Senior Project Report - Automatic Usv Wqms

Senior Design Project Report
EE 493 Senior Design Project
Automatic Unmanned Surface Vehicle-Based Long

Range Water Quality Monitoring System
By:
Gabriel Nicholson
Samuel Hobbs
John Ohmer
May 2022
Faculty Advisor: Nansong Wu, Sonoma State University

Industry Advisor: Doug Calhoun, Environmental Health Supervisor, County of Napa
Client: NASA
Project Website: www.nemousvwqms.weebly.com

Automatic USV Long Range WQMS
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Dr. Nansong Wu, our project advisor, who has helped us through the
design process.
We thank Doug Calhoun, our industry Advisor, for imparting his knowledge.
Special thanks to the California Space Grant Consortium and the Office of Research and
Sponsored Programs at SSU for supporting this project.
1
Abstract
Water quality testing in reservoirs usually involves taking grab samples from a boat or by
the shore. These samples are then taken to labs for extensive testing. It is, however, unrealistic
for someone to go around a large area of the reservoir and take multiple samples, and if they do,
it is time-consuming and inefficient. This sporadic field sampling is not conducive to the
long-term assessment of the water quality of a large body of water. The Automatic Unmanned
Surface Vehicle-Based Long Range Water Quality Management System (Automatic USV
WQMS) aims to fix this problem. The Automatic USV WQMS will follow a preplanned path
given to it by an operator. Along this path, the system will use sensors to measure four major
properties of water quality, those being temperature, acidity (pH), turbidity, and dissolved
oxygen, at specific points along the path. This will allow for continued long-term assessment of
water quality in a large area, efficiently.
2
Table of Contents
Abstract 2
List of Figures 4
List of Tables 5
Problem Statement 6
Introduction 6
Literature Review and Previous Works 7
Methodology 10
Challenges and Risks 11
Project Requirements 12
Marketing Requirements (MR) – Make a complete and meaningful sentence 12
Engineering Requirements (ER) 12
Implementation 13
System Architecture 14
Alternative Design Matrix 18
Budget/Parts List 20
Project Schedule 22
List of Tests 23
Description of Tests 24
Ethics of the Engineering Profession and Our Project 29
References 30
3
List of Figures
Figure 1: Model of Prototype 14
Figure 2: System Block Diagram 15
Figure 3: Hardware Block Diagram 16
Figure 4: Software Block Diagram 17
Figure 5: Schedule 22
4
List of Tables
Table 1: Microprocessor/Microcontroller Design Matrix 18
Table 2: Flight Controller Design Matrix 19
Table 3: Budget plan 20
Table 4: Test plan 23
5
1. Problem Statement
Current water quality monitoring methods are time-consuming and inefficient due to
requirements on manpower and coverage area. Testers must use boats and handheld devices to
manually test bodies of water. The limitation on the area coverage and regular testing make it
difficult to have a long-term assessment of water quality. This could allow potential water
contamination to go undetected.
2. Introduction
With extreme droughts, due to climate change, our freshwater resources are dwindling
quickly. With the decrease in water supply, we now face the challenge of protecting the precious
water sources we have left. We aim to do this with our Automatic Unmanned Surface
Vehicle-Based Long Range Water Quality Monitoring System (Automatic USV WQMS).
The Automatic USV WQMS moves along a predefined path through bodies of water
taking sensor readings at specified locations. The USV is unmanned so less manpower is
required to do testing. It will be able to cover a larger area more consistently and constantly than
a manned boat trolling a body of water.
While this WQMS will allow for continuous monitoring of a body of water it will not
completely replace lab testing. The sensors installed on the USV will only cover four of the most
basic water quality testing points Ph, dissolved oxygen, temperature, and turbidity. This project
also only covers the Automatic USV and its WQMS. It does not include the transmission of
sensor readings or their handling, apart from what happens on the USV.
In this report, we explore the theory behind this project, the outline of its construction,
and the tests to prove its veracity. A literature review covering the background history and
foundation that was used to construct this project is given in Section 3. The logic and principles
used can be found in the methodology section 4. The test results that prove the potential of the
project can be seen in the Description of Tests section 8.1. Finally, if you wish to know what
6
references we used you can find that in the references section 9. If you are confused about some
points you might be able to find an explanation in the appendix.
3. Literature Review and Previous Works
There are many similar products that have been made before that automatically perform
water quality testing such as In-Situ, a company that specializes in water quality analyzers and
data loggers [1]. They are a long-established company however their focus is purely on making
the testing side of water quality management easier. Their sensors do focus on easy usabilities,
such as their AQUA Multiparameter Probe, which has the ability to measure dissolved oxygen,
conductivity, temperature, pressure, pH, and ORP [1]. However, In-Situ’s products are still
manual, handheld, or stationary instruments that are expensive and will not conduct tests at
multiple different locations automatically. In-Situ has also tried to use a UAV to collect
measurements before, but this method still will use much more power than a USV since it has to
lift off the ground with a heavy sensor payload [2]. In their UAV project, they only had
conductivity, pH, and dissolved oxygen sensors which were hanging off the UAV to be lowered
into the water. Although their UAV was automatic, it also had the challenge of fighting against
air currents when flying, and the user still had to pay attention closely to when to take over
control [2]. A USV does not have these problems because it only needs two motors for
propulsion and does not need to overcome the force of gravity. If a UAV were to lose power it
would drop out of the sky and you would lose your product, whereas a USV would be easily
recoverable. Our USV will solve the major problems In-Situ’s products face, by being able to
navigate a body of water on its own using GPS navigation and take its own sensor readings while
being large and stable. This is not something they currently have.
HardwareX is the name of a university project by six different team members, it is very
similar to what our product would provide. HardwareX is an automatic USV that navigates a
pre-planned path and takes three different types of sensor readings [3]. Although they are not as
established as In-Situ, their product is meant to be more cost-effective while also implementing a
way to take water quality readings automatically over a defined path. The main difference
7
between their project and ours is that our USV will also focus on dissolved oxygen readings, and
ours will be larger in size. HarwareX’s main selling point is that it is low-cost and open-source,
as well as having the ability to interface with a smartphone [3]. While this is not the highest
priority of our project, our USV will still be more stable than their USV which is only 0.28m x
0.24m x 0.28m [3]. Our USV will be much larger and therefore more stable and less likely to be
drawn off course by currents or waves. According to HarwareX’s testing, their USV could only
handle wind speeds of less than 4m/s and wave heights of 7cm. For reference, the Beaufort scale
for estimating wind speed and sea state places this USV’s rating at a low one for wave height and
a three in terms of wind speed, which is fairly low on the scale [4]. Our goal is to have a
Beaufort rating of two and four, with a wind speed of around 6m/s and a wave height of around
15cm.
There have been numerous water quality management systems with areas that overlap
with this project’s features. For instance, a USV project designed by Feng Chia University
performs a similar function of automatically navigating a body of water and taking readings.
However, their USV contained minimal sensors, relied on computer vision, and was designed
with a core focus of cleaning the water, not just monitoring it [5]. The issue with this is that it
does not allow for the USV to take samples in a strategic and logical manner. An autonomous
approach of collision detection means it does not care where it is going, only that it does not
crash and returns home when it needs to. Feng Chia University’s USV is not designed for water
quality monitoring as much as it is for water maintenance either, but a pH sensor is included in
their design. In 2019, Gdynia Maritime University in Poland made a USV for the purpose of
hydrography, which is the mapping of the features of a body of water. They made a particular
effort to effectively design paths for mapping [6]. Their research and testing with path planning
and the Pixhawk 4 show that the flight controller is capable of an accuracy of one to three
meters. In contrast, the USV designed by Ramakrishnan College of Technology uses the flight
controller APM 2.8, which in their testing proved accurate at three to six meters. Additionally,
their flight controller proved to be unreliable, as it would only work 70% of the time [7].
