Download EDUCATIONAL LABORATORY VIRTUAL

EDUCATIONAL LABORATORY VIRTUAL
INSTRUMENTATION SUITE (ELVIS)
LABORATORY DEVELOPMENT
FINAL REPORT
TEAM # MAY03-19
CLIENT:
National Instruments
FACULTY ADVISORS:
Prof. Mani Mina
Prof. Diane Rover
GROUP MEMBERS:
Michael Ballou
Ryan Hankins
Jason Salz
David Schmidt
Dayu Zhou
MAY 7, 2003
Table of Contents
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. ii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iii
List of Definitions ........................................................................................................................... 1
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Executive Summary ..................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Acknowledgement ....................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Problem Statement ....................................................................................................... 2
1.4 Operating Environment ................................................................................................ 3
1.5 Intended Users and Intended Uses ............................................................................... 3
1.6 Assumptions and Limitations ...................................................................................... 4
1.7 Expected End Product and Other Deliverables ............................................................ 4
2 Project Approach and Results ..................................................................................................... 5
2.1 End-Product Functional Requirements ........................................................................ 5
2.2 Resultant Design Constraints ....................................................................................... 5
2.3 Approaches Considered and One Used........................................................................ 6
2.4 Detailed Design ............................................................................................................ 7
2.5 Implementation Process Description ........................................................................... 9
2.6 End-Product Testing Description ............................................................................... 10
2.7 Project End Results .................................................................................................... 10
3 Resources and Schedules .......................................................................................................... 11
3.1 Resource Requirements ............................................................................................. 11
3.2 Schedules ................................................................................................................... 16
4 Closing ...................................................................................................................................... 21
4.1 Project Evaluation ...................................................................................................... 21
4.2 Commercialization ..................................................................................................... 21
4.3 Recommendations for Additional Work .................................................................... 22
4.4 Lessons Learned......................................................................................................... 22
4.5 Risk and Risk Management ....................................................................................... 23
4.6 Project Team Information .......................................................................................... 23
4.7 Closing Summary....................................................................................................... 24
Appendix A – Sample Labs .......................................................................................................... 25
EE 201 - Lab 1 .................................................................................................................. 25
EE 201 - Lab 5 .................................................................................................................. 32
EE 201 - Lab 6 .................................................................................................................. 34
Potato Battery Laboratory ................................................................................................. 36
i
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 – Current Lab System .................................................................................................... 4
Figure 1.2 – ELVIS Lab System ..................................................................................................... 4
Figure 2.1 – ELVIS Evaluation Board ............................................................................................ 7
Figure 2.2 – Oscilloscope Virtual Instrument ................................................................................. 8
Figure 2.3 – Measured Resistance Error ......................................................................................... 9
Figure 3.1 – Original Project Schedule ......................................................................................... 16
Figure 3.2 – Revised Project Schedule ......................................................................................... 17
Figure 3.3 – Final Project Schedule .............................................................................................. 18
Figure 3.4 – Project Plan Schedule ............................................................................................... 19
Figure 3.5 – Project Poster Schedule ............................................................................................ 19
Figure 3.6 – Project Design Schedule ........................................................................................... 19
Figure 3.7 – Final Report Schedule .............................................................................................. 20
Figure 3.8 – Product Documentation Schedule ............................................................................ 20
Figure A.1 – Potato Wiring ........................................................................................................... 36
ii
List of Tables
Table 3.1 – Initial Personnel Effort Estimates .............................................................................. 12
Table 3.2 – Revised Personnel Effort Estimates ........................................................................... 12
Table 3.3 – Actual Personnel Effort ............................................................................................. 12
Table 3.4 – Initial Required Resource Cost Estimates ................................................................. 13
Table 3.5 – Revised Required Resource Cost Estimates .............................................................. 13
Table 3.6 – Actual Required Resource Costs ............................................................................... 13
Table 3.7 – Initial Project Cost Estimates..................................................................................... 14
Table 3.8 – Revised Project Cost Estimates ................................................................................. 14
Table 3.9 – Actual Project Costs................................................................................................... 15
Table A.1 – Potato Voltage and Current ....................................................................................... 37
iii
List of Definitions
o Educational Laboratory Virtual Instrumentation Suite (ELVIS) – A hardware DAQ
system.
o Data acquisition (DAQ) – Process of collecting and measuring electrical signals from
sensors, transducers, and test probes or fixtures, and inputting them to a computer for
processing.
o LabVIEW - A graphical programming language used for creating test, measurement, and
automation applications that has been developed by National Instruments.
o Traditional laboratory instruments – Unique instruments providing different
functionalities. Examples include function generators, digital multimeters and
oscilloscopes.
o Virtual Instruments – Software representations of traditional instruments. Virtual
instruments are used to control and take readings from a hardware device capable of
communicating via a DAQ card.
1 Introduction
1.1 Executive Summary
Need for Project
This project is the result of the Electrical and Computer Engineering department’s desire
to evaluate the feasibility of using the National Instruments ELVIS system for a basic
circuits laboratory class. The other primary goal of the project was to test and evaluate
the usefulness of ELVIS to give feedback to National Instruments.
Project Activities
The activities with which the group was involved throughout the project included testing
the accuracy of ELVIS, analyzing EE 201 lab projects, converting several of the more
relevant labs for use with ELVIS and producing documentation of both converted labs
and the conversion process for future labs. The group carried out the testing of ELVIS by
wiring up a simple RC circuit and attempting to use the ELVIS virtual instruments to
measure the results of various inputs. ELVIS was further used to measure a set of basic
circuit components consisting of resistors and capacitors as well as a range of voltages,
frequencies and currents. The analysis of the EE 201 labs consisted of reviewing the
existing lab manual and deciding which labs taught the most important concepts and
which would best showcase the abilities of ELVIS. Once these labs were selected, they
were actually performed using the ELVIS system and a documentation set was produced
1
to describe the differences from the existing lab manual. The final project activity was
creating a conversion document that would provide future course coordinators and
teaching assistants with a process for converting from stand-alone lab hardware to the
ELVIS system.
