Subject: [Roll] Requirements for SHM

From: Jukka MJ Manner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 10:02:35 +0300 (EEST)

Dear all,

We wrote a (very) short draft about structural health monitoring (SHM), a 
rather important area for future sensor networks, and how we understand 
the requirements for the routing infrastructure.

We tried to highlight the application and the requirements, but also the 
non-goals. Many of the requirement are similar to the ones already 
expressed, but some are probably different, and actually quite 
challenging.

Any comments would be appreciated, the draft only takes half a cup of 
coffee to read. ;)

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-manner-roll-shm-requirements-00

Cheers,
Jukka

_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

---

From: Bob Paddock <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 19:25:21 -0400

> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-manner-roll-shm-requirements-00

One dish of Yogurt did it for me, don't drink coffee.  My first posting
to the list, hasn't been anything I thought I could contribute until
I read these sections:

   "We can expect the network to bootstrap itself in
   matter of hours or even days, rather than seconds.  Also, once the
   network routing has been put in place, the only changes are that some
   nodes may just die out, and some are replaced, at a very modest
   frequency.

   SHM applications do not require extremely large sensor networks.  One
   network might consist of tens up to couple hundred nodes.  If larger
   structures need to be monitored, multiple independent sensor networks
   could be used."

I am one of the co-authors of "A Technology Review of Smart Sensors with 
Wireless Networks for Applications in Hazardous Work Environments"
published by CDC/NIOSH.  This paper was written to introduce Senior Management
level type people (those that sign the check, not those doing the work) mostly
in the Coal Mining industry to issues of Smart Sensors.  Download the free 
paper from here:

http://www.wearablesmartsensors.com/

Coal mines are very large infrastructures, much larger than bridges, with far
more stringent requirements.  If you want the worst of everything, then
design for operation in a Coal Mine. No light, caustic dust, explosive gases,
no air, no power, lots of heat etc...  Note that Rocks and Coal *absorb* most 
radio waves.

"We can expect the network to bootstrap itself in
   matter of hours or even days, rather than seconds. "

The Holly Grail of a Coal Mine network is to be functional during and after
a catastrophic event; ie *BOOM!*.  Hours and days are useless in this context.
You need to know where everyone is *RIGHT NOW* in a mine that can cover
many-many square miles, in 3D space.  

This 3D space after the event is  literally a different world, anything you 
knew about the network before the event is useless.

If anyone has a system that will work here, please let me know.

-- 
                http://www.wearablesmartsensors.com/
 http://www.softwaresafety.net/ http://www.designer-iii.com/
                 http://www.unusualresearch.com/
_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

---

From: Jukka MJ Manner <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:47:10 +0300 (EEST)

Hi Bob,

Thanks for the comments. Regarding the bootstraping, I realize our text is 
misleading. Our point was that the _initial_ bootstraping phase, i.e., 
when you set up the network for the first time, can take a relatively long 
time. This is the phase when the nodes figure out the routing (set up the 
topology and routes), and the sensors, possible data fusion points, and 
sinks find each other out. Ultimately, we would like to have a network 
that is easy to set up: a service guy just puts nodes here and there, at
some predefined locations, and once online, the nodes automatically figure 
out where they are, where the sinks are, etc.

Once the network is running, obviously any changes in the network should 
be handled instantaneously, which I believe was your primary concern.

Cheers,
Jukka

---

From: Kris Pister <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:38:04 -0700

It's great to have the non-goals in there as well.  Tolerance of long 
network formation times reduces the overall power requirements for most 
(all?) duty-cycled DLL discovery algorithms.

>> The Holly Grail of a Coal Mine network [...]
>> If you want the worst of everything, then design for operation
>> in a Coal Mine. No light, caustic dust, explosive gases,
>> no air, no power, lots of heat etc

Sounds a lot like Industrial !

 >> If anyone has a system that will work here, please let me know.

We've done several deployments in coal and other mines.  Worry not!  
Both 2.4GHz and 900MHz networks work just fine, and build in minutes not 
hours.

ksjp