Researchers at National Chi Nan University built a system that not only monitored many
of the same quality factors as this project, but also monitored outside environmental data such as
8
light, humidity, and air pressure. However, their setup is stationary and is not designed for
monitoring multiple areas [8]. MEA Engineering college created a similar stationary system with
fewer sensors but it was able to have more than one instance of the device connected through the
internet of things (IoT) [9]. A key requirement of our USV is that it is mobile, however, what can
be learned from these two projects is applicable to the future work of our project.
In 2018, several engineers at Chung-Yuan Christian University developed a USV
utilizing an all-in-one sensor module from Ark Labs. The sensor module contained temperature,
pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, water depth, turbidity, chlorophyll, and potassium ion
sensors. However, due to the complexity added by the number of sensors their system needed to
stay stationary for a minimum of 2 minutes. A full operation time for five points would take two
hours to complete and therefore is not efficient [10]. Having too many sensors also inhibited the
mobility of their USV.
The closest related USV water quality monitoring system to this project is one done by
Wu and Khan in 2019 [11]. The project focused on integration to the internet of things (IoT),
however, it covers many of the aspects of this project. The USV utilized dissolved oxygen,
turbidity, pH, and temperature sensors and transmitted the data over the internet to a cloud. The
future work is planned for using GPS and automatic navigation since it was not implemented at
the time of the project.
Another USV done by Madeo, et. al. makes use of dissolved oxygen, salinity, water flow,
pH, ORP, and a water depth sensor. Their project took a focus on the design and stability of their
boat. In their testing, they found that a double hull, the catamaran-style boat was much more
stable than a single hull one. They went into depth by calculating the maximum angle their USV
could be rolled before capsizing. Their research [12]. In their report, they explain very well why
they chose the catamaran-style, but this is not the only project that utilized this style of USV. In a
review of ten previous works, it was found that five of these utilized catamaran USV designs,
and two were stationary water monitoring platforms.
After reviewing many previous works, one thing that is in common between many of
them is the sensors that they use. In a comparison of Ramakrishnan College, Chung-Yuan
Christian University, and Madeo’s USV, they all implement pH sensors, and at least two of them
9
use temperature and dissolved oxygen sensors. Turbidity sensors are used by several other
projects as well, and although it is not as common, this is something that will be integrated into
our USV because it is a valuable indicator of solid and particulate pollution.
For this project, the USV’s sensors will cover most of the tests that are required for
typical water quality testing: Dissolved oxygen, turbidity, pH, and temperature. However, we
will not be able to perform bacteriological tests because this requires samples to be manually
taken and tested in a lab. No USV currently on the market can perform these tests, but all the
other essential tests will be taken by our USV. These laboratory tests include bacteria such as E.
coli, mineral tests looking for things like chlorine & chloride, nitrate, lead, copper, and iron. [13]
The list of minerals is long. As stated above these are laboratory tests that require equipment that
can not fit on the USV.
4. Methodology
To solve the lack of coverage of bodies of water and to ease the burdens of water quality
management, we will build an unmanned boat that is capable of performing important water
quality measurements and maneuvering around a path on its own. To do this we will use a set of
four sensors PH, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and temperature. All of the sensors are waterproof,
however, the turbidity sensor is not waterproof on its back. This is problematic as it is very short
and stubby. For this reason, we plan to encapsulate the turbidity sensor in a tube so that it can be
in the water without worry of its back getting submerged. The other sensors are much longer and
can safely protrude from the hull into the water without worry of their wires or other potentially
problematic components getting wet. The sensors will be connected to an analog to digital
converter on an Arduino Leonardo. The Arduino will have a script continuously running that
stores the data readings from the sensors for a certain amount of time. The Arduino Leonardo
will be connected to the Pixhawk flight controller so it can be told when it should take readings
and will be powered from the Pixhawk as well. The Pixhawk will connect wirelessly to a base
station computer that uses Mission Planner, an open-source software. The base station will send
10
path data to the flight controller and the user will be able to give it commands such as “return
home”. The Pixhawk will be programmed such that when the USV’s battery is 50% or less it will
issue its “return home” command. The Pixhawk controller is what will be the core of our
solution, it manages not just the sensors and the Arduino Leonardo, but it is also responsible for
the movement of our unmanned surface vehicle (USV). The Pixhawk is able to know where it is
using a GPS module that can be connected to it, it uses this GPS to navigate the path that the
base station communicates to it. The Pixhawk is also able to control the motors of the USV and
perform differential steering so that the USV can maneuver along its path. The Pixhawk,
Arduino Leonardo, GPS, sensors, and motors, will all be integrated onto a secure and stable hull,
due to the planned capsized ratio of less than 2.0. Capsize ratio
is a measurement that represents a boat’s ability to recover
from an inverted capsized position. [14] The equation used to
calculate it is as follows:𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 =
𝐵𝑒𝑎𝑚 (𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ) / [[𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡/64. 2] × 1/3] The
components integrated onto the USV’s hull will be watertight
and safely secured, and unlike HardwareX’s USV, this project's
USV will have a capsize ratio of less than 2.0 and will therefore be less prone to capsizing,
improving its stability. Our solution will also include a dissolved oxygen sensor which is a very
important and critical test in water quality management. Other than the hardware, the
programming IDEs, libraries, and software we will be using are open source or free.
5. Challenges and Risks
The largest challenge that our project faces is the water. Our Unmanned Surface Vehicle
(USV) is meant to travel in water with water-sensitive components. It is imperative that we
properly protect these components so our USV can function properly. If water is allowed to
interact directly with our components it can cause major damage. Water can cause electrical
11
components to corrode and the impurities in the water can allow electrical current to travel to
other points of the device where it shouldn’t be causing damage. [15]
Another challenge we face is interpreting our sensor readings. Our sensors send analog
voltage values to an analog to digital converter that will translate these voltage values into digital
format. The challenge starts here when we have to take those voltage readings and convert them
into the sensor readings using provided equations. We must take those equations and fine-tune
them to accurately translate the voltages to readings. [16] These equations can be slightly
different for every device so accurate calibration is imperative.
One of the most significant risks we could face during testing is a runaway or stranded
USV. It is possible that a path might take the USV to a point where the Pixhawk has a poor
connection, gets stuck on an obstacle, or it might have a malfunction in its thrusters and become
stranded. This could be a serious issue, to mitigate this we would try to only design paths that do
not go outside the Pixhawk’s specified range. If the USV does become stranded, our best
contingency plan is to have an inflatable raft that we can use to go out on the lake to retrieve it.
Another possible contingency plan is to attach a very long line to the USV so that we can reel it
in if we need to.
With the looming worldwide semiconductor shortage, parts have become more expensive
and scarce. Vendors are out of stock and have backorder lists already generated. This is a risk
that we face when ordering components for our USV. In order to mitigate this risk, we will have
to order parts as soon as possible. We have researched multiple viable options for most of the
electrical parts within our system. If one happens to become unobtainable our contingency is to
have backup vendors to order our second or third choice. If a part that we have already had on
order becomes unavailable we have backup vendors that we can order from. Just in case a part is
nonfunctional we will order multiple of a single part, justifiably the cheaper ones.
6. Project Requirements
6.1. Marketing Requirements (MR) – Make a complete and meaningful sentence

