Active Parking Management

Active Parking Management – System Design Review

Active Parking Management

Wynn Aung Conley Brodziak Bryan Blakeslee Andrew Eggers Tyler Ludwig


Team Members

• Tyler Ludwig – ME, Project Manager• Conley Brodziak – ME, Asst. Project Manager• Bryan Blakeslee – EE, CE• Andrew Eggers – CE• Wynn Aung – EE

Roles & ResponsibilitiesTyler – Indication Structural Design, Weatherproofing, Budget Conley – Main Housing Design, Electro-Mechanical Interfacing, MountingBryan – Power System and User InterfacesAndrew – Microprocessor, Sensors, ProgrammingWynn – Indication System and User Interfaces


Introduction

• Motivation– Reduce commuter search time– Reduction of carbon footprint– Future goal of campus-wide parking system– Delivery data to parking administration

• Goals– Reduce time spent looking for parking– Easy identification of open lots– Accurate system


Customer Needs

Need # Importance Description Customer

1 3 Operation in inclement weather Randy Vercateuren

2 9 Resistant to vandalism Randy Vercateuren

3 9 Operation during high volume traffic Randy Vercateuren

4 9 Doesn't impede current parking Randy Vercateuren

5 9 Inform commuter of lot status Randy Vercateuren

6 1 Retrevial of real time data Randy Vercateuren

7 9 Maximum 2% counting error Randy Vercateuren

8 3 Field programmable Randy Vercateuren

9 1 Aesthetically pleasing Randy Vercateuren

10 3 Operates for one month on internal power source Randy Vercateuren

11 3 Indicator must be visible above landscape Randy Vercateuren

12 3 Affordable Mark Smith

13 9 Sustainable operation Enid Cardinal

14 9 Conforms to RIT Facilities color scheme Randy Vercateuren

Revisions– Removed :

• Portability– Added

• Vandalism (#2), Importance 9• Visibility (#11), Importance 3• Color (#14), Importance 9


Specifications

Spec. # Customer Need Specification (metric) Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal ValueS1 3,10 Time of operation Hours 0900-1700 24/7

S2 7,5 Accuracy Percent 2 1

S3 10 Minimum battery lifetime Months 1 month Infinite

S4 9 Aesthetically pleasing Binary Y Y

S5 8 Field programmable Binary Y Y

S6 6 Duration of record storage Days 30 365

S7 12 Cost Dollars 500 300

S8 4 Sensor operation distance Feet 20 50

S9 1 Operational temperature range °F -10 to 110 -20 to 140

S10 1 Waterproof unit Binary Y Y

S11 1 Operational in snow Feet 3 10

S12 1 Withstand continuous wind gusts MPH 60 100

S13 5,11 Visible indication of lot status in all directions Yards 150 150

S14 1 Operational in humidity Percent 90 100

S15 13 Must sustain itself Binary Y Y

S16 2 Withstand/Operates after transient impact G 2.5 5

S17 2 Cannot be easily stolen Binary Y YS18 3 Minimum height Feet 15 20S19 14 Color (black) Binary Y Y


Risk MitigationRisk Item Effect Cause Liklihood Severity Importance Action to Minimize Risk Owner

1 Budget Unable to purchase necessary technology MSD Budget limitation 2 3 6 Use low cost materials/technology.

Coordinate between team budget needs Tyler Ludwig

2 Software Development Time Unable to operate system MSD timeframe 2 3 6 Use low cost materials/technology.

Coordinate between team budget needs Andrew Eggers

3 Magnetometer Operation Project moves to fallback acounstic sensor

Magnetometer accuracy unachievable 2 2 4 Create test environment to verify

suitability of sensor for projectAndrew Eggers

4 Lead times beyond construction starts date

Delayed construction of system

Out of stock parts, not ordering on time 2 2 4

Monitor stock of potentially needed parts, order parts with long lead times early in development cycle

All

5 Structeral Integrity Physical damage to system/surroundings

Construction limitations 1 3 3 Proper structural analysis. Knowledge of

FMS/PATS construction limitations. Conley Brodziak

6 Power Supply/GenerationHuman power intervention (battery depletion)

Selected system may not supply enough current to keep battery charged

2 1 2Perform worst case current draw analysis, select parts to exceed worst case

Bryan Blakeslee

7 WeatherproofingWater damage on internal components. Exterior degredation

Operational environment 1 2 2

Maintain watertight seal around vital electrical components. Select weather resiliant materials.

