Multi-Unit Ultrasonic Animal Containment System

Final Report

Submitted to Dr. Stanislav Kesler and the Senior Design Project Committee
of the
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department
Drexel University

Team Number: ECE-15

Team Members:

James Pocius Electrical Engineering RF Track

Jeet Som Computer Engineering CE Track
Herbert Hauls Electrical Engineering DSP/Communications Tracks
Brad Thomas Electrical Engineering Electronics Track

Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the Senior Design Project

May 17, 2006

Abstract
There are currently many methods of animal containment on the consumer market. Some
of the newer systems utilize wireless communication in the form of RF signals. However, these
units lack mobility, are expensive, and require professional installation. Thus, there is sufficient
motivation for a mobile, user friendly animal containment that allows for free range animal
movement.
Our design, the Multi-Unit Ultrasonic Animal Containment System, addresses this need
for an alternative method of animal containment. The source of the project is a pending patent
application, which outlines a method of animal containment. The document establishes a
containment approach using ultrasonic signals and their propagation delay to measure and
determine distance. The desired outcome of the project is two main communicating units with
an option for a third unit that provides system status feedback to the human user of the system.
We have designed a system composed of a transmitting and a receiving unit. These units
are similar in design, in that both utilize a development board which contains a microcontroller
and radio frequency transceiver. Ultrasonic transducers operating at 24 kHz were used to
provide the signals necessary for defining the containment parameter boundaries. Associated
drive and conditioning circuitry was used to generate the signals necessary for transmission and
calculation. The transmit portion of the design uses a microcontroller to generate a driving
signal for the transmitting transducers. This signal is then received by the receiving unit and
processed via a microcontroller. This microcontroller is capable of performing time-distance
calculations to determine the distance of the transmitted signals and blink corresponding LED’s
as to what distance the signal is propagating from.
One setback of the design is attributed to the RF subsystem of the project. This was
primarily due to a lack of the software needed to properly code the send and receive capabilities
of the development boards used for the design. In an effort to simulate RF communication, we
connected the send and receive units via a length of wire. The wire provided the essential
functions that the RF communication would have, namely periodic clock synchronization of the
two microcontrollers. As a side effect of the lack of RF, the optional monitoring unit was also
unable to be realized since this unit relies primarily on RF communication.
Besides the RF setback, we have maintained the scheduling presented in previous project
documents. The budget was updated to reflect the final cost of the project, including the prices
of all components and equipment purchased throughout the span of the project. We were well
within the proposed budget because we used less expensive transducers and designed the
associated transducer drive and receive electronics instead of purchasing it. The device that we
were able to design and build lays a foundation for the most important concepts of the prototype,
namely the use of ultrasonic transducers to define boundaries associated with a containment
parameter, and performs initial distance measuring calculations between the transmitted and
received signals.

i
Table of Contents

Abstract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ii

Figures and Tables List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iii

1. Problem Description, Goals, and Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

2. Statement of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1. Method of Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
2.2. System Units. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. System Operation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
2.4. System Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

3. Scheduling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

4. Economic Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

5. Ethical, Environmental, and Social Impacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

6. Conclusion and Future Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

7. References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Appendix A: System Functionality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Appendix B: Texas Instruments Development Board. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Appendix C: 24kHz Transducer Specifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Appendix D: MPS Circuit Schematic. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Appendix E: EC Circuit Schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Appendix F: Code. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Appendix G: LED Descriptions. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Appendix H: 50kHz Transducer Datasheet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Appendix I: Schedule for Team 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Appendix J: Prototype Budget. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Appendix K: Industry Budget. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Appendix L: Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Appendix M: Resumes of Team Members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

ii
Figures and Tables List
Figures List:

Figure 1: Generalized Method of Solution for Transmission and Reception. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Figure 2: Transmitting Microcontroller output pulse train at 25.97 kHz, Vpp = 3.062. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 3: Driving Signal, f = 10 Hz, Vpp 2.812 V. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Figure 4: Driving Signal from comparator/NAND output stage, f = 25.64 kHz, Vpp = 6.062 V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Figure 5: Received Ultrasonic Signal, f = 24.39 kHz, Vpp = 209.4 mV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Figure 6: Output of comparator, f = 24.39 kHz, Vpp = 5.312 V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Figure 7: Output of NAND gate, f = 25.81 kHz, Vpp = 5.875 V. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Figure 8: CMOS level output signal, f = 26.49 kHz, Vpp = 2.875 V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Figure 9: System Functionality Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Figure 10: TI Development Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Figure 11: Transducer Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Figure 12: MPS Circuitry Schematic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Figure 13: EC Circuitry Schematic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Figure 14: 50 kHz Datasheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Figure 15: Team 15 Time Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Tables List:

Table 1: MSP430F449 Port Positions and Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.....5

Table 2: MPS and EC Power Budgets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Table 3: Individualized Team Member Project Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Table 4: Design Team Final Out-of-Pocket Costs . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Table 5: Out-of-Pocket Budget. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Table 6: Industry Budget. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

iii
1. Problem Description, Goals, and Deliverables
Pet owners use various methods to contain their animals outdoors. The most common
containment methods include the use of fences (wooden/aluminum), chains, and more recently,
electronic buried-wire containment systems. However, all of these current methods have
mobility limitations. Fences and perimeters established by the electronic buried-wire system are
both fixed. The use of a chain limits the range an animal can travel, as well as being prone to
tangling. Our design would alleviate the immobility of other methods, as well as avoid the cost
of materials and professional installation for electronic buried-wire systems and traditional
fences. Thus, our design allows for the mobile containment of an animal without the use of a
leash. Our system will serve as a compliment and/or replacement to existing systems, and also
act as an alternative when the above systems cannot be used, for example at a public park or
field. The proposed design goals of the system include:

• contain an animal up to a 50 foot range using ultrasonic propagation to measure distance

• use an ultrasonic frequency outside of the hearing range of dogs
• consist of two to three mobile units
• be lightweight, for easy transportation
• have sufficient power, allowing for reasonable usage times
• have a low cost (to serve as an attractive alternative/addition to current containment
methods)

The system deliverables included two main units: the mobile perimeter stake (MPS) and
an electronic collar (EC) attached to the animal. An optional monitoring unit (MU) used by the
human user was also proposed. A description of each device is below:

MPS
The MPS is a transmitter of ultrasonic (US) signals and a relay for state information from the EC
to the MU, and serves as the center of the system. The primary function of MPS is to emit an
omni-directional US wave of a specific frequency and duration at regular intervals. Radio
frequency (RF) communication is received from the EC with data about the state of the EC. The
information will be relayed by RF to the MU. This device is to be implanted into the ground.
Due to limitations in RF development, we were unable to utilize any RF communication between
the system units. This will be further explained in the progress section.