MR-1. Water quality sensors must be accurate and reliable
MR-2. Electronics should be reasonably waterproof.
MR-3. Must be able to navigate a pre-planned path automatically.
12
MR-4. Must be portable enough to fit inside a utility van or SUV.

MR-5. Must be light enough to be handled by two people.
MR-6. The boat must move at a reasonable speed.
MR-7. Resistant to capsizing (low capsize ratio)
MR-8. The USV must return home when the battery is low
6.2. Engineering Requirements (ER)

ER-1.
a. Minimum Ph measurement ± .2 tolerance. (MR 1)
b. Minimum ± 5 NTU for readings under 25 NTU (Nephelometric Turbidity Units). ± 5%
of readings above 25 NTU. (MR 1)
c. Minimum ± 5% ppm for dissolved oxygen reading accuracy. (MR 1)
d. Minimum ± 2 degrees celsius temperature accuracy. (MR 1)
ER-2. The water-sensitive components must have a minimum protection of IP64. (MR 2)
ER-3.
a. GPS must have a minimum accuracy of ± 15 meters. (MR 3)
b. The boat must follow the planned path with a minimum accuracy of ± 15 meters.
(MR 3)
ER-4. Boat dimensions: Maximum length 1.71 meters, maximum width 0.871 meters, and a
maximum height of 1.31 meters. [17-26] (MR 4)
ER-5. Not exceed 46 kg. (MR 5)
ER-6. Must have a minimum forward speed of 3 km/h. (MR 6)
ER-7. Capsize Screening Ratio should be less than 2.0 (MR 7)
ER-8. When the battery is at 50% the USV will activate its return to home function (MR 8)
7. Implementation
We are creating a small catamaran boat that will hold all of our components to make it a
functioning unmanned surface vehicle (USV) and water quality monitoring system (WQMS). It
will be controlled by a Pixhawk that will receive path data from a base station running
MAVProxy. The Pixhawk will control the boat’s motors through an electronic speed controller
and keep the boat on the designated path using its GPS module. When the Boat reaches points
that are used in the path planning to designate where to go, it will run an event at that point. The
Pixhawk will stop the boat and communicate with the microcontroller that is controlling all of
the sensors. The microcontroller will take a set number of sensor readings in the time frame
13
allotted for the event, before temporarily storing and preparing the data to be communicated to
the cloud. Once the event is over the Pixhawk will continue on to the next designated point. This
continues until the boat reaches the last point, where once done the boat will return to home.
Home is a point saved in the Pixhawk and it can return to that location at any time when directed.
Figure 1 below is a 3D representation of the prototype that will be built.
A. Waterproof enclosure rated IPX4
B. USV deck
C. Pontoons
D. Thruster mounts
E. Sensor attachment
Fig. 1
7.1. System Architecture
The system starts at the base station, which contains the software for Mission Planner to
communicate to the USV its path data. This is represented in Fig. 2 below in yellow. Once the
path data has been loaded into the USV’s flight controller, in the green navigation section of Fig.
14
2, it will begin its movement. The ESC or Electronic Speed Controller will control the motors on
the USV and direct its path from one point to the next. The hardware block diagram in Fig. 3
shows the ESC controls of the thrusters. The logic of the movement program can be observed in
Fig. 4. To summarize, at designated points given by Mission Planner, the USV will stop and take
sensor readings at that specific point. The sensor readings will be stored temporarily for
transmission purposes. After storing the data and the time for taking readings has passed, the
USV will continue to move to each following point in the path and take readings at the
designated event points. Eventually, the USV will come to an endpoint that was specified and it
will stop and return to the preset home waypoint. Conversely, if the battery ever hits 50% the
USV will also return to the home waypoint.
Fig. 2 System Block Diagram

