EEE/GEF 455/457 About the Design Review Presentations (3 rd Nov. 2011)

1. EEE/GEF 455/457About the Design Review Presentations (3rd Nov. 2011) Royal Military College of Canada Electrical and Computer Engineering Maj Randy Hartmann Randy.Hartmann@rmc.ca 613-541-6000 ext. 6554/6493 Sawyer 4209 CaptVincent Roberge Vincent.Roberge@rmc.ca 613-541-6000 ext. 6492 Sawyer 3211

2. When: October 31, 2011 • Where: TBC • Time: From 13h00 to 16h00 • Important notes: • Compliance with the time allotted for each DR presentation must be in order. • Each one consists of 15minutes of presentation followed by 5 minutes of questions Design Review Presentations

3. Again: 15minutes of presentation • Introduction  10% ~ 1.5minutes • Body  80% ~ 12minutes • Conclusion  10% ~ 1.5minutes And: 5 minutes of questions

4. Example of a PDS Presentation

5. AFFIDS – Autonomous Forest Fire Identification and Detection System SIDAFF – Système d’identification et de détection autonome de feu de forêt EEE 455/457: 4th Year Project 2010/2011 Royal Military College of Canada Electrical and Computer Engineering Designed by: Ocdt/Élof Grant Greaves ConcepteursOcdt/Élof James Hodgson Supervised by: Dr. RachidBeguenane Superviseur

6. 1.5 minutes for the Introduction Note: Normally 2 slides are enough, and both should take 1.5 minutes. Introduction (Aim/Motivation/Outline)

7. Introduction (Aim/Motivation) • Poor visibility – hard to see fires from ground; • “Hot Spots” – hot areas that can flare up; • Slow communication – information relay can be time-consuming; • Solution: Autonomous UAV! Forest Fires

8. Outline • Project Overview • Functional Requirements • Overall Structural Design • Functional Design & Interface requirements • Video Decoder Module • Memory Module • Mouse Module • Image Processing Module • Video Encoder Module • Planned milestones • Risks • Conclusion • Questions

9. 11 minutes for the Body Note: Number of slides depends on each case. But the period of 11 minutes should be respected. • Project Overview • Functional Requirements • tructural Design • Functional Design & Interface requirements • Video Decoder Module • Memory Module • Mouse Module • Image Processing Module • Video Encoder Module • Planned milestones Body

10. Project overview The “Big Picture”

11. Functional Requirements (Requirements Review) • Target Identification: The system shall be able to identify targets (i.e. forest fires) within the video feed autonomously. • User Notification: The system must be capable of notifying the user of a target, once it has been identified by highlighting its location on the output monitor.

12. Overall Structural Design(Architectural Review)

13. Functional Design & Interface Requirements • One-way flow of information • Real-time (live) analog video feed (Digitized for analysis)

14. Functional Design & Interface Requirements(For each design level : Decomposition) 1. Video Processing Subsystem (VPS)

15. Functional Design & Interface Requirements (For each design level : Decomposition) 2. Video Decoder Module (VDM) • Interface with the Digilent VDEC board • Decode and convert video signal • Synchronize video frames with output

16. Functional Design & Interface Requirements (For each design level : Decomposition) 3. Memory Module (MeM) • Buffer pixel information • Consists of 2 memory spaces which alternate read/write with each line of video

17. Functional Design & Interface Requirements (For each design level : Decomposition) 4. Image Processing Module (IPM) • Pixel analysis • Pixel alteration as needed (show target)

18. 5. Video Encoder Module (VEM) Functional Design & Interface Requirements (For each design level : Decomposition) • Interface with the VGA connector (generation of video sync signals) • Interface with the 7 segment display (initialization information and target coordinates)

19. Planned timeline

20. Risks Too much text. Be carefull for the time period of 11mns!!!! • Improper fire identification • - False positive reading / false negative reading. • Proper fire detection, identification and location play a key role in the entire UAV system. • To mitigate the risk associated with the detection algorithm, one use sample video feeds from the actual UAV in order to tweak the detection algorithm. • Catastrophic equipment failure • A good portion of the project budget is to be invested in the on-board video system. • Should a catastrophic system failure occur with the prototype UAV there is a high risk of losing the bulk of the electronic equipment. • To reduce this risk, the image processing unit (FPGA) will be placed at the GCS. • The image analysis algorithm will be tested using sample video feeds to reduce the risk inherently associated with flight. • Equipment Pricing • An IR, thermal-imaging camera would have been ideal. • The financial cost is too great, and thus a less effective camera will be used. • The target identification and recognition algorithm will be more difficult to identify as it will need to be more precise to compensate for the inconsistencies with the camera.

21. 1.5 minutes for the Conclusion Note: Normally 2 slides are enough, and both should take 1.5 minutes. Conclusion (Summary/Conclusion)

22. Conclusion • Why design this system? • Reduce life and equipment loss • Improve effectiveness of forest fire fighting forces • Why AFFIDS? • Cost effective (low risk onboard system & hardware implemented) • Real-time, extremely fast analysis (<1 frame time) • Compact and portable • AFFIDS will... • Save lives, • Save money... • Save trees!

23. 5 minutes for the Questions Questions?

24. Dryruns in the presence of PMOs for Nextweek (Oct. 24th ).Just let us know by Email wheneveryou’reavailable to do sowithinnextweek.