EC
The EC is a receiver for the US signals transmitted by the MPS. Using time US time delay, the
distance from the MPS to the collar will be calculated. Then, the EC will apply an appropriate
audible stimulus by comparing the current distance data and the preset perimeter distance. If a
detection event does not occur after a pre-determined timeout period, EC will transmit a RF
signal notifying the MPS there has been a lapse in communication, which will then be relayed to
the MU. This unit is meant to be worn by the animal to be contained. Due to limitations in RF
development, we were unable to utilize any RF communication between the system units. This
will be further explained in the progress section.

1
MU
The MU is an optional user notification system that will display the current state of the system.
The display will notify the user whether the EC is within the perimeter, outside of the perimeter,
or if it is not receiving an US signal. The MU is updated using data from the RF signal from the
MPS. This unit is meant for human monitoring of the system. Due to limitations in RF
development, this optional unit was not able to be realized. However, since it was stated that this
unit was optional, it does not serve as a major detriment to the project outcome.

A system overview of the units mentioned above is attached as Appendix A. The

actualized deliverables include the MPS unit and the EC unit that are described above. The stake
unit is composed of a wire wrapped prototype board, interfaced with the prefabricated
development board (see Appendix B), which drives the transmitting transducers (see Appendix
C). The wire-wrapped prototype board consists of a comparator and CMOS output circuitry used
to produce a square wave to drive the transmitting transducers. The prefabricated development
board contains the MSP430 microcontroller (µC), the TRF6903 RF transceiver (RFT), as well as
the input/output communication headers. The EC unit is also composed of a wire-wrapped
prototype board, interfaced with the prefabricated development board, and a receiving
transducer. This prototype board consists of an amplifier, comparator and CMOS output
circuitry. As in the stake unit, the prefabricated development board contains the same MSP430
microcontroller and TRF6903 RFT, as well as the input/output communication headers. It also
contains the indicator LEDs which show the state/distance, and a button used to toggle between
the status and distance display. While the RF transceivers on each board are fully functional, we
were not able to program the necessary code needed to initiate communication between the MPS
and EC units. This was due to development environment limitation caused by budgetary
constraints, which will be discussed later in the report. The MPS and EC units above will also be
described in further detail in the Statement of Work section.
The optional third MU unit was meant to act as a unit for human user feedback.
Essentially this unit would relay status information about the system to the human user, such as
low battery and lost signal conditions. Due to time and budgetary constraints related to the RF
development, we were unable to design and build this optional unit.

2. Statement of Work
The final development of our experimental prototype consists of two main parts: the
transmitting MPS unit and the receiving EC unit. These units are primarily composed of US
transducers, the µC development boards, and appropriate signal conditioning and/or drive
circuitry.

2.1 Method of Solution

The proposed Multi-Unit Ultrasonic Animal Containment System (MUACS) is composed

of two primary communicating units, a mobile perimeter stake (MPS) and an electronic collar
(EC). At the onset of the project, we were aware of several of the hardware and software
challenges that we would encounter during the design and construction of the transmit and
receive units. From the hardware perspective, this included developing appropriate driving
circuitry on the transmit unit. This was needed to achieve sufficient ultrasonic signal
transmission distance. Another major hardware consideration was conditioning the signal to be

2
able to be input into the microcontroller. We utilized several of the prescribed configurations in
the data sheets of the components we used to help us with the design of the necessary circuitry.
The MPS and EC units have US signal production and detection circuitry, respectively. This
send and receive circuitry is similar in design and components, which is to be expected of a
transmit/receive system. The µC is used primarily for control and calculation purposes. The EC
and the MPS units both have US transducers and µC’s as the center point of the respective
send/receive device. The block diagram in Figure 1 below shows the general operation of the
transmit and receive stages of the design:

Figure 1: Generalized Method of Solution for Transmission and Reception

The software concerns at the onset of the project mainly dealt with the ability to
accurately measure the time difference between the sent and received signal. This was crucial to
be able to accurately convert this to a relative distance, which then would serve to define the
boundary of the system. A major consideration here was how to keep the transmit and receive
µC’s synchronized. We also had to have a signal frequency of 10 Hz, or a period of 100 ms, to
match the 100 ms speed of sound approximation prescribed in the patent. Interfacing of the µC
development board with the hardware components was utilized via the communication ports on
the development boards. To program the TI MSP430 µC, a JTAG connector was purchased to
interface the computer to the development board. We first used the free Code Compiler
Essentials (CCE) compiler program provided by TI for programming the µC. However, CCE
was slow and inefficient in developing our code. We began using a 30 day trial version of IAR
software, which is a third party software developer for the MSP430 µC’s. Several TI application
notes documents were found that helped write programs to allow the µC to perform the actions
we needed it to do. The IAR program allowed the use of the C programming language as well as
assembly language. This was critical for the design, since we are most familiar with the C
programming language. To connect the hardware and software stages, a wire was connected
between the necessary development board inputs and output ports to the various hardware stages.

3
 After the hardware and software issues were considered, we then conducted an
approximate power consumption budget of the different components of the system. We used the
current rating of the batteries that are being used in the design, as well as the pertinent current
values from the various component datasheets. This analysis will be further explained in the
System Operation section.

2.2 System Units

As stated above, the final design consists of the transmitting MPS unit and the receiving
EC unit. As mentioned, the hardware electronics of the two units is similar in construction. The
software of the two units is different in that the receive side needs more functionality to process
the received signal. Without the use of RF communication, we had to utilize some of the
communication ports located on the output headers of the development board. We also used the
communication ports to interface the inputs and outputs of the µC’s to the inputs and outputs of
the hardware electronics. The sections below describe the specific components and computer
code used in each of the two units.

MPS
The MPS unit is meant to serve as the central transmitting unit of the system. It is
composed of the µC development board, a wire-wrapped prototype board that contains the
necessary signal production circuitry, and the “stake” that houses the US transducers. The
transmit software uses a µC output port to produce a 24 kHz signal that drives the transducers.
This driving pulse train itself has a frequency of 24 kHz, but the pulses are periodic at a
frequency of 10 Hz, or 100 ms, to maintain our speed of sound approximation. This signal is
then fed into the transmit circuitry. The transmit circuitry consists of a comparator/NAND gate
stage that establishes a square wave output that is higher than the µC is capable of producing.
The comparator ensures that that the square wave signal(s) ride the power supply rails. The
comparator/NAND gate stage is composed of a LM339 comparator and a CD4011 NAND gate
chip, respectively. The LM339 and CD4011 are both quad packages. We connected the four
comparator outputs to four of the NAND gate inputs, and then used the corresponding NAND
gate outputs to drive the US transducers in the MPS unit. The schematic for this circuitry is
attached as Appendix D.