Final Results
The group’s lab write-ups for EE 201 labs 1, 5 and 6 are high quality instructions that are
ready for use with ELVIS. The conversion document will also greatly assist in switching
the remaining EE 201 labs from traditional instruments to ELVIS.
Recommendations for Follow-On Work
After testing the ELVIS system the group concluded that it lacked much of the necessary
functionality for use in lab courses such as EE 201. However, it became known that the
ELVIS system used by the team was a pilot version and was thus not a finished product.
The retail version of ELVIS will be much more accurate and will include important
missing features such as current measurement and an inductance meter. The group was
also informed that the cost of the system had been significantly reduced and would
represent a significant cost savings from the current lab setup. Because of features of
ELVIS that are not currently available with the traditional instruments, labs can be
streamlined to reduce or eliminate repetitive hand measurements and replace them with
automated and more visual operations. This will free up lab time for additional
experiments while preserving the intended learning goals. In light of these factors, the
group feels that there is much to be gained by the use of ELVIS.
1.2 Acknowledgement
The team would like to acknowledge David Gardner and Randy Hoskin of National
Instruments for providing two ELVIS systems and DAQ boards that will be used through
the project.
1.3 Problem Statement
General Problem
At Iowa State University, computer and electrical engineering students are given the
opportunity to learn electrical engineering concepts through hands-on work in course
labs. A variety of equipment and instrumentation, such as voltage and current sources,
function generators and oscilloscopes, are provided for students to test the behavior of
actual electrical circuits and systems.
Though exposure and familiarity to a wide variety of instruments is valuable, students
often spend more time configuring instruments and manually recording data than is spent
implementing circuits and analyzing the data. The ELVIS system has been designed to
2
consolidate a variety of instruments into one functionally equivalent system and to
provide a means of automatic data acquisition.
General Solution-Approach
The team must become familiar enough with this system to document the conversion
process of the electrical engineering labs to the new system. ELVIS in conjunction with
LabVIEW will be used to collect and measure data and input the data into a computer for
processing. The team will determine the instrumentation needs of a particular lab and
replace the instruments functionality with an equivalent ELVIS and LabVIEW setup. The
end result will be a complete set of documentation for converting future labs, as well as a
demonstration of a converted lab. This project is keeping Iowa State labs on the cutting
edge of technology to better prepare engineers for the future.
1.4 Operating Environment
After completion of this project, the system would most likely be used by electrical and
computer engineering students while in lab. The EE 201 labs are the primary focus of the
project group. Freshman students who have minimal engineering knowledge generally
attend these labs, so converted labs would have to be simple so as not to confuse the user.
New engineering students may also unknowingly create circuits with inputs or outputs
that could damage the ELVIS hardware.
1.5 Intended Users and Intended Uses
Intended Users
The intended user for this project is the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering. This department can use the ELVIS and LabVIEW system developed by the
project team to upgrade the current labs used for certain courses.
Intended Uses
The EE 201 lab is the primary lab to be integrated with the new ELVIS and LabVIEW
system. The new system would allow for easier reading of measurements taken in the lab
and can be used as a replacement for several traditional lab instruments.
3
1.6 Assumptions and Limitations
Assumptions
1. National Instruments will provide the ELVIS and DAQ hardware.
2. Virtual instruments that are used by LabVIEW and are compatible with ELVIS
will be provided.
3. The group can create virtual instruments that are not provided.
4. It is assumed that the DAQ can capture all data required by the lab.
5. National Instruments will provide necessary information regarding complications
with the ELVIS hardware.
6. Hardware is installed and correctly configured.
Limitations
1. Functionality of virtual instruments controlled by LabVIEW may not exactly
match the functionality provided by the actual instruments currently used in lab.
2. The ELVIS hardware may not be able to generate the variety of signals currently
required by a lab.
3. Breadboards on which students implement circuits are somewhat expensive which
could preclude them from being removed from the lab.
4. Hardware is still in the beta stage of development and does not meet all design
requirements with regards to measurement accuracy.
1.7 Expected End Product and Other Deliverables
The basic electrical engineering laboratory EE 201 will be converted from traditional
multimeter-based experiments to labs using the new ELVIS DAQ system. ELVIS will
gather the data related to the test circuits and transfer the data to a computer with
LabVIEW installed. Students can then use graphical interfaces generated by LabVIEW to
analyze the data. With ELVIS, students are relieved of errors and problems of measuring
equipment and the efficiency of laboratory education will be enhanced.
Figure 1.1 – Current Lab System
Figure 1.2 – ELVIS Lab System
4
2 Project Approach and Results
2.1 End-Product Functional Requirements
The four requirements below specify the necessary functionality of the finished ELVIS
project. These goals are crucial to the success of the project.
o Provide clear, concise, and accurate documentation for EE 201 labs
The documents produced must be written in such a way that undergraduate
engineering students will have no problems understanding and following the
instructions.
o
The new system will teach the same objectives as the previous lab system
The revised labs will not be substantially changed in terms of content and concepts
taught. Students will follow the same procedures but instead of using hardware and
instruments, they will be able to use a computer to manipulate virtual instruments.
o Create new labs with ELVIS system
The ELVIS system is a powerful integration of the traditional lab instruments. Lab
setup and measurement will be simpler than before. The lab instructors could choose
to add more material to the current laboratory within the same class period. The team
will explore the potential of ELVIS system and develop some new lab
demonstrations.
o Provide full documentation on conversion process for the lab instructors
The readers will be lab teaching assistants or instructors who are in charge of EE 201
labs (and other labs). They know the lab material quite well but are unfamiliar with
the ELVIS system. They will use this document for a reference during the conversion
process.
