ENME482L Project:

LED Door Lighting System

Lab: Section 02, Friday, 10AM-12PM TAs: Mr. Wenlong Tang and Mr. Jingrui Wang

Report Submitted To: Dr. Teshome Jiru Date Submitted: December 9, 2010

INTRODUCTION For this ENME 482L course project our group wanted to design and manufacture a product that not only satisfies the requirements set out for this course, but also has the possibility to be marketed and be used by the common household. One common problem that is faced by many consumers is being able to locate the keyhole on the main entrance door for their home at night. Matters can worsen when the homeowner may have their workbag or grocery bag in one hand while trying to find the keyhole with the other. Other cases might include inclement weather where finding the keyhole at night will allow the homeowner to take cover more quickly in inclement weather such as rain and snow. The LED Door Lighting System constructed in this laboratory project consists of a sensor, controller, and actuator. These components are represented by an ultrasonic sensor, LabVIEW software, and LED lights, respectively. As the user moves closer to the sensor, the LED will increase in brightness to reflect the proximity of the user. As the user moves further from the sensor, the brightness will decrease until the light turns off completely. This innovative product is a practical and affordable alternative to other lighting systems currently on the market. This report examines the construction, operation, and response of the LED Door Lighting System as well as relevant entrepreneurial aspects of the product.

METHODS AND MATERIALS The materials utilized in this project include a front door model (door knob and deadbolt lock), an ultrasonic sensor, LED lights, a NI ELVIS, connecting wires, and a PC based DAQ on a Dell desktop computer. The computer features LabVIEW 2009 software. Additionally, a breadboard was used in conjunction with the ELVIS apparatus. Excel software was used to
1

interpret and graphically display the data obtained. A tape measure was used for calibration purposes as well. Additional parts that were purchased and used to build and wire the project are given in the overall materials list in Table 1.

Table 1. Materials List.

Material Gorilla Glue Door Hardware Wood (12x36 Pine) Sheet Metal (12x18) Spray Paint (Brown) Spray Paint (Black) 4-40x3/4 screws 22AWG Wire Ultrasonic Sensor L.E.D. Lights Flashlight Case Electrical Tape Quantity 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 20 ft 1 20 1 1

The overall project station is pictured in Figure 1. The door panel with all of the components is shown in Figure 2, while a diagram of the door panel is shown in Figure 3. The door panel features a door knob, dead bolt lock, the ultrasonic sensor, and LEDs in an enclosure. The equipment was set up according to the diagram shown in Figure 4. After setting up the experiment as indicated in the Laboratory Handout in the Appendix, the first step was to calibrate the sensor. The sensor is shown in Figure 5, and is wired to the ELVIS as shown in Figure 4. The sensor was calibrated using a long board with 1 inch increments on it, as shown in Figure 6. Starting at 1 inch away, a clipboard was held in front of the sensor, and the distance

and voltage output from the sensor were recorded using a sensor calibration program in LabVIEW. The readings were captured in LabVIEW with a graph, such as that shown in Figure A-1 of the Appendix. Subsequent measurements and voltages were then read at every inch up to 36 inches away. The exact voltage value was found for each distance, and this value was compared to the theoretical values and range given by the sensor manufacturer.

Figure 1. The LED Door Lighting System lab station.

Figure 2. The door panel.

Figure 3. A diagram of the door panel.

Figure 4. A diagram of the laboratory setup.

Figure 5. The sensor.

Figure 6. Sensor calibration set-up.

After calibrating the sensor, the LEDs had to be calibrated. An LED was hooked up to the ELVIS breadboard using the instructions provided in the lab handout. A detailed image of an LED is provided in Figure 7. Before voltage intervals for the LEDs at each distance could be determined, the LED circuit was analyzed to determine the maximum voltage that could be used, so that the LEDs would not be damaged or burned out. The circuit that was analyzed is shown in Figure 8. The method of analysis used was Ohms law, given by Equation 1: V=IR (1)

Where V is the voltage in volts, I is the current in amps, and R is the resistance in ohms. After verifying that the maximum voltage that could be used matched the 3V limit given in the lab handout, the voltage was scaled back and tested at small increments, until the minimum amount of voltage required to turn on the LED was found. Upon determining minimum and maximum voltages, the voltage range was divided into the 5 desired increments. Voltage was then output

from the PC using LabVIEW at each increment to ensure that the brightness of the LED at increment noticeably changed.

Figure 7. A diagram of an LED [1].