EC
The EC unit serves as the receiving unit of the system. It is composed of the same µC
development board that is in the MPS unit, a wire-wrapped prototype board that contains the
necessary signal conditioning circuitry, and the receiving US transducer. It also contains the
code that performs the distance/time calculations, and flashes corresponding distance indicating
LEDs.
The received transducer signal is fed into the receive circuitry, which consists of an
amplifier stage and a comparator/NAND gate stage that produces a CMOS compatible output
necessary for the µC. The amplifier stage utilizes a LM324 operational amplifier, while the
comparator/NAND gate stage uses a LM311 comparator and a CD4011 NAND gate chip,
respectively. The schematic is attached as Appendix E. The converted CMOS signal is then sent
into the µC input port. The software takes the conditioned input signal and processes it for
pertinent time/distance measurements.

4
 The software used in the EC unit is more advanced than that in the MPS unit. The
software in the EC has to perform the time/distance calculations between the sent and received
signal. Since this is a development board, many of these communication ports are already being
utilized to some capacity. We originally began programming on Port 1, because this port allows
interrupts. However, because this port was pre-wired to other components on the development
board, we were unable to use it for communication and signal processing. We thus shifted the
communication to Port 5, which is easily accessed via the input/output headers on our
development board. We utilize this port for the simulated RF link between the two units, as well
as for interfacing with the custom signal conditioning circuitry. As mentioned, since we are
unable to use interrupt enabled Port 1, we had to substitute the use of interrupts with a technique
known as polling. Polling is a process of manually checking values for changes on a repetitive
basis, as a part of the main program loop [1]. The timing of our system allows us to use polling
without having any negative side effects, such as creating unacceptable system latencies. The
code used to do this is attached as Appendix F. The utilized ports are shown below in Table 1:

MSP430F449 PORT POSITIONS AND FUNCTIONS

MPS Development Board EC Development Board
HEADER PIN (J3) PORT FUNCTION HEADER PIN (J3) PORT FUNCTION
5 5.4 Output (Transmit) 5 5.4 Input (Receive)
31 6.5 Simulated RF TRANSMIT 31 6.5 Simulated RF TRANSMIT
37 5.0 Simulated RF RECEIVE 37 5.0 Simulated RF RECEIVE
39 GROUND GROUND 39 GROUND GROUND
40 GROUND GROUND 40 GROUND GROUND
Table 1: MSP430F449 Port Positions and Functions

In general, with the development board (containing the µC and RFT) and US transducers,
we have been able to successfully create the two main units of the system, the MPS and the EC.
We were able to generate necessary code and circuitry to construct an initial prototype. This
includes the aforementioned methods, such as programming the µC to produce an appropriately
oscillating square signal at the desired frequency of 24 kHz, amplifying this signal to a drive a
UST. The received signal is then amplified and converted to a CMOS level to be input to the µC.
The µC then performs the necessary time-distance calculations. This process will be described
in more detail in the following System Operation section.

2.3 System Operation

This section details the entire send/receive process between the MPS and EC units. It
outlines the send/receive process step-by-step, with visuals of the system operation provided by
oscilloscope captures of the various signals.

Step-by-Step Transmit and Receive Process

First, the MPS µC generates a 2.7-3.0 V (depending on battery levels) square wave pulse
train at 24 kHz out of output Port 5.4 on the input/output headers of the µC board. This is shown
in Figure 2 below:

5
Figure 2: Transmitting Microcontroller output pulse train at 25.97 kHz, Vpp = 3.062

As shown above, the µC output signal has a Vpp = 3.062 V, at a frequency of 25.97 kHz.
To obtain the required timing ratio of 100 ms, which correlates to the speed of sound, the pulse
train had to match this frequency. Figure 3 below shows this periodic function. Note that you
cannot see the 5 pulses as shown in Figure 2 above because the time scale was increased.
However, the pulse lines shown show that the signal is periodic with a frequency of exactly 10
Hz, or 100.00 ms.

Figure 3: Driving Signal, f = 10 Hz, Vpp 2.812 V

This above signal had a Vpp = 2.812 V (not shown), at a frequency of 10.00 Hz, which
conforms to the 100 ms periodicity required for our speed of sound approximation. This signal
is the initial driving signal used to excite the US transducers.

The signal in Figure 3 above is then input into the comparator/NAND gate stage to
increase the voltage level of the signal to that of the supply rails. This then generates the pulsed
square wave output shown below in Figure 4, which is then used to drive the US transducers that
comprise the MPS unit.

6
Figure 4: Driving Signal from comparator/NAND output stage, f = 25.64 kHz, Vpp = 6.062 V

As shown above, the µC output signal has a Vpp = 6.062 V, at a frequency of 25.64 kHz.
This signal is used to drive the transducers on the MPS housing, and is the final output signal of
the MPS unit. The transducers become excited with this signal and begin producing acoustic US
waves, according to the pulse pattern of the driving signal shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3 above.
These acoustic waves are then transmitted through the air, and received by the US transducer on
the EC unit. The received ultrasonic signal is shown below in Figure 5:

Figure 5: Received Ultrasonic Signal, f = 24.39 kHz, Vpp = 209.4 mV

The above capture shows the sinusoidal acoustic signal received by the US transducer on
the EC unit. The received signal had a frequency of 24.39 kHz (not shown) and was measured to
be 209.4 mV, which is at too low a voltage level to be used as a µC input. The µC needs CMOS
level input, which necessitated the need for aforementioned receive circuitry that amplifies and
converts this low voltage signal to a CMOS level. The LM324 amplifier output has a gain of
approximately 20, which effectively amplifies from the mV range to volts range.

The signal is then passed through the comparator. The output of the comparator is shown
in Figure 6 below:

7
Figure 6: Output of comparator, f = 24.39 kHz, Vpp = 5.312 V

Notice that the signal has pulses similar to that of Figure 4 above. This signal was measured at
Vpp = 5.312 V (not shown) with a frequency of 24.39 kHz. The sharp peaks are converted to
squares via the NAND chip. This output is shown below in Figure 7:

Figure 7: Output of NAND gate, f = 25.81 kHz, Vpp = 5.875 V

The signal out of the NAND gate chip is 5.875 Vpp at 25.81 kHz. The signal is now a
square wave, which is necessary for edge detection by the µC. The µC requires a signal of
approximately 2.7 to 3.0 V in order to interpret it correctly. To acquire this level, a voltage
divider circuit was designed in order to reduce the 5.875 V to a lower CMOS voltage level.
Figure 8 below shows the output signal of the voltage divider.

