Nutrient Management and Edge of Field Monitoring Conference December 1-3, 2015 Memphis, TN

1. 1
Field‐Testing Prototype Reduced‐Cost Edge‐of‐Field
Runoff Monitoring Stations
Dennis Busch Randy Mentz
December 2, 2015

3. Runoff Monitoring

4. Barrier: Equipment Cost
High‐Cost Multi‐Purpose Engineered Components
Examples
1. Sampler
2. Stage Sensors
3. Data Logger
>$20,000
4

5. Barrier: Installation Cost
Challenge: In‐field berms
5

6. Barrier: Operational Cost
Challenge: Snow, Ice, and Submergence
Solution: Multiple stage sensors
Hydronic Heat System
6

7. Barrier: Operational Cost
Challenge: Trained technicians to operate station
Solutions: Replaceable, Plug‐n‐Play systems. Display
to verify system function
7

8. Funding Sources
• Earmark Funding
• MN Dept. of Ag
• NRCS CIG (3)
• WI DNR
• IA Soybean Assoc.
Collaborators
• USDA ARS
• MN Dept. of Ag
• IA Soybean Assoc.
• UW‐Extension
• UW‐Madison CALS
• Univ. of Arkansas
8

9. Preliminary Data
• NRCS CIG 2011‐2015
• 3 State Field Test of Reduced‐Cost Monitoring
System
9

10. MHXL Flume Performance
10

11. MHXL Flume Performance
11

12. Sensor Performance
• “Conventional” system: Campbell datalogger,
ISCO sampler (flow compositing), APG
ultrasonic sensor
• Assembled a dataset from events where:
– Photographic stage data available
– Discharge > 100 cubic feet
12

13. 13

14. Submergence Performance
14

15. Submergence Performance
15

16. Sampling Performance
16

17. Sampling Performance
• Dataset assembled from events where both
systems triggered at least 1 liter of
composited samples
17

18. 18

19. 19

20. 20

21. 21

22. Passive Samplers
• Submerge and freeze in winter
• An option for above‐freezing conditions
22

23. Remote Cameras
• Timelapse: continuous log of field conditions
• Motion‐triggered: logs field activities
• Staff gauge
– Critical component for improving data quality
– Identifies: sensor errors, submergence conditions,
freezing conditions and other sources of error
– Consumer‐grade camera was glitchy and
unreliable, even when plugged into a power
source
23

24. 24

25. Prototype Gauging Station
• Built‐in live display with on‐board
interface
• Pre‐programmed for edge‐of‐field
monitoring
• Ease of installing electronics kit
• Inexpensive, replaceable
components cut trouble‐shooting
time
• Sample pump: price ($130)
• Real‐time submergence correction
• Integrated flume/approach heater
• Remote cameras provide valuable
observational data
25
• Datalogger (early version) had no
remote access
• Complicated data‐collection
interface
• Limited data storage
• Hand‐built components (quality
issues)
• Sample pump: tubing durability,
voltage‐dependent speed, intake
velocity, amperage draw in cold
conditions
• MHXL flume not well‐suited for
extreme approach conditions/high
velocity flow
• Remote cameras‐high failure rate
Pro Con

26. Questions?
26

27. Need for Remote Access/Control
Example: Tail‐end of snowmelt event decreasing
temperatures cause increase in stage.
27

28. Development: Logger
28
Version 1:
Custom Electronics
Submergence Correction
Version 2:
User Interface
Robust Connections
Version 3+:
Rapid Prototyping Elec.
Data to SD/Upload to Web
Remote Pump Control

29. Development: Remote Data Access
29

30. Enhanced Capability: Logger
Hardware
• Rapid Prototype
Platform
• Improved Cabling
• SD Card Storage
• Graphic User Interface
• Telemetry
Software
• Web Interface
• Remote Pump Control
30

31. Development: Time‐lapse Photos
31
Smart Phone / Application / WiFi
+ photo quality, inexpensive, off-the-shelf
- temperature rating, updates, control
Raspberry Pi / Camera Module / WiFi
+ inexpensive, control interval remotely
- synchronizing flash, night photo quality,
Arduino / Camera Module / WiFi
+ remote control, inexpensive
- complicated fabrication, buggy,
Game Camera / EyeFi Card / WiFi
+ off-the-shelf, photo quality
- no remote control, high failure rate
IP Camera / Ethernet
+ off-the-shelf, remote control
- power consumption,

32. Development: Site Information
• Rugged Modem
• IP Camera
• Web Relay
32

33. Questions?
33