2.2 Resultant Design Constraints
There will be several design constrains that mainly result from the fact that our ELVIS
system is a pilot beta version of the final commercial product.
o Measurement inaccuracy
There was significant measurement inaccuracy with simple resistor and capacitor
measurements. For some small resistors (less than 1k), the error exceeds 100%.
5
o No current and inductance measurement capacity
Since this is a pilot version, current and inductance measurement capacity is not
provided. This affected several experiments with current measurement needs.
o Incomplete ELVIS documentation
The documentation that came with ELVIS did not provide much detail on the
software and hardware package. The user’s manual did not give descriptions on how
to use some of the virtual instruments. Most fields in the technical specifications were
listed as “to be determined” which meant the specifications would be announced at
some future time. All these affected the completeness and accuracy of the documents
the team will provide at the end of the project.
2.3 Approaches Considered and One Used
During the project, the team considered the following approaches.
o Create new virtual instrument interface for each individual lab:
The team considered using LabVIEW to develop new integrated interface for each
lab. Only the instruments used would appear in the new integrated interface. The
advantage is that students can do the same measurement in less time. However, the
team felt the students would learn more if they selected the virtual instruments needed
and analyzed the data collected by them. Furthermore, in the future, it will consume
much less of the lab instructor’s time to maintain the new interfaces.
o Use the current virtual instruments to develop new labs
The team used the current virtual instruments and assumed that the limitations would
be removed in the final version of this product. The team also wrote instructions to
selected EE 201 labs (Lab 1, 5 and 6). Then the team found volunteers to follow the
instructions to test it. The team also developed several labs that are not in the current
EE 201 lab manual to demonstrate the feasibility of converting current labs to use the
ELVIS system, which was the potato battery lab attached to this report. The
advantage was that this required much less time for the team and for the lab
instructors who would one day use ELVIS. The disadvantage was that the team had to
live with the limitation of the current pilot system, such as inaccuracy.
6
2.4 Detailed Design
The cost of producing our product, the conversion documentation, is trivial. The real cost
of the project is in the ELVIS system. The hardware donated by National Instruments to
this project is a pilot version and was estimated to be worth about $5,000. However, the
cost of the final version has been reduced to around $2,000. This is significant because
the cost could become prohibitive if a large number of ELVIS units were to be purchased
by the Department. ELVIS represents the potential for reducing the cost of each lab
workstation by approximately one third. While most of the existing measurement
equipment would be replaced by ELVIS, other important equipment such as the
computers could continue to be used.
Figure 2.1 – ELVIS Evaluation Board
Figure 2.1 is a picture of the ELVIS system donated to the group by National
Instruments. It has a removable breadboard on top on which students can design and
build circuits as well as controls on the front panel. This breadboard can be removed to
allow for designing and building circuits outside the lab. The front panel can control
some ELVIS functions, allow data and signals to be input or output as well as let the user
toggle between using the ELVIS controls and remotely controlling the system via
computer software. The unit also has a full array of connections for external tools and
data transfer.
7
Figure 2.2 – Oscilloscope Virtual Instrument
Figure 2.2 shows a sample virtual oscilloscope provided with the ELVIS set of virtual
instruments. It provides virtually the same functions as a traditional oscilloscope with the
advantage of allowing for computer control and convenient data logging. Other virtual
instruments are provided as well, such as a power supply, multimeter and function
generator. Initially the group planned on a design involving the creation of an entire new
set of virtual instruments to replicate the existing lab equipment, however the tools
provided with ELVIS are more than adequate for what is needed.
The most useful of the virtual instruments provided with ELVIS include the abovementioned oscilloscope, a digital multimeter, a variable power supply and function
generator. These are the only virtual instruments likely to be needed for the EE 201 labs.
The digital multimeter has all the basic functions of a stand-alone multimeter. Tests of its
accuracy were less than promising but the group has learned that the accuracy of the final
version is much improved. The lack of current measurement is a major limitation but this
has reportedly been added as well. The variable power supply has a lower maximum
voltage output than the power supplies currently used in lab but this is not a limiting
factor and the virtual instrument provides the necessary functionality. The function
generator is equivalent to those in use in the labs with the exception that the pre-release
version of ELVIS used by the group has a limited frequency range.
8
Resistance Error
300.00%
Percent Error
250.00%
200.00%
150.00%
100.00%
50.00%
0.00%
-50.00%
10
33
100
330
1k
3.3k 10k
33k 100k 330k
1M
Resistor Label
Figure 2.3 – Measured Resistance Error
Figure 2.3 shows the resistance error that the group found by using ELVIS to measure the
resistance over a typical range of resistors. As can be seen in the graph, the measured
resistance error is unacceptably high at low resistances but is more useable at higher
resistances. This can be attributed to the pilot version of ELVIS being an unfinished
product still in the testing stages.
Because this project did not require traditional engineering design and instead resulted in
a document, discussion of design is somewhat unique. The final conversion document
provides instructions for switching EE 201 labs to ELVIS as well as provides examples
of the group’s work on several labs that have already been successfully converted. It also
provides a brief introduction to ELVIS for lab teaching assistants that can also be used to
familiarize students with the features of ELVIS. A brand new lab was designed to
demonstrate some of ELVIS’ capabilities and is included in the conversion document
along with descriptions of other ideas for fully taking advantage of this system (see
Appendix A). Finally it describes potential advantages and disadvantages of the use of
ELVIS.
2.5 Implementation Process Description
The implementation of the project was primarily the documentation of the conversion
process. The documentation process included brainstorming and working on labs. In the
brainstorming part of deciding how to convert labs, the team had to think of how the labs
were carried out. The team had to ask what the labs were trying to accomplish and
whether or not ELVIS would lose any functionality of the original lab and whether or not
ELVIS could enhance the learning process for the lab.