Figure 8: CMOS level output signal, f = 26.49 kHz, Vpp = 2.875 V

8
This signal was measured as 2.875 V at 26.49 kHz. This is the now at the appropriate voltage
level that the µC can recognize and perform calculations on. The CMOS level signal is input
into Port 5.4 of the EC’s µC., where the microcontroller then determines the range, and flashes
corresponding LED’s. The development board has four LEDs that we have utilized to show
various states of the unit. See Appendix G for a detailed description of the LEDs and their
meanings.

Power Consumption and Batteries

For initial prototype purposes, we have been using alkaline AAA batteries for mobile
power. However, we have 3.6V rechargeable lithium ion batteries rated at 1200 mAh that we can
implement into the design. Standard AAA batteries are rated at 750 mAh. The power budgets
for the MPS and EC units based on using the Li Ion batteries are shown below in Table 2:
MPS POWER BUDGET
Li Ion Battery Source (mAh)
1200

PART Type of Current CURRENT mA RUNNING TIME (Days)

CD4011 NAND LOW Level Output Typ.Current (mA) 0.88 56.82
LM339 Supply Typ.Current (mA) 1.00 50.00
TRF6903 Development Board Rx Typ.Current (mA) 2.52 19.84
Total Typ. Current Usage for EC Unit Typ.Current (mA) 4.40 11.36

EC POWER BUDGET
Li Ion Battery Source (mAh)
1200

PART Type of Current CURRENT mA RUNNING TIME (Days)

CD4011 NAND LOW Level Output Typ.Current (mA) 0.88 56.82
LM324 Supply Typ.Current (mA) 1.00 50.00
LM311 Positive Supply Typ.Current (mA) 5.10 9.80
TRF6903 Development Board Tx Typ.Current (mA) 0.50 100.00
Total Typ. Current Usage for MPS Unit Typ.Current (mA) 7.48 13.37
Table 2: MPS and EC Estimated Power Budgets

These values were calculated using datasheet values for typical current values of the various
components used in the design, multiplied by the mAh rating of the batteries. The estimates are
a worst case scenario, in that they represent an always on system. Actual operation of the system
would be every 100 ms. Thus, the values in Table 2 above likely represent the low end values
for system power.

2.4 System Limitations

Since this is an initial prototype, there are many limitations that need to be addressed to
produce a unit that resembles a final prototype. First, due to cost limitations, we conducted all
testing with 24 kHz transducers, because 50 kHz units have a price of ~$30, and we needed at
least 10 units. The 24 kHz units were only $1.25/unit, and allowed us to prove the concept of the
design. Thus, the 24 kHz transducers need to be increased to a level above the hearing range of
dogs, for example to 50 kHz. We have provided the datasheet for a US transducer unit that

9
would work well with this system. It is attached as Appendix H. Also, the code we wrote
produces an output signal with a frequency based upon the on-board crystal frequency. The
maximum frequency of the on-board crystal is 32.768 kHz [2]. Thus, to provide for frequencies
higher than that, an external crystal will be needed to attached to the µC. This could be easily
soldered to the development board in the predefined pad layout for an external crystal. However,
since the US transducers used for our prototype operate at 24 kHz, we were able to program the
µC and onboard crystal to produce a sufficient signal to drive the US transducers.
Another limitation of the design was the lack of RF development. This was mainly
attributed to the fact that to access the predefined RF send and receive functions of the IAR
programming software we used, the full software version had to be purchased. This would have
increased the out-of-pocket cost of the design team members by another $300, increasing the
total cost to the group members to $819.49. Instead of purchasing said software, a wired
simulation of the RF communication was implemented to sync the two µC boards and to
simulate state transmissions and distance ranges.
Also, more detailed power consumption calculations will need to be done. Once a final
prototype is established, real world testing can be done on the battery powered unit. The main
power consumption of the µC is in transmission and receiving of signals. The lithium ion
batteries used in our prototype design provides 1200mAh.
Another limitation is the documentation needed to test a final prototype of animals.
Testing of our design on live animals requires a permit. Once a permit is obtained, then the
efficacy of the unit for containing live animals can be tested. The EC unit will also have to outfit
with a stimulus applying transducer that produces a sound that the dog can hear. This sound has
to be able to annoy the dog enough so that it comes back into the acceptable confinement area.
Since we already have the 24 kHz transducers, these units could be used to produce this sound.
Also, since 24 kHz is above human hearing, it will not bother humans. Several products on the
market already use this as a method for training dogs to stop barking. For example, there is a
dog-bark training device that emits an US signal when a dog barks. This sound is annoying to
the dog, which in turn trains the animal to stop barking.
Overall, there were several limitations to the project. Continued work toward a final
prototype will have to address these issues.

3. Scheduling
As a means of continued organization and accurate time budgeting throughout the
project, we employed the use of a Gantt chart, shown in Appendix I. The Gantt chart displays an
overview of the time allocated to each aspect of our design. This has been updated to reflect the
status of our project.

From the proposal and progress report, the scheduling was as follows:
• The first large portion of time was devoted to preliminary research to see if the
proposed project was feasible to design and build within the set time constraints.
• After completing preliminary research in late November, the design of the prototype
was to last until the end of January.
• From January to April, we planned to build the US and RF transmitter and receiver
units. Simultaneous to the hardware design was the software design for the user
interface and µC.

10
 • After the hardware and software testing period, a draft preliminary instruction manual
for using the prototype.
• From March until the end of the project, we planned to continue to finalize any of the
necessary construction and testing of the units.

Overall, we have maintained the framework of the schedule from the progress report.
However, our project schedule was shifted due to longer than expected testing of the necessary
hardware components, and actually building the prototype boards that house the circuits.
We also spent more time than expected on the software design of the µC. We originally
were looking into the code for the µC as being all in one package, but as it turns out more
software libraries needed to be purchased in order benefit from explicit functionality of the µC.
The updated schedule can be seen Appendix I.
We were able to successfully complete the necessary send and receive circuitry, as well as
interfacing with the development boards. This comprises the essential components of the stake
and collar units. While we were unable to work on RF communication between the units, we
were able to represent this using a direct wire link. Because the RF system is pre-wired to the
development board, implementation of RF would have been more of a function of software than
hardware. Having another computer engineer on the team would have helped to distribute some
of the programming load. That way, one could have worked on the ultrasonic processing code,
while the other on the RF code.

Teamwork
The table below shows the major responsibilities of each team member. These were
separated into hardware and software, the two main components of the design.