Figure 8. The LED circuit.

After the calibration of both the sensor and the LEDs, the full lab set-up was constructed according to the Laboratory Handout and Figure 4. The full lab station was shown previously in Figure 1. After opening and running the LabVIEW program led_project_final.vi, one group member moved in front of the sensor, and approached and backed away from it with varying speed and distance. Testing was also done in light and dark conditions. The group recorded the values of distance from the sensor, the voltage output from the sensor, and the voltage being input into the LEDs. Observations were made of how the light intensity (brightness) increased with decreasing distance to the sensor, how rapidly the intensity changed, and the sensitivity of the system. The LEDs in their enclosure is shown in Figure 9. The final product performing in dark conditions is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 9. The LED enclosure.

Figure 10. The LED Door Lighting System in dark conditions.

The full door lighting system can be broken into three main components: a sensor, a controller, and an actuator. The ultrasonic sensor acts as the only sensor in the lab. It determines the distance to the object in front of it by sending out a high frequency sound wave and determining the time it takes for the wave to reflect back. The voltage output that the sensor generates is sent to the breadboard on the ELVIS device. The ELVIS is shown in Figure 11. This apparatus acts as an interface to the LabVIEW software, which is the controller in this system. The LabVIEW software essentially takes data from the sensor (ultrasonic sensor) and translates it into usable data by the actuator (LEDs). There are several operations which take place inside the LabVIEW program. These operations serve to react to and interpret the voltage coming from

the sensor, and translate it into usable data, in the form of a voltage output to the LEDs. The LabVIEW program block diagram is detailed and numerically labeled in Figure 12. A sample of the LabVIEW program front panel is shown in Figure 13. Item 1 in Figure 12 is a While Loop, which causes the program to repeat the conditions contained within until the desired output is achieved. Item 2 is a DAQ Assistant, which receives the analog voltage input from the sensor. Item 3 is a filter, which filters the sensors input after it is received by the DAQ Assistant. This process reduces noise and errors in the signal. Items 4 and 5 are a graph and numeric indicator, respectively. The graph visually displays the sensor input on the front panel, in the form of amplitude versus time. The indicator simply displays the same voltage value as the graph does numerically. Item 6 is a multiplier. This function multiplies the sensor signal by 100, transforming the numbers to a larger scale so that there is more separation between the input values. This function is necessary for later operations. Item 7 is once again a numeric indicator, and it shows the amplified values on the front panel. Item 8 converts from dynamic data, making the data usable for an array. The resulting data type is ID array of scalers automatic. The next step is an Index Array, indicated by Item 9. The index array returns the element of sub-array of n-dimension array at index; it creates an array of the input data, displaying an input for each dimension of the array. Item 10 is round to nearest, which takes each array output value and rounds it to the nearest integer, so that the case structure will accept the data. The case structure is represented by Item 11. The case structure holds a sub-diagram for each possible input scenario, and executes the commands contained within for each case. The range for each of the 5 case structures and there corresponding output signal is 30 and over (0V), 25 to 29 (2.4V), 20 to 24 (2.6V), 14 to 19 (2.8V), and 0 to 13 (3V), respectively. Item 12 creates an analog signal out of the output data using LabVIEW Signal Express, to be used by the LEDs. Similar to Items 4 and

10

5, Items 13 and 14 are a graph and numeric indicator. These show the values of the output voltage to the LEDs both graphically and numerically. Item 15 is another DAQ Assistant, which sends the signal to the NI ELVIS, where it is then sent to the LEDs. The LEDs are the actuator in the system, and produce the end result which is light.

Figure 11. The NI ELVIS setup and breadboard.

11

Figure 12. A block diagram of the led_project_final.vi.

12

Figure 13. The LabVIEW front panel.

From the data obtained, several important variables can be determined, such as the distance range of the sensor, the voltage being output by the sensor, the amount of amplification done to the signal by the controller, the voltage being input into the LEDs, and the brightness of the LEDs. By examining these parameters, a comparison can be drawn between distance and voltage, and the overall effectiveness of the LED Door Lighting System can be analyzed.