The actual conversion process took two parts. The first part was completing the lab using
the old system to get accurate results. This included using the old lab equipment such as
the oscilloscope, function generator, digital multimeter and variable power supply. In this
9
process the team completed the lab step by step exactly as the lab manual specified. The
team then documented each step along the way and recorded the data.
The second part was completing the lab using the ELVIS system. This step included
going through the lab step by step according to the lab manual. If there was a section the
team could not complete due to loss of functionality using ELVIS.
2.6 End-Product Testing Description
The end product was a new set of lab instructions for EE 201 and documentation on how
to convert labs from the current system to ELVIS. To test the new set of lab instructions,
the team asked two people to use the new lab write-ups and see how well they could
follow the instructions. One student was an electrical engineering major that was taking
EE 201 at the time of the testing. The group chose this student because he would be
somebody that would have a fresh but limited knowledge of what was going on. The
other student was a chemical engineering major with very limited knowledge of circuit
design.
The tests were performed on the ELVIS workstation in the senior design lab. The two
students worked together as partners to complete the lab without input from the team.
The point of the test was to see if the instructions were simple enough for anybody that
had a limited knowledge of circuits and equipment to measure readings in circuits to
complete the lab. The team gave the students the new instructions for EE 201 lab 5 and
observed them as they worked through the lab. The students had very little trouble
working through the lab. The only help they needed with the lab was a small overview on
the virtual instruments because neither had experience with the ELVIS computer
interface. The lab instructions were considered accurate and usable due to the speed and
accuracy at which the students completed the lab. The same method to create EE 201 lab
5 instructions were used to create the rest of the instructions for the completed EE 201 lab
manual.
2.7 Project End Results
As an addition to the project, the team decided to add an extra lab that demonstrates some
functionality of ELVIS. The lab will create an FM radio receiver. This lab is interesting
and educational. It can spark interest in antennas and waves for EE 201 or EE 333
students that may not have decided on an area of emphasis. It is rather simple to do on the
ELVIS workstation because ELVIS contains the necessary power supplies and function
generator to create an output signal. The output signal can be read on the virtual
oscilloscope or with another simple circuit, actually output the signal to a speaker.
10
3 Resources and Schedules
3.1 Resource Requirements
Personnel Effort Requirements
Table 3.1 shows the initial estimate for the amount of personnel effort in hours that would
be required to complete this project. At the initial planning stage of this project, the team
had no experience dealing with a project of this magnitude so the estimates for time
required were very rough. The main consideration was to estimate on the high side so as
to not go over budget.
The “Project Planning” task involved the team getting a good understanding of what was
required and what possible steps would need to be taken to complete the project. After
discussing the project, the team set to work writing the project plan document.
The “Project Design” task involved the team deciding how the plan would actually be
carried out to completion. Ideas were discussed and a final decision made. Once the team
agreed on a course of action work began on the project plan document.
The “Interface Development” task came from a belief that the team would have to
develop many of its own user interfaces for lab students to use while carrying out lab
experiments. This was to be done using the LabVIEW programming environment
provided by National Instruments. As work on the project progressed, the team became
more familiar with the virtual instrument interfaces provided by National Instruments.
The decision was made that these interfaces would be more than sufficient for use in the
EE 201 laboratory curriculum. The work instead focused on ways to rewrite the EE 201
lab manual to provided students with instruction on how to use the virtual instrument
interfaces provided by National Instruments.
Once the instructions for several EE 201 labs were rewritten to target the use of ELVIS,
work began on the “Interface Test” stage of the project. The team made efforts to ensure
the instructions were very clear and easy to follow in a step-by-step manner. Several
students outside of the project team were brought in and asked to use the newly rewritten
lab to see how well they were able to follow the instructions.
The “Project Documentation” task involved team members writing documentation that
will be used as a guide for others who wish to incorporate ELVIS into their laboratory
curriculum as well as an effort to design a new lab that makes use of interesting features
present in the ELVIS system.
11
Table 3.1 – Initial Personnel Effort Estimates
Project
Planning
Project
Design
Interface
Development
Interface
Test
Project
Documentation
Michael Ballou
15
25
40
10
25
115
Ryan Hankins
2
20
45
15
20
102
Jason Salz
5
20
45
15
20
105
David Schmidt
15
25
40
10
30
120
Dayu Zhou
4
20
50
15
20
109
41
110
220
65
115
551
Totals
Total
Table 3.2 shows the revised estimate of the anticipated effort required from the team.
Because this project was of a different nature than most other senior design projects, less
time was required for actual design work. Instead the team focused more on testing and
evaluating ELVIS to determine its usefulness in a college level laboratory environment.
Table 3.2 – Revised Personnel Effort Estimates
Project
Planning
Project
Design
Interface
Development
Interface
Test
Project
Documentation
Michael Ballou
15
15
40
10
25
105
Ryan Hankins
2
11
55
15
20
103
Total
Jason Salz
5
5
55
15
20
100
David Schmidt
15
10
40
10
30
105
Dayu Zhou
4
10
50
15
20
99
41
51
240
65
115
Totals
512
Table 3.3 shows the actual personnel effort as the end of the project approached. Because
the team decided to use the virtual instrument interfaces provided by National
Instruments, significantly less time went into interface development than was originally
estimated.
Table 3.3 – Actual Personnel Effort
Project
Planning
Project
Design
Interface
Development
Interface
Test
Project
Documentation
Michael Ballou
6
16
4
2
45
73
Ryan Hankins
2
2
12
2
35
53
Jason Salz
8
3
8
4
40
63
David Schmidt
6
7
4
2
47
66
Dayu Zhou
5
13
5
2
42
67
27
41
33
12
209
Totals
12
Total
322
Other Resource Requirements
The following section details some of the items required through the course of this
project. Table 3.4 shows the initial estimate of required resources for the project. The
primary piece of equipment used throughout the course of this project was the ELVIS
system itself. National Instruments provided the team with two pilot versions of ELVIS
that the team was told amounted to a $10,000 contribution. Since EE 201 was chosen as
the laboratory course with which to evaluate ELVIS, the team needed a current version of
the laboratory course packet and well as a parts kit used by students to build their circuits.
