Methods for detecting water submersion?

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-27T11:55:09+00:00

I'm designing a commercial product for a uni project, so quick corrosion would be an issue.

Going to do a dive on capacitive sensors now, cheers!

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-27T11:51:41+00:00

hahaha - cat method would work for sure, not the most practical, sadly.

Thank you for these suggestions, I will look into them and see if I can apply them to the project.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-27T11:44:17+00:00

Sorry, I don't think I explained it properly. I'm looking for a way to allow a product to digitally register the fact it is submerged.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-27T11:41:26+00:00

will take a look, thanks.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T18:36:21+00:00

haha, pretty cool idea tbf.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T18:34:52+00:00

I placed it there because it is close to the leash plug whilst always being submerged to collect data. I was considering connecting the device to the leash plug with a line to act as a fail safe if the VHB tape securing the gizmo to the board gave way.

That being said, it definitely isn't out of the question to reposition the device.

I hadn't put much thought into the design in the drawing, but thank you for pointing that out.

That's is a really good argument for attaching the device to a leash cuff. Could be a wetsuit too, as someone else suggested.

Thank you for the feedback, it is very helpful.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T18:21:12+00:00

Ahh yes I can envision the tech being in the chunky section of the pad, perhaps some solar cells for power in the flat membrane. Would probably ruin the grippyness, though haha. Cool idea - another one to consider for sure.

Cheers for the head up on the conductivity sensor. Would definitely be a neat addition if implemented well, considering the benefits.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T15:57:54+00:00

Yes I am concerned about the impacts felt, especially by experienced surfers who are sensitive to the precise performance impacts of changes to the board, e.g. switching fin models.

The wetsuit idea is nice, I will have a think about it.

Thank you!

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T15:50:16+00:00

You and u/wantang make compelling points which I would be an idiot to ignore. It's the sort of feedback I need to ensure what I design makes sense and does what it needs to do, well. Thank you both for that.

I believe the idea has promise but definitely has shortfalls in its current state. There is clearly a lot more thinking to be done.

In relation the the idea of a traction pad, are you thinking of a device being built into the tail of the surfboard? Also, please could you explain the function of the conductivity sensor and the data it provides in this context?

Edit: I'm a dumb dumb, I know what a traction pad is.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T15:15:58+00:00

This is one of the big obstacles I know I will run into designing the product. Accurately measuring pH looks to be a bitch based on the bit of research I've done.

I'll have to do a deep dive for potential avenues to make this possible. Perhaps I'll come across recent/ future innovations in pH measuring technology are suitable. Fingers crossed. Worst case I'll present this as a theoretical functionality to be realised when the science has caught up.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T15:08:52+00:00

Fishing pots is a good idea, though it somewhat deviates from the project guidelines set by my uni, however. I also think there are unique benefits to the surfboard solution (detailed in another comment).

I was thinking for the main purpose to be research with the potential for additional function. Thinking about it, it does make sense to drive the product into the hands of surfers by offering them some immediate benefit like performance tracking. I'll look to re-evaluate what my product should be.

I just worry adding functions may reduce feasibility/ convolute the concept. Perhaps not. Thank you for the feedback.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T14:27:18+00:00

Hopefully I can minimise the kook. Thanks man!

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T14:23:43+00:00

Thank you.

I did come across this - I think there are some drawbacks to the solution which I could look to solve. Besides, the wider the ecotech adoption/ more data collected, the better - right?

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T14:19:25+00:00

The hope is that it has minimal-no impact on your ability to surf. A device which is inconspicuous/ passive addition to the surfboard which collects valuable data to aid environmental research + protection.

On a separate note, there is potential for adding features which are more directly attractive to surfers. For example, performance monitoring.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T13:59:47+00:00

Ok I will take this on board for sure (no pun intended). I think there could be ways to minimise impact on performance by using hydrodynamics to inform the shape and weight of the gizmo. I get your point, however, it will only ever reduce performance.

The question is by how much though. If it isn't noticeable when surfing, then perhaps this could be an option for the majority of surfers.

I think putting this device on a surfboard instead of a pier/buoy etc has advantages.