Figure 2: Blue is the sensor module, green is the navigation module, red is the power module, and yellow
is the base station module. Each contains the components associated with its operation.
15
Fig. 3 Hardware Block Diagram

Figure 3: Blue is the sensor module, green is the navigation module, red is the power module, and yellow
is the base station module. Each contains the components associated with its operation.
16
Fig. 4 Software Flowchart

Figure 4: Green is the start of the program, blue is the functions or operations of the program, yellow is
the logical if’s of the program, and red is the end of the program.
17
7.2. Alternative Design Matrix
Microprocessor/Microcontroller
Cost Power Usage Size Compatibility Memory Total

with sensors
RaspberryPi 3 B+ 4 5 4 1 3 17
($50.00) (3.3 - 5V) (56.5 x 85.6mm) (1 GB LPDDR2)
(SD Card Storage)
Arduino Leonardo 5 5 5 5 1 21
($22.79) (3.3 - 5V) (69.1 x 54.1mm) (64 MB LPDDR2)
(SD Card Storage)
Odyssey Mini PC 1 1 3 3 5 13
($218.00) (12 - 19V) (110 x 110mm) (8 GB LPDDR4)
(SATA SSD)
Table. 1 Microprocessor/Microcontroller Design Matrix
Scoring: The scoring will be based on a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the best possible score.
Decision: Table 1 above shows that the Arduino Leonardo is the best fit for our project.
Considering the number of sensors we have to manage, sensor compatibility played a major role
in our decision. Three out of four of the sensors that we have are explicitly intended to be used in
conjunction with the Arduino Leonardo. Even though the Arduino lacks the memory to save the
data gathered by the sensors, we will be using a RaspberryPi to store the data for testing
purposes.
Conclusion: We plan on using the Arduino Leonardo for our project.
18
Flight Controllers
Cost Size # of I/O Documentation Total

Interfaces
AbuseMark NAZE32 5 5 1 2 13
($44.09) (36 x 36mm) (4)
Pixhawk PX4 3 3 5 5 16
($238.88) (44 x 84mm) (16)
CUAV X7 Pro 1 4 5 5 14
($1200.00) (45 x 77mm) (16)

Table. 2 Flight Controller Design Matrix
Scoring: The scoring will be based on a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the best possible score.
Decision: With a ton of different flight controllers on the market we did some research on a few
of them and placed our findings above on Table. 2. The lightweight flight controllers like the
AbuseMark, lack the firmware needed to operate a USV. The pre-installed firmware only
supports quadcopters. However, the Pixhawk and Cuav both have firmware that supports rover
as well as quadcopters. This is important to the project because the vehicle will make use of
differential steering to navigate the water. This immediately eliminated the AbuseMark from
being used in this project because it did not have the firmware that is required. There are a ton of
open forums and support for the Pixhawk and CUAV. These are both used widely by the drone
community so finding documentation and help on how to operate this kind of hardware is easier
to come by. Matching the Pixhawk in all other categories the CUAV sports a hefty price tag of
$1,200. This would put us far past our budget and leave us with the best viable option, the
Pixhawk PX4.
Conclusion: We plan on using the Pixhawk PX4 for our project.
19
7.3. Budget/Parts List

Table 3 shown below is a list of parts that we will be using to build a working prototype of this
project.
Part/ Quantity Price Description Link Test ER#
PixHawk + GPS $228.88 Flight Controller https://amzn.to/2X8cptg FT-10 ER-3a

Kit with a GPS FT-11 ER-3b
(1) module for ST-2
navigation. ST-3
T100 Thrusters $179.00 Motors that drive https://bit.ly/3FV9TZd FT-10 ER-3b

(2) (Each) and steer USV. ST-2 ER-6a
ST-3
ST-4
Sabertooth Dual $79.99 Electronic Speed https://bit.ly/3DAZ2BB FT-10 ER-3b

12A Motor Control that
Driver controls the speed
(1) of the thrusters.
RaspberryPi $35.00 Stores the data https://bit.ly/3j7Fblt FT-1 ER-1a

3B+ from the Sensors FT-2 ER-1b
(1) taken on the FT-3 ER-1c
Arduino. For ST-1
testing purposes ST-3
only.
Arduino $22.79 Microprocessor https://tinyurl.com/cw6r58dw FT-1 ER-1a

Leonardo that controls the FT-2 ER-1b
(1) sensors. FT-3 ER-1c
FT-4 ER-1d
ST-1
ST-3
Turbidity $9.90 A sensor that tests https://www.dfrobot.com/produ FT-2 ER-1b

Sensor the “cloudiness” ct-1394.html ST-1
(2) of the water. ST-3
Temperature $8.99 A sensor that tests https://amzn.to/3j00BRF FT-3 ER-1c

Sensor the temperature of ST-1
(2) the water. ST-3
20
pH Sensor $64.90 A sensor that tests https://www.dfrobot.com/produ FT-1 ER-1a

(1) the pH balance of ct-2069.html ST-1
the water. ST-3
Dissolved $169.00 A sensor that tests https://www.dfrobot.com/produ ST-1 ER-1d

Oxygen Sensor the amount of ct-1628.html ST-3
(1) dissolved oxygen
in the water.
Calibration $100.00 A solution to https://bit.ly/3vfiGA1 FT-2 ER-1b

Solution - calibrate the ST-1
Turbidity turbidity sensor ST-3
(1) for accurate
readings.
Calibration $40.94 A solution to https://amzn.to/3FN6dIC FT-1 ER-1a

Solution - calibrate the pH ST-1
pH sensor for accurate ST-3
(1) readings.
Calibration $21.50 A solution to https://amzn.to/3mO21zO ST-1 ER-1d

Solution - calibrate the ST-3
Dissolved dissolved oxygen
Oxygen sensor for accurate
(1) readings.
Boat Body $370.00 Main body of the https://amzn.to/31sfLt4 FT-5 ER-2

(1) USV FT-6 ER-4
FT-7 ER-5
FT-8 ER-7
FT-9
ST-3
LiPoBattery $216.66 22.2V LiPo https://amzn.to/3CvLF4w ST-5 ER-6b