The printing of a large full color poster was also required as part of the senior design
course.
Table 3.4 – Initial Required Resource Cost Estimates
Team Hours
Other Hours
Materials provided by National Instruments
Item
0
0
$10,000
Printing of project poster
8
0
$100
Purchase of EE 201 lab manual
0
0
$15
Purchase of EE 201 parts kit
0
0
$30
8
0
$10,145
Total
Cost
Table 3.5 shows the revised estimates which were included as part of the project plan.
Table 3.5 – Revised Required Resource Cost Estimates
Item
Team Hours
Other Hours
Materials provided by National Instruments
0
0
$10,000
Printing of project poster
8
0
$70
Purchase of EE 201 lab manual
0
0
$15
0
0
$30
8
0
$10,115
Purchase of EE 201 parts kit
Total
Cost
Table 3.6 shows the actual resource costs incurred during the project. Later in the
semester, the team was informed the commercial version of ELVIS would only cost
$2,000 so the cost of two ELVIS systems was subsequently reduced. The Electrical and
Computer Engineering Department was also generous enough to donate a copy of the EE
201 lab manual. Also, several team members were able to find their EE 201 parts kit used
when they were enrolled in the class so those costs could be negated.
Table 3.6 – Actual Required Resource Costs
Item
Team Hours
Other Hours
Materials provided by National Instruments
0
0
$4,000
Printing of project poster
8
0
$63
Purchase of EE 201 lab manual
0
0
$0
0
0
$0
8
0
$4,063
Purchase of EE 201 parts kit
Total
13
Cost
Financial Requirements
In an effort to make the financial estimates of the senior design project more true to real
world company funded projects, the element of labor costs was factored in. Table 3.7
shows the initial project cost estimate with and without labor.
Table 3.7 – Initial Project Cost Estimates
Item
W/O Labor
With Labor
$10,000
$10,000
Parts and materials
Materials provided by National Instruments
Printing of project poster
$100
$100
Purchase of EE 201 lab manual
$15
$15
Purchase of EE 201 parts kit
$30
$30
$10,145
$10,145
Subtotal
Labor at $11 per hour
Michael Ballou
$1,265
Ryan Hankins
$1,122
Jason Salz
$1,155
David Schmidt
$1,320
Dayu Zhou
$1,199
Subtotal
Total
$6,061
$10,145
$22,267
Table 3.8 shows the revised project cost estimate after the project plan was formalized.
Table 3.8 – Revised Project Cost Estimates
Item
W/O Labor
With Labor
Parts and materials
Materials provided by National Instruments
$10,000
$10,000
Printing of project poster
$70
$70
Purchase of EE 201 lab manual
$15
$15
Purchase of EE 201 parts kit
Subtotal
$30
$30
$10,115
$10,115
Labor at $11 per hour
Michael Ballou
$1,155
Ryan Hankins
$1,133
Jason Salz
$1,100
David Schmidt
$1,155
Dayu Zhou
$1,089
Subtotal
Total
$5,632
$10,115
$21,379
Table 3.9 shows the actual cost of the project after the final cost of equipment and the
final number of hours worked became known.
14
Table 3.9 – Actual Project Costs
Item
W/O Labor
With Labor
$4,000
$4,000
$63
$63
Purchase of EE 201 lab manual
$0
$0
Purchase of EE 201 parts kit
$0
$0
$4,063
$4,063
Parts and materials
Materials provided by National Instruments
Printing of project poster
Subtotal
Labor at $11 per hour
Michael Ballou
$803
Ryan Hankins
$583
Jason Salz
$693
David Schmidt
$726
Dayu Zhou
$737
Subtotal
Total
15
$3,542
$4,063
$11,147
3.2 Schedules
Figure 3.1 is a Gantt chart detailing the original project schedule. The schedule details the
estimated times for all major project deliverables.
Figure 3.1 – Original Project Schedule
16
Figure 3.2 is the revised project schedule. The overall schedule change very little from
the original plan.
Figure 3.2 – Revised Project Schedule
17
Figure 3.3 shows the final project schedule. Changes were made in the “Project
Development” task to reflect the fact that no new virtual instruments were to be
developed. Instead more time was devoted to creating a new lab used to demonstrate
some unique capabilities present in ELVIS as well as more time spent on the conversion
documentation.
Figure 3.3 – Final Project Schedule
18
Figure 3.4 details the specific tasks undertaken in order to complete the “Project Plan”
deliverable as required by senior design. The team was slow to begin work on the project
and missed the first deliverable deadline. The team made a big push to get the deliverable
completed as soon as possible. This was the only deadline missed.
Figure 3.4 – Project Plan Schedule
Figure 3.5 details the specific tasks undertaken in order to complete the “Project Poster”
deliverable as required by senior design. Work was completed on schedule.
Figure 3.5 – Project Poster Schedule
Figure 3.6 details the specific tasks undertaken in order to complete the “Project Design”
deliverable as required by senior design. Work was completed on schedule.
Figure 3.6 – Project Design Schedule
19
Figure 3.7 details the specific tasks undertaken in order to complete the “Final Report”
deliverable as required by senior design. Work was completed on schedule.
Figure 3.7 – Final Report Schedule
Figure 3.8 details the specific tasks undertaken in order to complete the “Project
Documentation” deliverable that was the primary product produced as required by this
project. The documentation is an instructional guide for use in evaluating ELVIS for use
in a laboratory curriculum.