Tyler Ludwig

8 Insiffiicient Indication of Lot Status

Commuter confusion, lack of visibility

Power limitations, environmental obstruction

1 2 2 Public awareness of new system and instructional signage. Wynn Aung

9 VandalismCosmetic damage to system, impaired system operation

Human condition 1 1 1Theft deterrent stickers. Keep housing locked. System anchored to ground. Solar panels out of reach

Conley Brodziak


Function Decomposition


System Diagram


Mechanical Design: Overhead Concept

• Structure Cost: $400• Structural Integrity:

Minimal bending moment. Wide stance to resist wind

• System Accuracy: No blind car instances

• Footprint: Spans width of entrance

• 24’x10’


Mechanical Design: Side Concept

• Structure Cost: $200• Structural Integrity: Large

bending moment at base• System Accuracy: Snow

obstructions and blind car instances

• Footprint: 2’x2’


Mechanical Design: Road Concept

• Structure Cost: Negligible• Structural Integrity: Road

Wear• System Accuracy: Excellent• Footprint: 3/16”x24’

Image credit: vehicle-counters.com/pdf/tc-ph50v2-r.pdf

Side View (Profile)


Mechanical Design Comparison

Overhead Concept

Side Concept Pressure Concept

Cost $400 $200 UnknownStructural Integrity

Stable Top heavy Road Wear

Accuracy Good Poor, Complicated

Excellent

Footprint 24’x10’ 2’x2’ 3/16’’x24’Aesthetics Bulky,

noticeableDiscrete Discrete


Sensor Selection

• The Federal Highway Administration– FHWA Traffic Detector Handbook: 3rd Edition

• Compares many detection methods• Covers installation procedures

• Factors in our sensor selection:– #1: Price must be within budget– #2: Must be low power– #3: Must not modify road surface– #4: Must operate in all conditions– #5: Must determine direction of vehicles

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/operations/its/06108/


Magnetometer Testing

• This test data was obtained over 15 seconds, with the magnetometer ~ 7' above a passing car

• Further testing needed to prove robustness over time


Flux Concentration

• Flux concentration can be used to direct more magnetic flux through the magnetometer, increasing sensitivity

• High flux materials, Mu-Metals, used for this

Picture credit: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Time and Frequency Division


Remaining Sensor Issues

• Issue: Natural variation of the Earth's magnetic flux over time• Potential Solution: Determine baseline by averaging data

• Issue: Magnetometer response can not ascertain direction• Potential Solution: Offset magnetometers

• Issue: A very slowly moving or stopped car might be detected as natural magnetic variation

• Potential Solution: Use difference between magnetometers


Alternative Sensor Plan

• Solar Powered Doppler Radar– Pro: High accuracy, low power.– Con: Cannot detect stopped vehicles.

• In-road magnetometer– Pro: This would greatly increase sensor

accuracy.– Con: Requires modification of asphalt.

• Saw cut channel for wire, covered in sealant.

• A hole drilled in each lane


Sensor Reality Check

• Even with a perfect sensor system, vehicles could always drive across the grass

• There will always be some level of possible error if a point-of-entry system is used

• These errors are most effectively countered by having the system accept corrective input from admin-level users


System Configuration

Functions• Accept new parameters• Accept lot size• Accept reset command• Set lot status

Components• Numeric keypads for input• User Display• Microcontroller with SD card – Data Collection


Indication System

Functions• Receive status• Activate indicator

Consists of• LED light indicator (Commuters)• 7-segment display (Parking Admin)


Power System: Rationale

• Solar– Safe, low maintenance, no moving parts, sun is

fairly constant, significant up front cost• Wind

– Periodic maintenance, moving parts may present safety hazard, wind is inconsistent, significant up from cost

• Replaceable Battery– Significant recurring cost, requires frequent

invasive maintenance


Power System: Solar Panel

• Purpose: Provide power source to charge battery• Must operate inside charge controller input range• Must supply current greater than that required by microcontroller,

interface, and indication system• Mounted 10' above ground

System Current NeededMicrocontroller 200mA

Interface 200mA

Indication 500mA

Total 900mA

Power Analysis


Power System: Charge Controller

• Purpose: Safely regulates battery charging, prevents back-discharging through solar panel

• Must output 12V for battery compatibility

• Must safely regulate up to 3A of current

• Maintains battery peak charge


Power System: 12V Battery

• Purpose: Bulk energy storage, emergency power

• Must supply power overnight

• Must survive multiple full discharges (deep-cycle capability)

• Drives microcontroller, indication, and 5V linear regulator

• Regulator provides power for digital logic devices


Proposed Budget

Component/System Budgeted Cost

Housing/Building Material $200

Microcontroller/Sensors $60

Solar Panel $150

Battery $60

Indicator $30

Date post:	23-Feb-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	taniel
View:	40 times
Download:	0 times

Active Parking Management

Documents