(1) Battery used to ER-8
power the USV
system
Total Cost $1,756.21

Table. 3 Budget plan
21
7.4. Project Schedule
The schedule for our Automatic Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV) Long Range Water
Quality Management System (WQMS) is mainly based on two major milestones. Those being
having a functioning prototype by the end of March and a finished and tuned product by May.
We have a few other note-worthy checkpoints as well. By the end of October, we expect to have
our semipermanent final list of components. This mainly includes sensors, thrusters, electronic
speed controllers, and boat haul. We then have multiple tests we wish to run to make sure our
prototype is on track throughout March. These three tests can be seen in figure 4 below. They are
marked by the blue chevron. These tests are mainly for the USV haul and path planning
software.
On to the main body of the Schedule. By the end of January, we expect to have selected,
tested, and calibrated our sensors. By the end of March, we expect to have developed the USV,
have path planning functioning in software, and have the sensors integrated with the USV. The
USV development starts in December while path planning and sensor integration will start in
December respectively. After the March deadline for a functioning product, we have a more
general schedule. Here we expect to perform more in-depth sensor calibration using data we
have collected from testing the prototype. We will also perform bug fixes we found with the
software along with optimization. In April we will begin the consolidation and finalization of
documentation we started back in September. This will continue till the final milestone with a
finished product. Figure 5 shown below is a visual representation of our schedule.
Fig. 5 Schedule
22
8. List of Tests
Table 4 shown below is a list of function and system tests that the team has laid out for the project.
Function tests (FT), are tests that will be performed on singular components of the project. System
tests (ST), are when two or more components come together to create a system that will then be
tested. For example, FT-1 tests the accuracy of the pH sensor while ST-1 tests the sensors working
together as a system.
Test Number Test Description Related Status
E.R.
FT-1 Test accuracy and calibration of PH sensor. ER 1a Complete
FT-2 Test accuracy and calibration of turbidity sensor. ER 1b Fail
FT-3 Test accuracy and calibration of temperature. ER 1c Complete
ST-1 Integration of all sensors into a module and test. Complete
FT-4 Check hull integrity and water tightness. Complete
FT-5 Check USV weight. ER 5 Complete
FT-6 Check Boat Hull Dimensions. ER 4 Complete
FT-7 USV Stability Test. ER 7 Complete
FT-8 Check IPX4 rating. ER 2 Complete
FT-9 Establish communication between the flight Complete

controller and the motors.
23
FT-10 GPS accuracy test. ER 3a Complete
ST-2 Planned path accuracy test. ER 3b Complete
Complete
ST-3 Flight Controller, Sensor Module, and Boat Hull
Integration Test.
Speed test. ER 6 Complete

ST-4
Battery life test. ER 8 Complete

ST-5
Table. 4 Test plan
8.1. Description of Tests

Function Test - FT
System Test - ST
FT-1: Test accuracy and calibration of the PH sensor. (ER.1.a.)

● Objective: Ensure that the sensor is operating within a reasonably accurate tolerance.
● Setup: Connect the sensor to the Arduino and prepare the calibration solutions that are
within our testing range.
● Pass/fail Criteria: The sensor passes if its reading is within ±0.2 of the known value.
● Results: Root mean Square Error is ±0.19 pH.
● Conclusions: The SEN0161-V2 pH sensor meets E.R.1.a. requirement for pH
measurements to be ±0.2 or less.
FT-2: Test accuracy and calibration of the turbidity sensor. (ER.1.b.)

● Setup: Connect the sensor to the Arduino and prepare the calibration solutions that are
within our testing range.
● Pass/fail Criteria: The sensor has a minimum of ± 5% NTU for readings under 25 NTU
(Nephelometric Turbidity Units) ± 5% of readings above 25 NTU. (MR 1)
● Results: Root mean Square Error is ± 28.8 NTU.
● Conclusions: The SEN0189 turbidity sensor fails to meet E.R.1.b. requirement for
turbidity measurements under 25 NTU. The sensor has better accuracy in samples with a
larger NTU but fails to meet the requirement for samples above 25 NTU as well.
24
FT-3: Test accuracy and calibration of the temperature sensor: (ER.1.b.)

● Setup: Connect the sensor to the Arduino, have the Kuluner TP-01
thermometer with an accuracy of ±0.56°C on hand to record the true temperature and
prepare water at varying temperatures for testing. The temperature of the water should be
greater than 0 but less than 50 degrees celsius. [26]
● Pass/fail Criteria: The sensor passes if its reading is within ± 2 degrees celsius of the
known temperature value.
● Results: On November 15, 2021, our team got together and connected the DS18B20
temperature sensor to the Arduino using the W1-GPIO-One-Wire Interface. Through the
Arduino, we could take sensor readings and then be prompted to enter the temperature
reading we got from our Kuluner TP-01 thermometer. We took 121 measurements in
total, in groups of 10 measurements at different water temperatures. Our root means error
came out to ±0.7°C.
● Conclusions: The DS28B20 temperature sensor has an accuracy of ±0.7°C, well within
our requirements set by ER.1.c.
FT-4: Check hull integrity and water tightness.

● Objective: Ensure that the hull of the USV is watertight and can support its payload
without taking in water or sinking.
● Setup: Take the boat hull to a small body of water with a full load. Have someone or
something on hand to support the boat if hull integrity or water tightness fails.
● Pass/fail Criteria: Place boat haul in water. Wait 1 hour and check for leaks.
● Results: After placing the USV in a body of water for a time period of 1 hour it remained
watertight and held its integrity.
● Conclusions: The USV hull is secure and will be able to support missions around bodies
of water without sinking or leakage.
FT-5: Check USV weight. (ER.5.)

● Objective: Ensure that the USV can be handled by one or two people.
● Setup: Take the USV with a full load, all its sensors, batteries, thrusters, etc and place it
on a scale. If it does not fit on a scale then it can be weighed by hanging it and using
weights or an electronic measuring system to measure it.
● Pass/fail Criteria: The test fails if the USV is over 46 kg. The test passes if the USV is
under or equal to 46 kg.
● Results: The USV’s weight was found to be 25.6lbs, or 11.6kg.
● Conclusions: The USV can be carried by two people comfortably, and ER 5 is satisfied.
FT-6: Check Boat Hull Dimensions. (ER.4.)

● Objective: Check to see if the boat hull meets the specified dimensions.
25
● Setup: Have tape measure on hand. Place the USV on a level surface that also keeps it
level.
● Pass/fail Criteria: If the length of the boat exceeds 1.71 meters, it fails. If the width of the
boat exceeds 0.871 meters, it fails. If the height of the boat exceeds 1.31 meters then it
fails. It passes if it is within all three requirements.
● Results: USV length is less than 1.71 meters, height is less than 1.31 meters, and the
width is less than 0.871 meters.
● Conclusions: The USV can easily fit within the cargo space of a utility van or SUV.
FT-7: USV Stability Test. (ER.7.)