Figure 3.8 – Product Documentation Schedule
20
4 Closing
4.1 Project Evaluation
The following items are the measurable milestones of the project, with descriptions of
evaluation process and results:
o Analyze necessary virtual instruments (100%)
During the last semester and the beginning of this semester, the team became familiar
with the virtual instruments provided by National Instrument. The team read through
the user manual from NI and experimented with the virtual instruments and the
benchtop workstation. Since the team carried out several current EE 201 labs with
ELVIS already, this milestone was completed successfully.
o Completion of necessary documentation (100%)
The team will have two documents ready at the end of the project. The first is the lab
manual for EE 201 lab with the ELVIS system. The second is the conversion manual
for lab instructors. The team has already finished several lab instructions. The success
of this milestone is measured by the completeness and readability of the documents.
The team has finished 50% of the total documents.
o Completion of testing (100%)
Testing of the virtual instruments with the current labs has already been completed.
The team will test the virtual instrument with the new labs as they are developed. The
ease of use and comprehension for all newly written documents indicates the success
of the milestone. The team has successfully completed 80% of the testing tasks.
o Working demonstration of ELVIS (100%)
ELVIS is working with the current EE 201 labs under the limitation of this version of
the ELVIS product. The team will demonstrate that it also works with the new labs
developed. The success is also measured by how well ELVIS was used to complete
the EE 201 labs. The team has successfully completed 80% of the demonstration.
4.2 Commercialization
The main goal of the project was to determine if the ELVIS system was applicable to the
electrical engineering laboratories. The team chose to apply ELVIS to the EE 201 labs. If
the conversion were a success then ELVIS would be commercially viable to the ECpE
Department. The estimated cost for the final version of ELVIS is $2000. Although this
21
seems like a lot of money for one piece of equipment it is important to note that ELVIS
can replace the oscilloscopes, multimeters, function generators, and variable power
supplies. The total cost of these four pieces of lab equipment easily cost thousands of
dollars more than ELVIS. Due to the wide variety of functions that ELVIS conveniently
supplies, it can be easily incorporated into any lab environment.
4.3 Recommendations for Additional Work
While the group was working with the ELVIS prototype there were a few things that we
needed to complete a couple of the labs that were missing. These were things within the
ELVIS hardware that could not be fixed by the senior design group. The group later
acquired a document that showed that the current measuring and inductance measuring
features of ELVIS were not included in the pilot version that we used for our project will
be added in the final product. As far as the documentation is concerned, there are only
three labs that have been entirely converted to use ELVIS, while the rest have
instructions for conversion. These remaining labs will need revised instructions at some
point in the future.
4.4 Lessons Learned
The main lesson that was learned is that the team was able to get more work done and
progress faster when the team worked together on a section of the project. For example,
when the group tried dividing up labs for each member to do, the team could not get the
labs to work right and the project did not go anywhere. Then when the team got together
to do the lab the team not only completed two labs in two meetings, but the team also
tested a variety of accuracy levels for ELVIS including measurements for resistance,
capacitance, and voltage readings. Due to the accuracy problems with ELVIS it became
more important for the group to understand the purpose of each lab. At times the group
became more concerned with whether or not the correct idea was being implemented
instead of repeating a calculated solution. This meant that the team had to analyze the
existing EE 201 lab instructions with much more detail than a normal person would if
they were doing the lab.
Group members also had to become familiar with the ELVIS breadboard. It was not
always obvious which pins are supposed to be used for the different features of ELVIS.
Also, it was not always easy to tell where the labels line up with the pins. After using
ELVIS over the course of the two semesters, it became easier to work with and wiring the
correct pins was second nature.
If the project could be done over again, the main change would be the version of ELVIS
that the group was provided with. If the group could have worked with the final version
of ELVIS it would have been much easier to complete all of the labs. Two of the labs
could not be converted due to the fact that the pilot version of ELVIS does not have a
current measuring capability.
22
4.5 Risk and Risk Management
Since the senior design team was presented with only one ELVIS system, the primary
risk of the project was if ELVIS quit working. There was also a risk of the parts that the
group was using giving us the wrong values. The team avoided this by testing the parts
before we used them and then keeping them separate from the rest of the lab kit so that
they could be used to rebuild the circuit, if necessary.
4.6 Project Team Information
 Client:
National Instruments
11500 N Mopac Expressway
Austin, TX 78759-3504
David Gardner
512-683-5458
Fax: 512-683-6837
Randy Hoskin
512-683-0809
Fax: 512-683-5678
 Faculty Advisors:
Mina, Mani
Office Address:
341 Durham
Ames, IA 50011-2252
Office Phone: 515-294-3918
Fax: 515-294-8432
[email protected]
Rover, Diane
Office Address:
3227 Coover
Ames, IA 50011-3060
Office Phone: 515-294-7454
[email protected]
 Group Members:
Ballou, Michael
3336 Frederiksen Ct
Ames, IA 50010
515-572-8077
[email protected]
Computer Engineering
23
Hankins, Ryan
1318 Woodstock
Ames, IA 50014
515-292-5135
[email protected]
Electrical Engineering
Salz, Jason
1551 Helser MacDonald
Ames, IA 50012
515-572-2755
[email protected]
Electrical Engineering
Schmidt, David
3336 Frederiksen Ct
Ames, IA 50010
515-572-8077
[email protected]
Computer Engineering
Zhou, Dayu
212 N Franklin Ave
Ames, IA 50014
515-292-2165
[email protected]
Electrical Engineering
4.7 Closing Summary
The purpose of the project was to attempt to incorporate ELVIS into an electrical
engineering lab. The team chose to use the EE 201 labs to achieve this goal. With some
minor setbacks, the team was able to use ELVIS to complete three of the labs from the
manual. The team chose lab 1 because it was the simplest lab and the team completed it
while the team was still becoming accustomed to using ELVIS. Then the team chose to
do lab 5, which utilized all of the functions provided by ELVIS except for the variable
power supply. Then the team chose to do lab 6, an operational amplifier lab. These three
labs best represent the full capabilities that ELVIS provides. With the information that the
group gathered from completely converting these three labs, the team can easily create
instructions for converting the remaining labs. ELVIS is an extremely versatile tool and
would be a valuable addition to all electrical engineering labs.