Herb James Jeet Bradley

Responsibility Hauls Pocius Som Thomas
Project Research x x x x
Hardware Design
Testing Ultrasonic Transducers x x x
Testing Amplification Circuitry x x
Testing Comparator/CMOS Circuitry x x
Building Hardware
Build Initial Designs / Test / Modify x x x x
Testing and Debugging x x
Software Design
Code Design / Testing / Modification x
Testing and Debugging x x
Table 3: Individualized Team Member Project Responsibilities

4. Economic Analysis
In the proposal, we analyzed the economic component of our project using two budget
types: an industry budget and a prototype budget. We originally estimated our out-of-pocket
budget along the premise that we would receive funds from our team sponsor, as well as Drexel
University. However, since these funds were never received, the design team was unable to
contribute all of the funds necessary to complete all aspects of the design. The mainly includes
the implementation of the RF communication portion of the design, which was contingent upon
the purchase of a full IAR Systems software package. Thus, the actual funds spent are lower

11
from the previously presented budgets. The project was entirely funded by the design team
members, at a cost of $519.49. The prototype budge is attached as Appendix J, and a modified
version to show percentage of cost is shown below in Table 4:

Out-of-Pocket Budget
Purchase Costs Estimated Cost Actual Cost % of Actual Cost ($519.49)
µC development kit $209.00 $300.00 (2x $150) 57.7%
RF Transmitter/Receiver $180.00 Included on dev. board
Ultrasonic Transducers $180.00 $20.00 (16x $1.25) 3.8%
PCB Prototyping $500.00 ----- -----
Miscellaneous Components: $175.00 ----- -----
- IC's ----- $25.00 4.8%
- Batteries ----- $25.00 4.8%
- Circuit Boards ----- $15.00 2.9%
- Housing Materials ----- $14.49 2.8%
Subtotal Purchase Cost $1,244.00 $399.49 76.9%

Development Costs
Testing Components & Supplies $100.00 $100.00 19.2%
Office/Laboratory $180.00 ----- -----
Printing and Overhead $100.00 $20.00 3.8%
Subtotal Development Cost $380.00 $120.00 23.1%

Grand Total $1,624.00 $519.49 100.0%

Table 4: Design Team Final Out-of-Pocket Costs

The industry budget, attached as Appendix K, outlines the development cost of our
design if it were built by engineers in an industry setting. The projected costs include resources
and equipment used for research and design, and represents our best-guess estimate given quotes
from manufacturers and average engineer salaries. The industry budget was changed slightly to
account for the increased time spent on the project. The man hours necessary for the testing
phase of the project was slightly increased, raising the industry budget by $12,000.

5. Ethical, Environmental, and Social Impacts

To fully evaluate the utilization and implications of our system, we must be aware of any
ethical, environmental, and social impacts that our design may have on the world. In this
section, the main goal is to ensure that our design has minimal negative effects.

Our project proposes an animal containment system. Thus, the major ethical concern is
animal containment. Since our system does not provide containment in a typical sense, such as a
leash or cage, we feel that this issue of containment is not as severe with regards to our design.
Our design will establish an US perimeter that the animal is contained in. If the perimeter is
exceeded, a noise within the hearing range of the dog would be emitted to train the dog to come
back into the acceptable area. Thus, there is not a large potential for causing physical harm to
animals. There are products available now that train dogs to not bark that use an US sound based
training method. Likewise, our system is not meant as a disciplinary device, but more as a
training device to help an animal learn the boundaries to which it can roam.
Possible environmental concerns arise from the use of high-frequency signals. Even
though the sound generated from US signals is beyond the hearing range of humans, there are
many animals in nature that can hear in the US range. A high-powered US signals could disturb

12
the habitat of wildlife in the surrounding area. The hearing of dogs is 44 kHz [3]. Other animals
such as cats, horses and sheep have similar hearing ranges.

Several veterinary and government agencies were contacted regarding the effects on
animals from high frequency signals. The University of Pennsylvania Veterinary hospital said
that the main concern would be the intensity of the signal, as opposed to the frequency. Thus, we
will have to ensure that intensity of the signal does not cross into the threshold of pain for
surrounding animals. Exposure to sound louder than 85 dB can have both auditory and non-
auditory effects on most animals [4]. The other possible environmental concern is the
implementation of RF transmission into our design. We must also account for the fact that many
existing devices (including existing animal containment systems) already use RF signals in their
system. Therefore, we must be certain that our signal do not interfere with other devices in the
immediate area that operate in the same frequency band. This is part of the reason we required a
bi-modal RFT. Also, as mentioned before, to do any actual testing on animals requires a permit.
This was discussed above in the Limitations section.

The social aspects of our design have largely remained the same. In the suburbs, many
homeowners associations have policies that restrict the type, size, and existence of any fence
system. At the same time, these associations also restrict the freedom of pets, mainly for safety
purposes. A fenceless system, such as we are proposing, will please community associations as
well as homeowners. The homeowner is able to contain the family pet, and the association is
content because there is not the visual clutter associated with conventional fences.

6. Conclusions and Future Recommendations

Our final project serves as a proof of concept for a mobile solution for animal containment. The
properly functioning prototype determined that we can send, receive and interpret the various
signals that are necessary according to the patent details. The US signals are critical because
they define the containment perimeter. Thus, we had to ensure that the US transducer circuitry
interfaced as best as possible with the development board. We properly transmitted and received
US pulses via the µC and performed the necessary time calculations to determine the distance,
which was a large portion of the proposed design. With the foundation we have set, a full
prototype could be realized with additional funding and time. This would include the
substitution of transducers outside of the hearing range of dogs. These transducers would likely
increase the transmit distance also, because they will be of a higher quality than the ones used in
our project. A fully realized prototype would also incorporate the use of RF signals for
communication between the units. Once these two improvements are made and functioning
properly, development of the optional MU device can be realized. Then the system will be
realized as it is laid forth in the patent application.

7. References
[1] Nagy, Chris. Embedded Systems Design using the TI MSP430 Series. Burlington,
Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing, 2003.

13
[2] Texas Instruments. MSP430x4xx Family User’s Guide Extract (Doc. SLAU168). Texas
Instruments. 2005.

[3] C.D. West, “The relationship of the spiral turns of the cochlea and the length of the basilar
membrane to the range of audible frequencies in ground dwelling mammals,” J. Acoust.
Soc. Am., vol. 77, pp. 1091-1101, March 1985. 1985.

[4] Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory
Animals. 21 February 2006. <http://newton.nap.edu/html/labrats/chaps.html#anim>

14
 Appendix A: System Functionality Diagram

Figure 9: System Functionality Diagram

15
 Appendix B: Texas Instruments Development Board

Figure 10: TI Development Board

The board dimensions are roughly 5” x 2.75” x 1” (L x W x H).