● Objective: Check the stability of the USV once assembled making sure it will not
capsize.
● Setup: Take a measurement of the boat’s beam and weight to calculate the capsize ratio.
● Pass/fail Criteria: The capsize ratio should be less than 2 in order to achieve acceptable
stability.
● Results: The USV has a capsize ratio of 1.33. The capsize ratio of a two-haul boat is
calculated by taking half of the beam length of the USV and dividing it by the cube root
of its displacement.
● Conclusions: Our boat meets the E.R. 7 requirements of having a capsize ratio of less
than 2.
FT-8: Check IPX4 rating. (ER.2.)

● Objective: Check to see if water-sensitive components have a minimum of IPX4
protection.
● Setup: Remove all water-sensitive components and replace them with water absorbent
paper. Once done reseal the USV. Place the USV on an elevated platform when the
bottom can be seen and accessed along with the top. Have a sprayer on hand to start the
test.
● Pass/fail Criteria: If any of the paper is wet then the test has failed. If it is not wet then the
test has passed.
● Results: After spraying the enclosure for 5 minutes and submerging it, the paper
remained dry. Once the enclosure was drilled for wires and sealed, the test was performed
again for 30 minutes in the rain and sprayed. No water entered the enclosure.
● Conclusions: The enclosure is able to protect the water-sensitive components with a
minimum rating of at least IPX4.
FT-9: Establish communication between the flight controller and the motors.
● Objective: Motors are able to perform differential steering.
● Setup: Connect Pixhawk to the electronic speed controller (ESC) and the ESC to the
T200 thrusters. Connect a multimeter between the ESC and the thrusters to see current
changes. Connect to the Pixhawk to issue directional commands.
● Pass/fail Criteria: Motors draw a different amount of current to move at different speeds.
Correction rotation behavior between both motors when commanded to make a turn.
26
These parameters will constitute a Pass. If there is no differential response when

commanded the test Fails.
● Results: Current draw varied when a turn command was issued. USV is capable of
differential steering.
● Conclusions: Motors responds to the RC transmitter and are able to steer the USV using
differential thrust. This feature works when the USV is in auto mode as well.
FT-10: GPS accuracy test. (ER.3.a.)

● Objective: Test to see if GPS is accurate enough to be used as navigation for the USV.
● Setup: Connect Pixhawk with GPS module to base station and use Mavproxy to read
onboard GPS coordinates. Have another GPS device on hand, to read GPS coordinates.
Walk Around with the GPS module and record different coordinates at different spots.
Compare recorded values with actual values.
● Pass/fail Criteria: GPS module is accurate within ± 15 meters.
● Results: Maximum distance from the known test GPS coordinate was 5.27 meters. The
minimum distance was 1.38 meters. The average distance from all known test coordinates
was 3.31 meters.
● Conclusions: The USV meets the E.R.3a requirement. A stable GPS connection, weather
conditions, and a clear line of sight to the GPS device have an effect on the GPS module's
accuracy.
ST-1: Integration of all sensors into a module and test. Test all sensors when connected to a
single microprocessor for complete functionality.
● Objective: Test all sensors when connected to a single microprocessor for complete
functionality.
● Setup: Connect every sensor to the Arduino and prepare the calibration solutions and
water for use, that are within the testing range of that sensor.
● Pass/fail Criteria: All sensors are able to successfully relay readings to the
microprocessor
● Results: The Sensors successfully relay readings to the Arduino.
● Conclusions: The Sensors are taking readings, temperature, turbidity, pH, and dissolved
oxygen as expected.
ST-2: Planned path accuracy test.

● Objective: The boat must follow the planned path with a minimum accuracy of ± 15
meters.
● Setup: Integrate the flight controller, USV hull, and motors. Set up a pre-planned path at
the base station. Where the USV will move from waypoint to waypoint on this path.
● Pass/fail Criteria: USV successfully completes three different paths within 15 meters of
its predetermined route. The test fails if USV is uncontrollable and is not accurate within
15 meters.
27
● Results: Maximum distance from the designated waypoint was 2.69 meters. The
minimum distance was 1.28 meters. The average distance for all waypoints was 1.84
meters.
● Conclusions: The USV exceeds E.R.3b requirements. A strong GPS connection and
weather conditions play a major role in planned path accuracy.
ST-3: Flight Controller, Sensor Module, and Boat Hull Integration Test. Assemble all the
individual components of the USV and put them together. Test to make sure they are interacting
correctly.
● Objective: Assemble all the individual components of the USV and put them together.
Test to make sure they are interacting correctly.
● Setup: Integrate the Sensor Module tested in ST-1 with the USV tested in ST-2. Set up a
simple pre-planned path with two to three measurement points. Have the Sensor module
save measurement values with timestamps for test purposes. Place Fully integrated USV
in a small body of water.
● Pass/fail Criteria: Passed the criteria set for ST-1 and ST-2 when all modules are
assembled together.
● Results: The USV completed its planned path within the required accuracy, as seen in
ST-2. Excluding the turbidity sensor that did not make accuracy requirements but it did
successfully read on the USV.
● Conclusions: With the integration of our sister team’s LoRa we can see the sensors
reading while the USV is in motion and at waypoints. Showing a complete integration of
the USV parts for our project and the other.
ST-4: Speed Test

● Objective: The USV must be able to move at a fast enough speed to perform its task
within a reasonable time.
● Setup: Monitor the change in distance over time to determine the speed of the USV in the
path planning software.
● Pass/fail Criteria: Passes if the USV is able to achieve a minimum speed of 3 km/h.
● Results: The USV can maintain an easy speed of at least 3.6 km/h.
● Conclusions: The USV will be able to navigate its planned path with a speed of at least 3
km/h, satisfying ER6
ST-5: Battery Life Test