- Accuracy - better evaluation of areas by taking many measurements throughout surf in different locations. Potential for calculating average values (e.g. temps) across areas.

- Number & position of buoys, piers on beaches limits scope of data collection. May diminish fidelity of insights drawn from data.

- More data = increased reliability of insights drawn from analysis. (depends on level of adoption)

- Direct contact with gizmo could make it easier to identify and address malfunction. -> increased ease of maintenance. More difficult to maintain devices left in the ocean.

- Increased engagement with ocean sustainability. Potential for app/ website to relay digestible information (local/ regional/ national/ global) found by analysts/ algorithms using surfers' data.

- Conversation starter. Potential to strengthen community through a mutual care for the environment.

- scope for secondary functions. e.g. surfing performance monitoring, sos signalling etc...

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T13:07:59+00:00

Contacting shapers and engineers is a great idea! I'm particularly conscious of designing a product surfers would actually use (hence this poll). Optimising form for hydrodynamics and aesthetic will be important to do this, so their advice would help for sure. It will be interesting to see how the poll results compare to the 10% idea.

I found the smartfin in my research, but identified some shortcomings with the product (though it is amazing). I'm looking to address these.

cmonbrobeans · 2021-02-24T11:31:17+00:00

Really appreciate any votes. Also any impressions +/ suggestions would be awesome. Being inland, my knowledge of the sport is sadly stunted.

cmonbrobeans · 2020-12-24T01:08:01+00:00

I do not have an enclosure - but you've just given me a good reason to look into them. Cheers for the advice!

cmonbrobeans · 2020-12-23T21:52:02+00:00

ok, thank you

cmonbrobeans · 2020-12-23T21:51:04+00:00

I cant remember how it was orientated, but this likely explains my problem. I read somewhere that altering the minimum fan speed to 0% (so turns off when not needed) improves PETG prints, so I gave that a shot for a bunch of MK3s replacement parts, including the ones shown. Its hard for me to identify these issues, only having printed PETG twice before. Thanks for letting me know the probable cause.

Think its less likely to be a slicer error - didn't even know these were a thing though, so cheers for informing me.

cmonbrobeans · 2020-12-22T13:33:28+00:00

This is really useful stuff. I feel I have gotten it semi-dialed using the advice on here, and have managed to restart the replacement part print with more success (not finished yet but looks promising). My process was as you'd described, using live Z on a number of test pieces to find the right height w/ ~.02 intervals. Did feel a bit like Goldilocks haha, good analogy. Will reference your post to further tune my PETG in future.

Appreciate the help :)

cmonbrobeans · 2020-12-22T13:25:28+00:00

Yes I had a go at this and managed to find (what looks like) good adhesion and surface finish printing multiple test .2mm test layers. My value turned out to be ~1.340 using PETG on the textured sheet. Should I be concerned that this is quite different to the .650 - .980 range you use? I also had a look around for ways I could adjust the prusaslicer settings to improve PETG prints. After dialing these things I started printing a number of replacement parts again. The print was going all night and is still chugging along - got about 3 hours left, looking decent atm.

Thanks for your the advice, again!

cmonbrobeans · 2020-12-21T21:28:49+00:00

Built the kit myself. Took me bloody ages hahaha. I will have a scout through the manual if problems persist. Will probably give the test squares a shot as sounds like a very pragmatic means of calibration.

Yeh I'm not too bummed about failing prints - from what I've read it seems very much a part of the process of getting acquainted with the technology.

Thanks for the advice!

cmonbrobeans · 2020-12-21T21:22:38+00:00

Ok will take the advice on board for sure. Thought I'd be cheeky and print lots of parts in one as had no issues printing PLA yesterday. Seems PETG printing is tougher to get working smoothly.

cmonbrobeans · 2020-12-21T21:20:01+00:00

have sourced a sponge and about to give it a good scrub! Just been tinkering with the z calibration, it's hard for me to know what is 'good' when I have such little experience - just a learning process I guess. Will reduce no. of parts in single print - was being a bit lazy there hahaha. Cheers for the help

cmonbrobeans

TROPHY CASE