16
 Appendix C: 24 kHz Transducer

Figure 11: Transducer Specifications

17
 Appendix D: MPS Circuit Schematic

Figure 12: MPS Circuitry

18
 Appendix E: EC Circuitry Schematic

Figure 13: EC Circuitry Schematic

19
 Appendix F: Microcontroller Code

//***************************************************************************
***
// MSP-FET430P440 Demo – Timer_A Toggle P5.1, CCR0 Contmode ISR, DCO SMCLK
// M.Buccini
// Texas Instruments, Inc
// September 2004
// Built with CCE for MSP430 Version: 1.00
// (Modified by Jeet Som on 3/1/2006
// for sonar output at 24kHz on port 5.4)
//***************************************************************************
***

#include “msp430x44x.h”

__interrupt void Timer_A(void); // Prototype for ISR

void main(void)
{
WDTCTL = WDTPW + WDTHOLD; // Stop WDT
P5DIR |= 0x10; // P5.4 output
CCTL0 = CCIE; // CCR0 interrupt enabled
CCR0 = 21; // for a square wave at freq of 24kHz
TACTL = TASSEL_2 + MC_1; // SMCLK, contmode
_bis_SR_register(LPM0_bits + GIE); // Enter LPM0 w/ interrupt
}

// Timer A0 interrupt service routine

TIMERA0_ISR(Timer_A)
__interrupt void Timer_A (void)
{
P5OUT ^= 0x10; // Toggle P5.4
}

20
 Appendix G: LED Descriptions
Display Description
1. Initially (Distance Mode)

Zone Zone Zone Zone

1 2 3 4
(RED) (ORN) (GRN) (YEL)

Toggle
Button
(RED)

2. After Press and Release of Toggle (State Mode)

Sync US RF Low
Neede Lost Lost Battery
d (ORN) (YEL)
(RED) (GRN)

Toggle
Button
(RED)

Definitions of Zones
0 < Zone 1 < INNER_BOUND
INNER_BOUND < Zone 2 < MIDDLE_BOUND
MIDDLE_BOUND < Zone 3 < OUTTER_BOUND

In code:
#define INNER_BOUND x
#define MIDDLE_BUTTON y
#define OUTTER_BOUND z

x, y, z are integers which have the units of (1/32.7 ms) * (1.1 ft/ms) = 0.033ft

21
Appendix H: 50 kHz Transducer

Figure 14: 50kHz Datasheet

22
 Appendix I: Updated Schedule for Team 15

Figure 15: Revised Gantt Chart

23
 Appendix J: Out-of-Pocket Prototype Budget

Out-of-Pocket Prototype Budget

Purchase Costs Estimated Cost Actual Cost
µC w/development kit $209.00 $300.00 (2x $150)
RF Transmitter, Receiver $180.00 Included on the
development board
Ultrasonic Transducers $180.00 $20.00 (16x $1.25)
PCB Prototyping $500.00 -----
Miscellaneous Components $175.00 $79.49
Subtotal Purchase Cost $1244.00 $399.49

Development Costs
µC Development Kit ----- -----
Testing Components & Supplies $100.00 $100.00
Office/laboratory $180.00 -----
Printing and Overhead $100.00 $20.00
Subtotal Development Cost $380 $120.00

Grand Total $1624.00 $519.49

Appendix K: Industry Budget

Industry Budget
Process Resource Cost Period Quantity Total
Design Engineering Labor $5,500/mo 1.5 mo 4 $33,000
Design Subtotal $33,000
Fabrication Engineering Labor
Table 5: Out-of-Pocket Budget
$5,500/mo 4 mo 4 $88,000
Technician $3,000/mo 3 mo 1 $9,000
Computers $1,200 --- 4 $4,800
µCs $2,000 --- 2 $4,000
RF Transmitter, $500 --- 6 $3,000
Receiver
Sonic Transmitter, $500 --- 6 $3,000
Receiver
Misc. Components $3,000 --- --- $3,000
Misc. Equipment $15,000 --- --- $15,000
Fabrication Sub Total $129,800
Testing & Engineering Labor $8,000/mo ** 2 mo 4 $64,000
Technician $3,000/mo 2 mo 1 $6,000
Finalization
Testing & Finalization Subtotal $50,000
Industry Subtotal $232,800

24
 Overhead %50

Grand Total $349,200

Table 6: Industry Budget

** This number was increased from $6,500 to $8,000, as we will need to use more man hours during the testing
phase of the project. This leads to an increase of $12,000 ($1,000/mo * 2 mo * 4 engineers).

25
 Appendix L: Bibliography

1. V. Bondarev and E.R. Brooks, "Sensor e.g. optical sensor in industrial application, transmits
digital signal from demodulator to µC, and operational parameters and commands from
controller to demodulator and front end block," US2004249485-A1,

2. T.J. Crist, T.T. Duncan and F.J. Napolez, "Collar mounted electronic dog bark limiter, has µC
with stored program that determines if membrane switch is depressed to turn bark limiter ON or
in OFF mode, where OFF mode serves as mode that is same as SLEEP mode," US2005145198-
A1; US6928958-B2; CA2456431-A1,

3. Fence Town, "Fence Pricing," 21 November 2005.

<http://www.fencetown.com/HomePage/Fences/G2?name=Fences&refid=G2>

4. Food and Drug Administration, "Code of Federal Regulations: Performance Standards for
Microwave and RF Emitting Products," vol. Title 21, Volume 8, pp. 1030.10, April 2005.

5. Food and Drug Administration, "Code of Federal Regulations: Performance Standards for
Sonic, Infrasonic, and US Radiation-Emitting Products," vol. Title 21, Volume 8, pp. 1050.10,
April 2005.

6. W.J. Frankewich, "Electronic pet containment system e.g., transmitter testing apparatus, has
switch electrically coupling and uncoupling antenna and transmitter circuit, indicator responding
to voltage differential between electrode contact points," US2004021574-A1; US6838991-B2,

7. D.A. Gerig, "Remote receiver unit for animal behavior modification systems, applies shock to
animal by electrodes of animal collar, when receiving signal from remote transmitter,"
US2001004238-A1; US6459378-B2,

8. S. Hama, H. Sekiguchi and A. Fujii, "US length measuring apparatus for coordinate input
device, involves measuring time period between start of US transmission and detected crossing
time, to calculate length between pen and sensor," US2003144814-A1; JP2003222675-A;
JP2003288157-A; JP2003256126-A; EP1347365-A2; CN1435677-A; KR2003065296-A;
US6944557-B2,

9. K.N. Huang, C.F. Huang, Y.C. Li and M.S. Young, "Temperature measurement system based
on US phase-shift method," in Ieee Embs Apbme 2003, New York: Ieee, 2003, pp. 294-295.

10. Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory
Animals. 21 February 2006. <http://newton.nap.edu/html/labrats/chaps.html#anim>

26
11. V.N. Khmelev, R.V. Barsukov, A.V. Shalunov, A.N. Slivin and S.N. Tehyganok, "The system
of checking and operating power of US technological apparatus," in 2001 Siberian Russian
Student Workshop on Electron Devices and Materials. Proceedings 2nd Annual, Novosibirsk
State Tech. Univ, 2001, pp. 54-55.

12. William Kleitz, Digital Electronics with VHDL, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education,
2004.

13. J.S. Kim, "Remote training system for domestic animals, has collar fixed with receiver, for
encircling animal's neck, with center layer having receiving antenna and outer layers to provide
weather-proof coating," US6167843-B1,

14. J.S. Kim, G.H. Lee and D.J. Lee, "Wireless animal behavior modification system e.g. for
modifying barking, has wireless command module which transmits stimulation commands to
signal generator that triggers shock and vibration to animal," US2003116101-A1; US6598563-
B2,

15. L.E. Kinsler, A.R. Frey, A.B. Coppens and J.V. Sanders, Fundamentals of Acoustics, New
York, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2000.

16. B. Kummert, "Animal collar, especially for dog, has expandable influencing element
arranged in holder in collar in base position and able to change to expanded functional state by
remote control," DE10114631-A1,

17. Z. Li, C.B. Theurer, R.X. Gao and D.O. Kazmer, "Design of US transmitters with defined
frequency characteristics for wireless pressure sensing in injection molding," IEEE Trans.
Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control, vol. 52, pp. 1360-1371, 08. 2005.

18. A. Malaoui, K. Quotb, K. Auhmani, M. Ankrim and M. Benhayoun, "An accurate electronic
device for US measurements using a µC," in 2004 IEEE International Conference on Industrial
Technology, Ieee, 2004, pp. 1432-7 Vol. 3.

19. Nagy, Chris. Embedded Systems Design using the TI MSP430 Series. Burlington,
Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing, 2003.

20. M. Russell-Ausley, "How Underground Pet Fences Work," vol. 2005, pp.
<http://home.howstuffworks.com/pet-fence2.htm>

27
21. M.B.H. Schilder and J.A.M. van der Borg, "Training dogs with help of the shock collar: short
and long term behavioural effects," Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., vol. 85, pp. 319-334, Mar. 2004.

22. N.V. Shaverin, "Automated measurement of the ultrasound propagation time in the devices of
physical parameters control," in Proceedings of the 9th International Scientific and Practical
Conference of Students, Post-graduates and Young Scientists: Modern Techniques and
Technologies, Ieee, 2003, pp. 98-100.

23. I.S. Simeonov, "Experimental determination of the reflective index of ultrasound waves from
homogenous mediums by means of piezoelectric transducers," in 6th International Conference
on Telecommunications in Modern Satellite, Cable and Broadcasting Services. TELSIKS 2003,
Ieee, 2003, pp. 831-3 vol.2.

24. StayDog, “Invisible Fence Monthly Specials” 21 November 2005.

<http://www.staydog.net/store/>

25. Texas Instruments. MSP430x4xx Family User’s Guide Extract (Doc. SLAU168). Texas
Instruments. 2005.

26. Texas Instruments. TRF6903 Design Guide (Doc. SWRU009). Texas Instruments. 2004.

27. Texas Instruments. TRF6903 With MSP430 Demonstration and Development Evaluation Kit
User’s Guide (Doc. SWRU008). Texas Instruments. 2004.

28. Texas Instruments. Ultrasonic Distance Measurement with the MSP430 (Doc. SLAA136A).
Texas Instruments. 2002.

29. C.D. West, "The relationship of the spiral turns of the cochlea and the length of the basilar
membrane to the range of audible frequencies in ground dwelling mammals," J. Acoust. Soc.
Am., vol. 77, pp. 1091-1101, March 1985. 1985.

30. T. Williams, The Circuit Designer's Companion, Burlington, MA: Newnes, 2005.

28
 Appendix M: Resumes of Team Members
Jeet Som
119 Lucerne Blvd
Cherry Hill, NJ 08003-5117
856-424-5187
sarbajeet.som@drexel.edu

Computer Skills

C++/C, Java, Matlab/Maple, VHDL, Excel, LabView

Hardware Engineering Skills

Electronic Device Design using VHDL Analysis with Node/Mesh Approaches

Embedded Systems Analog Signal Processing with Filters

Software Engineering Skills

Logical Object-Oriented Program Design Highly Modularized and Encapsulated Code

Easily Readable (Self Documenting) Code Proficient in Memory Manipulation (pointers)

General Knowledge

Theory of Classical Physics Calculus and Linear Algebra

Set and Propositional Logic Optimization Within Constraints

Honors

Drexel University - Dean's Scholarship

National Merit Scholarship Commendation
SAT Score: 1410 (Math:680 Verbal:730)

Engineering Coursework

Basic Circuit and Digital Logic Theory w/Labs

Differential Equations of Systems
C/C++ Programming and Data Structures
Physics for Physicists (derived E&M field)

Education

Drexel University, Philadelphia

Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering, Anticipated Graduation - May 2006
GPA Cumulative: 2.95

Experience

Unisys, Malvern, PA
Hardware Engineer (FPGA), September 2004 to March 2005
Unit test and FPGA test bench simulation.

Datacore Systems, Philadelphia, PA

Database Editor ( Lotus Notes), Summer 2000, Summer 2003
Modifying database information, using data from unformatted text-based documents.

Freshman Engineering Design Project

A group project to develop a solar powered heating system that is capable of boiling a half a liter of water in 15 minutes, using components that could fit into a xerox
box.

I had the responsiblity of creating the container for the liquid. My goal was to maximize conversion of radiant energy into thermal enthalpy. I designed a thermal
container composed of a pryex beaker with the interior coated with black paint, and then lined with copper foil. The design was implemented by optimizing heat
transfer using the concepts of Snell's Law, emissitivity, and thermal gradients. The following lessons were learned:

1. Prior to the design cycle, there should be a input/output specification of all subsystems, and analysis of limitations.
2. Testing and revision cycles are vital to engineering projects, and purely theoretical analysis is insufficient.

