One risk encountered was falling behind schedule. This was a result of three group members leaving at the end of the first semester. The management of this risk went well, though. The 2nd semester team worked very hard to understand the project and put in a lot of extra hours in order to get back on track.

The risk of going over budget was also encountered. There was quite a few more hours spent researching than originally planned. Even though it was anticipated it also contributed to falling behind schedule.

4.5.3 Unanticipated risks encountered and management thereof

The biggest unanticipated risk encountered was the three group members that left. This risk was not managed well. Even though, one group member leaving was anticipated, three was not. Documentation and research was lost. The learning curve of the new group members was set very high in order to make up for the lost time and data.

4.5.4 Changes in risk management

In order to prevent loss of data due to the absence of team members, all members of the group have copies of all documents written by the team. Most research is done by more than one person in order to maintain a consistent knowledge base throughout the group.

In order to keep the group from falling behind, weekly meetings were set up with the faculty advisor and bi-weekly meetings were set up for the team members. This was done to keep the team meeting frequently and attempting to stay ahead.

4.6 Project Team Information

These are the persons directly involved with this project, including the client, faculty advisor and student team members.

4.6.1 Client:

Murray McMurray Hatchery, Inc.

Lucien A. (Bud) Wood

P.O. Box 458

191 Closz Drive

Webster City, IA 50595

515-832-1235 ext. 240

bud@

4.6.2 Faculty Advisory:

Randall L. Geiger

351 Durham Center

Iowa State University

Ames, IA 50011

P: 515-294-7745

F: 515-294-1152

rlgeiger@iastate.edu

4.6.3 Team Members:

Anthony Serra Hubertus von Crailsheim

CprE ME

4004 Ontario 6323 Fredrickson Court

Ames, IA 50014 Ames, IA 50010

641-455-9724 515-572-7661

tserra@iastate.edu hubertus@iastate.edu

Zachary Schmid Jeff Hoelscher

EE EE

315 Lyon Harwood 535 Meadow Ct.

Ames, IA 50013 Ames, IA 50010

515-572-0968 515-451-1636

zschmid@iastate.edu jhoelsch@iastate.edu

5 Closing Summary

Currently to raise a small number of chickens requires a time intensive manual approach. This project seeks to create a more automated process saving the hobbyist chicken farmer time. This would include implementing a microcontroller to control coop equipment such as coop door, lighting, heating and cooling. All of these controls would be modular and ideally all processes would now be centralized for greater immediate feedback.

Appendix A

Visuals from Detailed Design

[pic]

Figure A1 – Main Menu

[pic]

Figure A2 – Heater Menu

[pic]

Figure A3 -- Timing system menu

[pic]

Figure A4 -- Ambient system flowchart

[pic]

Figure A5 – Timing system flowchart

[pic]

Figure A6 – The board layout of the BasicX-24 board.

-----------------------

Figure 2.5 – Digikey #GH5001-ND

Figure 2.4 – NetMedia 2x16 LCD

Figure 2.1: Current Pitman level lift mechanism in use

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download