RESULTS To begin analyzing the system the sensor first had to be calibrated. The given calibration from the manufacturer was 10mV per inch. This means that for every inch something is moved closer or further away from the sensor the voltage output from the sensor would change by 10mV. This factory rating is a good estimation, but since every sensor is different calibration had to be done for the specific sensor being used. Calibration was performed using a board with one
13

inch increments marked on it. Output voltage measurements were made at every inch to create a calibration curve for the sensor. Figure 14 is a distance versus voltage plot for the calibration of the sensor. At the beginning of the graph there is no change in voltage. This means that the sensor is not able to distinguish the difference between one and seven inches away. After seven inches there is a linear trend in the voltage change for each inch. Adding a trend line to the linear portion of the graph reveals the equation y=.0099x-.0033. The slope of this trend line shows that the true calibration for the sensor used in this experiment was 9.9 mV per inch. This is very close to the calibration value given by the manufacturer.

Sensor Calibration
0.4 0.35 0.3
Voltage (V)

0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Distance (In)

Figure 14. Sensor Calibration Plot.

14

After the sensor was calibrated the voltage output to the LED lights had to be determined. This was done using some of the manufacturer's specification for the lights and Ohms law given in Equation 1. The manufacturer reported that each of the LED lights had a resistance of 150 ohms and could withstand a maximum current of 0.02 Amps. Using this information and Ohms law it was determined that the maximum safe voltage for each of the LED lights was 3.0V. Upon testing this experimentally it can be seen that the brightness of the LED lights increases as voltage increases from zero to 3.0V. However once 3.0V is hit the brightness no longer increases and at that point the LED lights reach a point of instability, meaning the voltage is too high for the lights to handle. If one were to continue increasing the voltage to the LED lights they would eventually fail and the circuit would be broken. Once the maximum voltage to the LED lights was known, the minimum voltage at which the lights show visible light was determined. To do this voltage was run through the light starting at zero and increasing until visible light was first seen at 2.4V. Now that both the minimum and maximum voltages were known, the remaining voltages were determined by incrementing (in this case by 0.2V) from 2.4V to 3.0V. These increments were chosen so that the light is noticeably different at each increment, yet smoothly transitions as the sensor is approached. The resulting voltages at their corresponding distances can be seen in Figure 15.

15

Voltage Calibration
3.5 LED Output Voltage (V) 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.1 0.2 Sensor Input Voltage (V) 0.3 0.4

Figure 15. Output Vs. Input Voltage.

Through observation of the trend within Figure 15 it is seen that as input voltage increases the output voltage decreases in a stepwise manner, where output voltage remains constant for a set interval of input voltages then decreases at the next step. Thus, it can be noted that the controller, the LabVIEW program, inverts the signal in a sense, because the output voltage decreases as the input voltage increases. In addition to the relationship between output voltage and input voltage, the relationship between output voltage and distance can be determined. The comparison between distance and output voltage is shown in Figure 16.

16

Output Voltage Vs. Distance

3.5 Output Voltage (V) 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 5 10 15 20 Distance (In) 25 30 35 40

Figure 16. Output Voltage Vs. Distance.

It can be seen in Figure 16 that there is less voltage being output at larger distances. Thus, as distance decreases, voltage increases. The trend of this graph is a stepwise trend where as distance increases output voltage remains constant for a set interval then decreases slightly and remains constant for another interval. It is important to note that the light staying constant at each interval does not translate to a time delay. If the user holds a position at a certain distance without moving, the light will stay at a constant brightness based on distance. If the user moves fluidly towards the door, the lights will remain at the brightness at each interval for only a moment, resulting in a gradual lighting effect. When comparing Figure 15 and Figure 16, it is seen that they both have the same stepwise trend. This is because input voltage and distance are directly related and increase with a constant slope, therefore output voltage vs input voltage and output voltage vs distance show a very similar if not the very same trend.

17

ENTREPRENEURSHIP As engineers design and develop new products, they must do so in a manner that will yield their company profit since research, design and overhead costs all need to be taken into account before introducing a new product into the market for the company to be able to continue its business. With respect to this particular controls project, our group decided to conduct two different cost analyses. The first analysis refers to what it costs to construct the LED lighting kit for the controls lab project. The second analysis refers to the cost to manufacture the LED lighting kit on a larger scale. Keep in mind that if our group were to start up a company that specialized in manufacturing these lighting mechanisms, we would not have to worry about financing material that related to the door or lock since the homeowner would already have one. Our product would be an add-on to any existing models of doors and locks. It can be seen in Table 2 that the total cost for developing the LED lighting kit for this particular project was $81.62.

Table 2. LED Kit Cost.