24
Appendix A – Sample Labs
EE 201 - Lab 1
LAB EXERCISE 1: Oscilloscope Operation
This is a programmed learning instruction manual. It is written for the National Instruments
Educational Laboratory Virtual Instrumentation Suite (ELVIS) Lab Development, its
prerequisite is a general physics background. No prior knowledge of or experience with
oscilloscopes is needed. As you do each step, it is suggested that you place a check mark by it.
Record comments and observations on these sheets. Your completed book is your personalized
manual for this instrument. Save it for future use – virtually all of our laboratories are equipped
with an oscilloscope.
We use programmed learning for this because it allows you to set your own rate of progress. Act
accordingly. Repeat steps if necessary. Go back if necessary. Get help if necessary.
Record important information in your lab notebook. Make a brief statement about each step in
your notebook.
Read the ELVIS operating manual before beginning the lab work.
Laboratory Work
Introduction
A.
Open the NI ELVIS software by double clicking on the icon on the desktop.
Click on the oscilloscope icon to bring up the virtual oscilloscope.
B.
Study the virtual interface of the ELVIS oscilloscope on the computer: in
particular note the location of:
1. The VERTICAL or y-axis controls
2. The TRIGGER controls
3. The TIMEBASE controls
4. The SOURCE controls
C.
Before you begin the actual use of the oscilloscope, a brief look at ELVIS is
necessary.
D.
Perform the following steps to familiarize yourself with the virtual
instruments.
25
1. Turn the power on the ELVIS workstation.
2. Click on the Function Generator icon to bring up the virtual function
generator.
3. Click on the up and down arrows on the different controls to get familiar
with changing the settings for the controls on the virtual oscilloscope.
4. Set the source on the oscilloscope to FGEN Func Out.
5. Click the On icon on the Function Generator.
6. Set the Frequency on the Function Generator to 1Khz and the peak
amplitude to 2V.
7. Make sure the oscilloscopes Trigger is set to Ch A. Click on the up and
down arrows on the trigger settings. Note the change in the waveform on
the oscilloscope.
8. Click on the different frequency settings on the function generator, note
the change in the oscilloscope waveform.
26
Using the Virtual Oscilloscope as a DC Voltmeter
E.
To use the oscilloscope as a DC voltmeter, first center the horizontal line on
the grid of the oscilloscope by rotating vertical position icon on the
oscilloscope.
F.
Set the remaining controls as follows:
Vertical controls
Set the source of the virtual oscilloscope to BNC/Board Ch A
Set the Scale to 5V/DIV
Horizontal controls
Set the time base controls on the virtual oscilloscope to 50 s
Trigger controls
Source: CH A
Type: Analog (SW)
Slope:
Level: 0 V
27
G.
We will use the virtual oscilloscope to measure the output voltage of the
variable power supply using the ELVIS software. Click on the Variable Power
Supplies icon.
1. Study the power supply interface. Note that the interface is equipped
with controls for positive and negative output voltages.
2. Click on the up and down arrows of the Variable Power Supply and note
the effect on the output level indicated on the interface.
28
3. Adjust the output voltage control to zero and connect the variable power
supply output pins to the oscilloscope input pins for channel A in the
ELVIS bread board.
4. Click on the up and down arrows of the variable power supply and note
the effect on the waveform on the oscilloscope.
5. Set the positive output voltage to 10 V. Notice the waveform is a straight
line, is this consistent with what the output should be? Now set the
negative output voltage to 5 V. What happened?
6. Close the variable voltage supply interface.
The virtual oscilloscope as an AC Voltmeter
H.
Now we will use the virtual oscilloscope to measure time varying voltages.
Periodic voltages will be used: these signals are repeated at regular intervals.
They may be developed by oscillators or function generators. Oscillators
develop voltages that vary sinusoidally with respect to time. Function
Generators develop sinusoids, square waves, triangular waves, ramps
(sawtooths), and other waveforms. We will be using a virtual function
generator with the ELVIS software.
The virtual function generator is equipped with
1. an off-on icon
2. function icons to control:
type of waveform (wave shape)
frequency waveform (Hz, kHz)
amplitude waveform (V)
3. a digital display which shows the waveform’s parameters
I.
Set the virtual oscilloscope controls as follows:
29
Vertical Controls
Channel A: ON, 2V/DIV
Channel B: ON, 2V/DIV
Trigger Controls
Source: CH B
Type: Analog(SW)
Slope:
Level: 0 V
J.
Adjust the output voltage control to zero and connect the variable power
supply output pins to the oscilloscope input pins for channel A in the ELVIS
bread board.
K.
Set the source controls on the virtual oscilloscope for channel B to FGEN
Func Out.
L.
Open the virtual function generator and set the frequency to 1 Hz by clicking
on the icon that is labeled 1 Hz. Adjust the peak amplitude to 2 V.
M.
The voltage being applied is Vmsinωt, and in this case Vm is 2volts. The
angular frequency, ω, is equal to 2πf, where f = 1 Hz. Ω is measured in
radians/second (rad/s).
N.
Turn on the power supply and adjust the voltage to 0V. Rotate the positive
knob on the front of the ELVIS workstation for the variable power supply at a
uniform rate, and return it to zero. Do this several times, at various rates.
O.
Increase the frequency on the function generator to 1 kHz. Again, rotate the
voltage knobs. Can you achieve a display similar to Figure 4? Why?
30
P.
Disconnect the variable power supply and close the window for the variable
power supply.
Q.
Click the ON icon on the virtual oscilloscope for channel A. The display
should now read OFF. Make sure the display for channel B is still on.
R.
Set the time base on the oscilloscope to 100s/div. You should now have one
cycle of a sine waveform displayed on the oscilloscope.