29
 James G Pocius
514 N Rock Glen Rd
Baltimore, MD 21229
443-690-5024
james.g.pocius@drexel.edu

Education

Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA

Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering, Anticipated Graduation - June, 2006
GPA: 3.0

Relevant Coursework

Digital Design
Basic Circuit Analysis (Sources, Resistors, Capacitors, and Inductors)
Thermodynamics
Materials I and II (Breakdown and Study of Metals, Polymers, Ceramics)
Linear Algebra (Matrices)
Steady State Electronic Devices
Analog Electronics
Signals, Systems, and Transforms
DC/AC Machinery Fundamentals
Energy and Power Management System Principles
Digital Signal Processing (DSP)
Analog/Digital Modulation and Coding
RF Techniques and Components (Microwave)
Electromagnetic Fields and Waves / Wireless Optical Electronics

Experience

RTKL Associates, Baltimore, MD

Co-op Intern, September 2004 to March 2005
Performed short circuit and voltage drop calculations for Fort Stewart,GA, and JHU Building 21, MD
Developed singleline, lighting, fire safety, and power construction documents for various projects using AutoCad 2004 and Microstation
Aided in the design of electrical, lighting, and fire safety systems for various projects
Researched grounding grid methods and software programs
Sized loads and created generator specifications using Caterpillar's Electric Design Pro for Fort Stewart, GA, and Highmark Data Center, PA
Backchecked fault current ratings and circuit breaker sizes for Fort Stewart, GA
Conducted site visits of JHU Davis Hall to observe progression of construction work
Participated as a recruiter for at the Drexel Career Fair in October, 2004.
*See below for list of projects and description

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD

Intern, May to June, 2002
Assisted in the developement of software database for flight hardware testing on the 'ST5' satellite project (command and telemetry mnemonics)
Monitored ground support testing equipment (simulator racks)
Observed the testing philosophy of the Integration and Test team while testing CDH Engineering Test units
Viewed environmental test chambers, including thermal vacuum, anachoic, acoustical, and vibration

Junior Achievement, Philadelphia, PA

Volunteer Teacher, December, 2002, to February, 2003
Worked with a class of 25 students
Taught the economics of staying in school

RTKL Projects

Himark Data Center, PA - a 70,000 squared foot off campus data center with an initial electrical load density of 30-60 watts per squared foot. Contains 35,000
squared feet of MEP and office space, 35,000 squared feet of data centerspace and is used as a 24/7 mission critical facility.

Johns Hopkins University (JHU) Building 21, MD - A 237,000 squared foot multipurpose office and lab facility on the campus of the Applied Physics Laboratory.

JHU Davis Hall, MD - A renovation of 9,000 squared feet of campus data centerspace including programming, design, construction, and migration of data center
itself.

Fort Stewart, GA - A three story building with approximately 110,000 squared feet comprising of office/conferencing occupancy on the first floor, and intensive
computer loads on the second and third floors.

Computer Skills

Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint

HTML, Java, Visual Basic Programming
AutoCAD 2000 and 2004, Maple 7.0, LabVIEW,
Microstation, C++

Honors

IEEE Member
Recipient of Drexel Alumni Grant

30
 Bradley Thomas
2979 W Schoolhouse Ln
Philadelphia, PA 19144
215-844-5432
bradley.howard.thomas@drexel.edu

Education

Drexel University Philadelphia, PA

Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering Anticipated Graduation - June, 2006
Concentration: Advanced Electronics Cumulative GPA: 3.04

Relevant Coursework

Advanced Electronics Control Systems

Motor Control Principles Electromagnetic Fields Theory

Employment Experience

Thomson Scientific Philadelphia, PA

Quality Assurance Technician April 2005 to Current (Part Time)
• Perform quality assurance tests on Web of Knowledge product line.
• Write detailed reports on how to reproduce technical problems found in software.
• Submit reports to programmers via online database in order to fix discovered problems.

Moog Components Group Springfield, PA

Engineering Intern September 2004 to March 2005 (Full Time)
• Performed quality checks on electrical schematics and project parts lists.
• Designed and constructed prototype boards for servo motor control, actuator control and avionic displays.
• Used lab equipment to verify proper operation of electronic devices.
• Conducted research on derating analysis of electronic components using military standards.

Housing Authority of Baltimore City (HABC) Baltimore, MD

HOPE VI Intern November 2003 to March 2004 (Full Time)
• Attended development meetings for construction projects with developers, contractors, and engineering firms.
• Evaluated contracts to ensure that all entities were working according to contractual agreements.
• Created an active database for insurance certificates required by HABC and Maryland state law.

CompUSA Glen Burnie, MD

Software Associate November 2002 to April 2003 (Full Time)
• Provided customer service and support for technology products.
• Attended weekly business status meetings and maintained inventory.

Computer/Equipment Skills

Hardware: PC, Macintosh, Multimeters, Power Supplies, Oscilloscopes, Logic Analyzers, Soldering
Software: MS Office, PSpice, OrCAD, Labview, MatLab, Maple
Programming Languages: C++
Operating Systems: Windows 95-XP, Mac OS's

Honors and Awards

A.J. Drexel Scholarship

William H. Dehuff Scholarship
Dean's List (Summer 2005)

31
 Herbert Hauls
herbert.courtney.hauls@drexel.edu
P O Box 4498
3933 Germantown Ave
Philadelphia, PA 19140
215-228-6437

Education: Drexel University Philadelphia, PA

B.S. in Elec. and Comp. Engineering
Anticipated Graduation - June, 2004
Telecommunications

Engineering Experience: Marconi Communications Warrendale, Pa

Product Integrity Lab Engineer September 2001- March 2002

• Managed multiple projects investigating the soundness of communications products

• Conducted tests and Interpreted test results administered according to Marconi's standards, as well as various other government and industry standards
• Produced testing reports
• Managed, installed and networked specialty testing equipment
• Investigated various testing techniques used while expanding and improving lab testing procedures manual
• Various miscellaneous duties: soldiering, wiring, thermo-coupling, etc

Techneglas, Inc. Pittston, PA

Electrical Engineer September 2000 to March 2001

• Utilized AutoCad 2000 to create electrical design layouts

• Tested stability and verified improvements of new vision system and software
• Analyzed samples for test purposes using new vision system
• Installed and updated software and components
• Revised online computer reporting systems

Computer Skills: Hardware: Mac, PC

Operating Systems: Windows 2000, 98, 95, MacOS
Software: Microsoft office 2000-Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Publisher, Microsoft Visual C++, C++, AutoCAD 2000/14, Maple, Matlab, Orcad, LabView, Internet
Explorer

Related Course Work:

Transform Methods and Filtering
ECE Laboratory I
Electronic Devices
Computer Programming I, II
Energy I, II
Systems I, II
Materials I, II
Electrical Circuits & Systems
Fundamentals of Intelligent Systems

Honors and Activities • NACME Vanguard Scholar 1999-2004

• First Robotics Competition Hosted at Drexel University: Referee 2001-02, Volunteer 2000
• Boy Scouts of America: Star Rank Scout, Appointed Cub Scout Leader-1995-96

32