LED Kit Material Wood Sheet Metal 22 guage wire Door Knob/dead bolt lock LED lights (6) Flashlight Ulta sonic sensor Magnetic Clamp Screws (2) Total Cost ($) 10.00 4.66 5.00 15.97 5.16 6.30 27.95 6.34 0.24 81.62

18

In our second analysis our group takes on the role as a company that manufactures these LED lighting mechanisms at a large scale. For the purpose of this report our company will produce 300,000 kits for homes across the country. Table 3 shows what would be included in the LED kit that our company manufactures. Note that the last row estimates the cost for not only 1 unit but for also 300,000 units. Table 4 shows what the cost would be for manufacturing, which includes the labor cost, material, production and tooling cost for the casing for the LED lights. Polycarbonate was the chosen material for the LED housing since it is weather proof and can withstand extreme temperatures. These cost estimations came from custompart.net where

based on the geometry of the part and the material being used in the product cost; the website is able to project estimated cost to see if it is in the companys interest to use a particular manufacturing process and material versus another.

Table 3. LED Mass Production Material Costs.

LED Kit Material 22 gauge wire LED lights (6) Flashlight Ultra sonic sensor Screws Total For 300,000 units Cost ($) 5.00 5.16 6.30 27.95 0.24 44.65 13,395,000

19

Table 4. LED Kit Mass Production Costs.

Costs Material Cost Production Cost Tooling Cost Labor Cost at $8/hr Total $ USD 128,744 127,018 69,534 1,200,000 14,920,296

The manufacturing process of the enclosures will be done through injection molding. Figure 17 shows a general setup of injection molding machine. The process for injection molding is as follows. First, the two halves of the mold are clamped together. Raw polycarbonate pellets are melted and injected into mold. Injected plastic is allowed to cool within the mold. After cooling, the mold is opened and the part is ejected. Any extra material from molding is ground off at this time. Finally the molded case is checked over by quality control before it is added to our LED kit.

Figure 17. The injection molding process [2].

20

To make profit, our company would mark up the price with 25%. With a 25% mark up our company would charge $62.17 for the L.E.D kit to the customers. Table 5 displays this information. This price places the LED Door Lighting System in the same price range as larger motion sensor porch lights found at major retailers. However, an advantage of the LED Door Lighting System is that it will consume less power than the competitors products due to its smaller size, use of LED lights, and the fact that it goes off immediately after the user goes inside.

Table 5. Consumer Costs.

Costs 25% of Total Cost Total + 25% Markup Cost per unit to consumers $ USD 3730074 18650370 62.1679

CONCLUSION In this laboratory project, an LED door lighting system was developed in order to illuminate a keyhole as a user approaches. The system features a sensor, controller, and actuator, consisting of an ultrasonic sensor, LabVIEW software program, and LED lights, respectively. With the help of LabVIEW and NI Elvis it was found that the voltage for peak luminosity for the LEDs was 3V. After experimentation, it was confirmed that when the voltage exceeds 3.0V, there is a strong chance that the LED will fail. It was found that the range of the ultrasonic sensor was 36 inches. The ultrasonic sensor was calibrated to account for 5 different ranges which caused an input of varying voltages. The ranges were for 30 inches and over (0V), 25 to 29
21

(2.4V), 20 to 24 (2.6V), 14 to 19 (2.8V), and 0 to 13 (3V). As a person increases proximity to the sensor, the voltage input to the system decreases, and output increases thus causing the LED lights to augment in brightness. The final design was a series of six LED lights connected in parallel. Each LED had a resistance of 150 ohms which yielded a maximum current of .02 Amps allowed. With the cost analysis completed, it was determined that our product can be innovative, yet priced competitively ($62.17) with other motion sensor lights, while still remaining profitable. It also was determined to be overall more cost effective for the consumer because LED Door Lighting System consumes less energy than the competitors standard motion sensor light.

22

REFERENCES [1] LED's. Fiber Optic Products, Inc., 1 Oct. 2010. Web. 6 Dec. 2010. <http://www.fiberopticproducts.com/Led.htm>. [2] "Injection Molding." CustomPart.net. N.p., 2009. Web. 8 Dec 2010. <http://www.custompartnet.com/partcost-401>

23

APPENDIX

A. Original Data B. Sample Pre-lab C. Sample Lab Instructions (Procedures, Class work, Homework)

24

Original Data

Figure A-1. LabVIEW graph of the sensor input voltage with varying distance.