● Objective: The battery must be able to endure for 1 hour to allow for the USV test larger
bodies of water.
● Setup: Fully charge the battery and check its voltage before running the USV with a full
payload. After a known period of time stop and check the voltage of the battery. From
this calculate if the battery will continue to supply sufficient voltage after 1 hour.
● Pass/fail Criteria: The battery will pass if it can last a minimum of 1 hour.
● Results: LiPo: 5000mAh*0.80 = 4000mAh
Life of Battery = 4000mAh/9000mA
28
Thrusters can operate at 100% throttle for at least 26.6 minutes

● Conclusions: The current draw increases when the thrusters are submerged in water.
Depending on the number of waypoints and the distance between them the USV could
last an hour, and a larger battery could be purchased. Our current iteration partially meets
ER 6b.
9. Ethics of the Engineering Profession and Our Project
An ethical product is one that improves or maintains the safety, health, and welfare of
society, and of the environment. [28] This project is aimed at relieving the burden water quality
testers and management face and improving upon their ability to monitor our bodies of water. By
using our USV water management authorities will be able to more quickly detect water quality
that could be dangerous to wildlife as well as humans. In this way, our USV will better the
safety, health, and welfare of not just the people who use bodies of water but the creatures that
live in them. Our project is designed to last for a considerable amount of time, as it will be using
high-quality parts with a large rechargeable battery. If the USV reaches the point where it is no
longer usable it can always be disassembled and recycled. Parts such as the Arduino Leonardo
and Pixhawk can always be removed and reused and if they cannot, there are options to safely
recycle electronics. [29] The USV will not have any emissions that could harm the environment
since it is all-electric, there will be no contaminants that could be leaked into the water from the
USV. For those who might be visually impaired the only difficulty of using our USV is on the
base station end, using the Mission Planner software to interact with the USV. However, this is
something that can be addressed in the operating system of the user’s computer in display
settings/ease of access. [30] So our project is not limited to who can use it either.
29
References
[1] - In-Situ, “Water Monitoring Equipment, Water Quality Testing, & More | In-Situ” 2020.
[Online]. Available: https://in-situ.com/us/. [Accessed Sep. 20, 2021].
[2] - Vidi, Nene “Autonomous Water Quality Testing and Sample Collection with a Drone”,
DroneBelow,March 28, 2019 Available:
https://dronebelow.com/2019/03/28/autonomous-water-quality-testing-and-sample-collect
ion-with-a-drone/ [Accessed Sep 28, 2021]
[3] - Jo, Wonse, et al. “A Low-Cost and Small Usv Platform for Water Quality Monitoring.”
HardwareX, vol 6, Oct. 2019 Available:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468067219300367 [Accessed Sep.
20, 2021]
[4] - “National Weather Service”, Beaufort Scale. https://www.weather.gov/pqr/beaufort
[5] - H.-C. Chang, Y.-L. Hsu, S.-S. Hung, G.-R. Ou, J.-R. Wu, and C. Hsu, “Autonomous water
quality monitoring and water surface cleaning for unmanned surface vehicle,” Sensors,
vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 1–21, Feb. 2021.
[6] - M. Specht, C. Specht, H. Lasota, and P. Cywiński, “Assessment of the steering precision
30
of a hydrographic unmanned surface vessel (USV) along sounding profiles using a

low-cost Multi-Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver supported
autopilot,” Sensors, vol. 19, no. 18, pp. 1–15, Sep. 2019.
[7] - S. K. Vasudevan and B. Baskaran, “An improved real-time water quality monitoring
embedded system with IOT on unmanned surface vehicle,” Ecological Informatics, vol.
65, Sep. 2021.
[8] - Y.-W. Kuo, W.-L. Wen, X.-F. Hu, Y.-T. Shen, and S.-Y. Miao, “A Lora-based multisensor
IOT platform for agriculture monitoring and submersible pump control in a water
bamboo field,” Processes, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 1–17, May 2021.
[9] - Liloja, M. Sreelekha, G. Gopakumar, and K. Shahil, “IOT-based water quality monitoring
system using Lorawan,” Computer Networks and Inventive Communication
Technologies, pp. 1157–1170, 2021.
[10] - T. H. Yang, S. H. Hsiung, C. H. Kuo, Y. D. Tsai, K. C. Peng, K. C. Peng, Y. C. Hsieh, Z.

J. Shen, J. Feng, and C. Kuo, “Development of unmanned surface vehicle for water
quality monitoring and measurement,” 2018 IEEE International Conference on Applied
System Invention (ICASI), pp. 566–569, 2018.
[11] - N. Wu and M. Khan, “Lora-based internet-of-things: A water quality monitoring

system,” 2019 SoutheastCon, 2019.
[12] - D. Madeo, A. Pozzebon, C. Mocenni, and D. Bertoni, “A low-cost unmanned surface

vehicle for pervasive water quality monitoring,” IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation
and Measurement, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 1433–1444, Apr. 2020.
[13] - ETR Labs. (20om/types-of-water-testing-methods21, January 14). Types of Water Testing

Methods. ETR Laboratories, Inc. https://etrlabs.c/ [Accessed Sep. 28, 2021]
[14] - G. Day, “Choosing a Safe Sailboat,” Choosing a safe sailboat, 04-Feb-2002. [Online].
Available: https://www.boats.com/how-to/choosing-a-safe-boat-5934/. [Accessed:
11-Dec-2021].
[15] - Telamco, “Why does water destroy electronic devices?,” Telamco, 09-Dec-2019.
[Online]. Available: https://telamcoinc.com/why-does-water-destroy-electronic-devices/.
[Accessed: 26-Oct-2021].
[16] - RealPars, “What is sensor calibration and why is it important?,” RealPars, 19-Jul-2021.
[Online]. Available: https://realpars.com/sensor-calibration/. [Accessed: 26-Oct-2021].
[17] - Car and Driver. 2021. Honda Pilot Features and Specs. [Online] Available at:
31
<https://www.caranddriver.com/honda/pilot/specs> [Accessed 14 November 2021].
[18] - Ford. 2021. Ford Explorer. [Online] Available at:

<https://www.ford.com/suvs/explorer/models/explorer> [Accessed: November 14,
2021].
[19] - Toyota Highlander Features and Specs. (2021, October 13). Car and Driver. [Online]
Available at: <https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/highlander/specs> [Accessed:
November 14, 2021]
[20] - Blossom Chevrolet. (2021). Dealer Website. blossomchevrolet.com [Online] Available

at: <https://www.blossomchevrolet.com/blog/measuring-the-chevy-suv-lineup/ >,
[Accessed: November 14, 2021].
[21] - Bob Moore. (2021). The Impressive 2021 Jeep Cherokee Dimensions. bobmoore.com.
[Online] Available at: <https://www.bobmoore.com/jeep-cherokee-dimensions/>
[Accessed: November 14, 2021].
[22] - Nissan. (2021). 2021 Nissan Rogue Specs & Prices | Nissan USA. [Online] Available at:
<https://www.nissanusa.com/vehicles/crossovers-suvs/rogue/specs/compare-specs.html#
modelName=S|FWD> [Accessed: November 14, 2021].
[23] - Subaru Outback Features and Specs. (2021, March 30). Car and Driver. [Online]
Available at: <https://www.caranddriver.com/subaru/outback/specs> [Accessed:
November 14, 2021].
[24] - Mazda CX-5 Features and Specs. (2021, September 14). Car and Driver. [Online]
Available at: <https://www.caranddriver.com/mazda/cx-5/specs> [Accessed: November
14, 2021].
[25] - Acura MDX Features and Specs. (2021, February 24). Car and Driver. [Online]
Available at: <https://www.caranddriver.com/acura/mdx/specs> [Accessed: November
14, 2021].
[26] - Johnson, S. (2019, January 10). The Cheapest & Most Common Tire Sizes. It Still Runs.
[Online] Available at:
<https://itstillruns.com/cheapest-common-tire-sizes-7483754.html> [Accessed:
November 14, 2021].
[27] - “Water Temperature,” Environmental Measurement Systems, 07-Feb-2014. [Online].

Available:https://www.fondriest.com/environmental-measurements/parameters/water-qua
32
lity/water-temperature/. [Accessed: 17-Nov-2021].
[28] - IEEE - Advancing Technology for Humanity, “IEEE - IEEE Code of Ethics”, June 2020
[Online] Available:https://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/governance/p7-8.html
[Accessed:11/29/2021]
[29] - EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Certified Electronics Recyclers”,
April 15, 2021. [Online] Available:
https://www.epa.gov/smm-electronics/certified-electronics-recyclers
[Accessed 11/29/2021]
[30] - Wolber, A. “How to adjust your settings to make your screen easier to read.”, December
20, 2017. TechRepublic.[Online] Available:
https://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-to-adjust-your-settings-to-make-your-screen-e
asier-to-read/ [Accessed 11/29/21]
33

Senior Project Report - Automatic Usv Wqms

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Senior Project Report - Automatic Usv Wqms

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Senior Design Project Report

EE 493 Senior Design Project

Automatic Unmanned Surface Vehicle-Based Long

Faculty Advisor: Nansong Wu, Sonoma State University

Project Website: www.nemousvwqms.weebly.com

Literature Review and Previous Works 7

Challenges and Risks 11

Ethics of the Engineering Profession and Our Project 29

Figure 1: Model of Prototype 14

Figure 2: System Block Diagram 15

Figure 3: Hardware Block Diagram 16

Figure 4: Software Block Diagram 17

Table 1: Microprocessor/Microcontroller Design Matrix 18

Table 2: Flight Controller Design Matrix 19

Table 3: Budget plan 20

Table 4: Test plan 23

3. Literature Review and Previous Works

5. Challenges and Risks

6.1. Marketing Requirements (MR) – Make a complete and meaningful sentence

MR-4. Must be portable enough to fit inside a utility van or SUV.

6.2. Engineering Requirements (ER)

7.1. System Architecture

Fig. 2 System Block Diagram

Fig. 3 Hardware Block Diagram

Fig. 4 Software Flowchart

7.2. Alternative Design Matrix

Cost Power Usage Size Compatibility Memory Total

($50.00) (3.3 - 5V) (56.5 x 85.6mm) (1 GB LPDDR2)

(SD Card Storage)

($22.79) (3.3 - 5V) (69.1 x 54.1mm) (64 MB LPDDR2)

(SD Card Storage)

($218.00) (12 - 19V) (110 x 110mm) (8 GB LPDDR4)

Conclusion: We plan on using the Arduino Leonardo for our project.

Cost Size # of I/O Documentation Total

($44.09) (36 x 36mm) (4)

($238.88) (44 x 84mm) (16)

($1200.00) (45 x 77mm) (16)

Conclusion: We plan on using the Pixhawk PX4 for our project.

7.3. Budget/Parts List

Part/ Quantity Price Description Link Test ER#

PixHawk + GPS $228.88 Flight Controller https://amzn.to/2X8cptg FT-10 ER-3a

T100 Thrusters $179.00 Motors that drive https://bit.ly/3FV9TZd FT-10 ER-3b

Sabertooth Dual $79.99 Electronic Speed https://bit.ly/3DAZ2BB FT-10 ER-3b

RaspberryPi $35.00 Stores the data https://bit.ly/3j7Fblt FT-1 ER-1a

Arduino $22.79 Microprocessor https://tinyurl.com/cw6r58dw FT-1 ER-1a

Turbidity $9.90 A sensor that tests https://www.dfrobot.com/produ FT-2 ER-1b

Temperature $8.99 A sensor that tests https://amzn.to/3j00BRF FT-3 ER-1c

pH Sensor $64.90 A sensor that tests https://www.dfrobot.com/produ FT-1 ER-1a

Dissolved $169.00 A sensor that tests https://www.dfrobot.com/produ ST-1 ER-1d

Calibration $100.00 A solution to https://bit.ly/3vfiGA1 FT-2 ER-1b

Calibration $40.94 A solution to https://amzn.to/3FN6dIC FT-1 ER-1a

Calibration $21.50 A solution to https://amzn.to/3mO21zO ST-1 ER-1d

Boat Body $370.00 Main body of the https://amzn.to/31sfLt4 FT-5 ER-2

LiPoBattery $216.66 22.2V LiPo https://amzn.to/3CvLF4w ST-5 ER-6b

Total Cost $1,756.21

7.4. Project Schedule

FT-1 Test accuracy and calibration of PH sensor. ER 1a Complete

FT-2 Test accuracy and calibration of turbidity sensor. ER 1b Fail

FT-3 Test accuracy and calibration of temperature. ER 1c Complete

ST-1 Integration of all sensors into a module and test. Complete

FT-4 Check hull integrity and water tightness. Complete

FT-5 Check USV weight. ER 5 Complete