S.
Change the frequency to 500Hz on the function generator and adjust the time
base on the oscilloscope until you get one or two complete cycles on the
oscilloscope screen. Change the frequency to 10,000 Hz and repeat. Notice
how convenient it is to observe a signal of almost any frequency.
31
EE 201 - Lab 5
Lab Exercise 5: Voltage and Phase Measurements in an RC Circuit
Laboratory Work
1.
Build the RC circuit that you analyzed in the pre-lab. Make sure to check the
resistors and the capacitor for accuracy before you begin the rest of the lab.
2.
Use an input of 1 Vrms
from the function generator. The + terminal of the
function generator should come from Func Out, while the minus terminal comes from
the DC ground on the ELVIS bread board.
3.
Measure the output voltage of the circuit with the digital multimeter. Make sure that
you are reading AC volts
with the multimeter. The multimeter should be
wired in parallel with the capacitor and resistor load.
4.
Using the oscilloscope you can measure the time delay of the circuit. Wire channel A
across the load as you did with the multimeter in part 3.
a. The oscilloscope can be used to measure the output voltage of the circuit as well,
but tends to be less accurate than the multimeter.
b. It is easier to use the single option
to get a measurement for t, but
make sure to click on the single option every time you change the frequency to
refresh the screen.
c. Use the cursors to measure t.
Good locations to place the
cursors are either at the max points of the two waveforms or at the x-axis
crossings.
5.
For channel B use the FGEN Func Out selection from the channel menu on the
oscilloscope screen. This will plot the input voltage.
6.
Now calculate Hdb and  using Vo and t.
a. Hdb = 20log10|Vo/Vi|
b.  = 360*f*t
7.
Create a table, using Excel, of your values to include the following f, t, Vo, Hdb, and
. Your variable is f. Start with a value of f that gave you  close to –45. Ten well32
spaced points should be sufficient. When using the function generator, be sure you
are in the appropriate “Range”
attempting to create.
category for the frequency you are
8.
Plot Hdb vs. f and  vs. f on the same graph from your pre-lab. Compare your actual
results with the results that you calculated in the pre-lab.
9.
Now using an advanced feature of the function generator, view the change in Vo as
the frequency increases.
a. On the function generator, click the MODE button so it is in ADVANCED mode.
b. In the new panel that opens below the main function generator window, set the
“Start Frequency” to 100 Hz and the “Stop Frequency” to 10,000 Hz. Set the
“Step (Hz)” value to 100 Hz.
c. Make sure the oscilloscope is on the screen and then click the “Start” button to
begin the sweep.
d. Observe on the oscilloscope how as the frequency increases the output signal
begins to lose strength the higher the frequency gets.
33
EE 201 - Lab 6
Lab Exercise 6: Operation Amplifier Circuits
Laboratory Work
1. Build an inverting amplifier circuit with a gain (Vo/Vi) of –47. Let 1k  Ri  10k.
2. Use the function generator for Vi. Use a frequency of 100 Hz.
3. Use the Variable Power Supply for the DC cutoff voltages on the oscilloscope. The +
terminal should have +12 V and the – terminal should have –12 volts.
4. Wire the + terminal of the oscilloscope to the output pin of the op amp. Wire the –
terminal of the oscilloscope to the DC ground. This will give you a plot of the output
voltage for the circuit. Use the FGEN Func Out option for channel B and measure t the
same as you did in lab 5. Also check the gain of the circuit using the oscilloscope.
e.  = 360*f*t
5. Begin with Vi = .21 Vp-p and a sinusoidal wave.
a. Observe the shape and amplitude of Vo to other Vi. Try varying the amplitude,
frequency, and waveform of Vi. Use the log function
on the
oscilloscope to record the different waveforms plotted by the oscilloscope. Later
in this lab you will use Excel to make a plot of these waveforms.
b. What happens to the gain as the frequency increases into the 10-20 kHz range?
c. Why is it not good practice to use a square wave to measure the gain?
34
6. Logging
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
Click on log on the oscilloscope
Save the file (typically to the desktop so it is easy to find)
Open Excel and open the text file that you just saved
Select delimited
Select tab, comma, and space
Select finish
The first 4 rows are not needed and can be deleted
Move the column headers over the correct columns
Delete columns A and D
Highlight the column you wish to plot
Use a line graph to plot the data
The plot should look the same as the oscilloscope screen when you clicked on log
35
Potato Battery Laboratory
Laboratory Work
1. Cut your three potatoes in half.
2. Strip the ends of six pieces of wire, two per potato. The strips of wire should be roughly
8 in. in length. Strip about 2 in. of insulation off the ends of the wires.
3. To make one potato battery you will need:
a.
b.
c.
d.
2 halves of a potato
2 galvanized nails
2 pennies
3 wires
4. Wrap one wire around each of the nails
5. Insert the nails into the potato. The wires connected to the nails do not need to be in or
touching the potato.
6. Wrap the last wire around one of the pennies and insert the penny into one of the halves
of the potato.
7. Now one potato has a penny in it and a nail in it, both with wires wrapped around them.
Using the wire connected to the nail, wrap the last penny. Insert that penny into the
potato that just has a nail in it.
Figure A.1 – Potato Wiring
36
8. Your battery should resemble figure 1. Repeat these steps to build the other two potato
batteries.
9. Attach two wires from one potato battery to the multimeter. Which end of the battery is
the + terminal? Which end is the – terminal?
10. Fill in table 1 with the measured data from the multimeter, using the batteries that you
have built.
Table A.1 – Potato Voltage and Current
voltage current
1 potato
2 potato
series
parallel
3 potato
series
parallel
11. In order to power an LED you need a minimum of 2 mA. Using the data that you have
collected, what do you think the best method for doing this would be?
12. Position the nail farther away from the penny in the potato with either of the 3 potato
connections. What happens to the voltage and current readings?
37