25

ENME 482L: VIBRATIONS AND CONTROLS LABORATORY FALL 2010 LAB: LED Door Lighting System Lab Prep

Figure 1. LED circuit diagram. 1. Calculate the equivalent resistance of the circuit. 2. Using the equivalent resistance, find the current for the following Voltage inputs: 0V, 2.4V, 2.6V, 2.8V, 3V. 3. Calculate the current through each resistor at the following Voltage inputs: 0V, 2.4V, 2.6V, 2.8V, and 3V and compare with the current found using the equivalent resistance. 4. What significance does aligning resistors in parallel have for the current?

26

ENME 482L: VIBRATIONS AND CONTROLS LABORATORY FALL 2010 LAB: LED Door Lighting System

Figure 1. Diagram of LED Door Lighting System.

The system shown in the diagram uses an ultrasonic sensor as a sensor, LabVIEW as a controller, and LEDs as an actuator. The sensor inputs a voltage based on a distance. ELVIS and LabVIEW interpret the voltage input, and determine a voltage to output to the LEDs, which thus vary in brightness with distance.
27

Figure 2. Diagram of door panel.

Equipment: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PC with LabVIEW NI ELVIS Door Model Ultrasonic sensor 6 LED bundle Connecting wires

Note: As part of the class work, write down raw data, sketch waveforms, and sketch the experimental setup. Include this hand-written (original) information in the Appendix of the formal report.

28

Sensor Calibration

Class Work: 1. Connect the sensor to the ELVIS breadboard as follows: (AN, ACHO+), (+5, +5), (GND, GND) 2. Open the sensor calibration LabVIEW program on the PC. 3. Place a measuring tape (or equivalent measuring device capable of measuring inches) directly in front of the sensor. 4. Starting at 1 inch away from the sensor, place a wood block directly in front of the sensor. Observe the voltage output graph and numeric indicator in LabVIEW. Record the distance to the sensor and the voltage output of the sensor. 5. Repeat Step 4 for additional 1 inch increments for at least 36 inches, or until the voltage output of the sensor no longer changes.

Homework: 1. Graph sensor voltage vs. distance and label all axes. 2. Obtain an equation for the linear portion of the graph to determine the sensor calibration 3. Compare the calibration obtained experimentally to the theoretical calibration provided by the manufacturer 4. Describe the trend between sensor voltage and distance away from the sensor

29

Figure 3. LED circuit diagram.

LED Calibration

Class Work: 1. Test an individual LED to verify that it works using the variable power supply on the ELVIS breadboard, using the following connections: (+ LED, Supply+), (- LED, GND) Note: + LED is represented by the longer lead. 2. If the LED works correctly, disconnect the previous connections and connect the individual LED to the ELVIS breadboard as follows: (+ LED, DAC0), (- LED, GND)

30

3. Open the LED calibration LabVIEW program on the PC. 4. Using the DAQ Assistant and Analog Output functions in LabVIEW, input voltages to the L.E.D in 0.1V increments starting at 1.5V, until the LED barely lights. Increase the voltage up to 3V or until brightness no longer changes. Determine 5 voltage increments from the voltage that the LED first lights at up until the full brightness does not change. These increments will be used to scale the brightness as proximity to the sensor changes. Note: Do not exceed a 3V input to the LED or the LED may be damaged.

Homework: 1. Graph input voltage from the sensor vs. output voltage to the L.E.D lights and label all axes 2. Describe the trend between input voltage from the sensor and output voltage to the L.E.D lights

Distance vs. Brightness

Class work: 1. Connect the ultrasonic sensor, LED bundle, and ELVIS breadboard as follows: (AN, ACHO+), (+5, +5), (GND, GND), (+ LED, DAC0), (- LED, GND), (ACHO-, GND) 2. Open led_project_final.vi in LabVIEW on the PC. Run the program. 3. Using a measuring device, stand in front of the door model and sensor. Move closer and further away from the sensor. What happens to the lights as you move closer to the door
31

and the sensor? Observe the distance to the sensor, the voltage output from the sensor, the voltage input going to the LED bundle, and the brightness of each LED light. Record all relevant distances and voltage values. Sketch the lab setup and your results, and comment on your results.

Homework: 1. Graph output voltage to the L.E.D Lights vs. distance from the sensor and label all axes 2. Describe the trend between output voltage to the L.E.D Lights and distance away from the sensor 3. Compare the trend from question two to the trend determined in second homework section.

32

Figure 3. Block diagram of led_project_final.vi.

33

Figure 4. Front panel of led_project_final.vi.

34