2. Watermelon Ripeness Sensor Melon Inc. In Search of Perfect Melons. Jason L. Firko Allan Cohen Matt Behr Dave Bartoski

3. Progress Review Overview l Welcome/ Introduction l Mission, approach, background, problem description l Method l Updated customer wants, system benchmarking, metrics, functional benchmarking, target values, concepts l Schedule l Division of work, actual, detailed, generic, budget

4. Watermelon Ripeness Sensor Team #2 Members : Jason Firko Matt Behr Allan Cohen Dave Bartoski Customer: Ed Kee Advisor: Dr. James Glancey Mission: Develop a non-destructive method and apparatus for accurately determining the ripeness of watermelons. Approach: Use customer wants to research and develop the most useful solution to the problem of determining watermelon ripeness. Develop a prototype and test it in an actual working environment.

5. Background l Watermelon market is a large, worldwide market lGrown on 5 Continents lGrown in 90 countries lAnnual production 50 Billion lbs./year l75% of the melons bought whole lLarge domestic and international market l Problem with a long history - 1905 University of Georgia Study l There are currently no accurate non-destructive testing methods available

6. l Present problems due to inaccurate methods of testing: Unneeded destruction of melons for inspectionUnneeded destruction of melons for inspection Loss of moneyLoss of money Poor quality of productPoor quality of product l This device will be beneficial for many reasons including: Reduce shipping costsReduce shipping costs Prevent rejection of shipmentsPrevent rejection of shipments Improve overall quality of the productImprove overall quality of the product Marketing advantageMarketing advantage Problem Description

7. Updated Customers & Wants

8. Top 10 Wants 1. Accuracy 1. Accuracy 2. Portability 2. Portability 3. Cost 3. Cost 4. Durability 4. Durability 5. Easy to Use 5. Easy to Use 6. Speed 7. Food Quality 8. Versatility 9. Maintenance 10. Service Life

9. Initial Systems Benchmarking l Current Methods for the testing of watermelons l Thumping, stem color, skin color, other traditional methods l Destructive Testing - Sucrometer reading l Near Infrared Testing - Experimental technique of sensing sugar content Acoustic Testing - University of OklahomaAcoustic Testing - University of Oklahoma l No Commercial products available

10. Metrics - Purpose and Format l Derived from Top 10 Wants l Provide a means of comparison l Allow a measurement of a specific quantity l Eliminate uncertainty/ambiguity l Often correlate to more than one want l Ranked in terms of top correlated wants l Target values from benchmarking and customer dialogue

11. Metrics & Related Wants Accuracy/Portability Accuracy/Portability l % Correct Ripeness Readings (95%) l % Error in Sugar Content * l (False Negative/False Positive)Readings l Weight (51 lbs.) l Size (Dimensions) (3’ Sides) l # People Needed - Transport/Operation (1) l Production Cost [$700]

12. Metrics (Cont’d) Durability/Ease of Use/Speed Durability/Ease of Use/Speed l Hours of Continuous Operation [12 hrs min) l Impact Resistance (Force) * l Time to Train [1 hr] l Number of Steps [5] l Level of Education Required [Grade 8) l Time/Cycle [10 sec] l Time per Shipment [2 hrs]

13. Metrics (Con’t) Food Quality/ServiceLife/Versatility/Maintenance Food Quality/ServiceLife/Versatility/Maintenance l Size of Intrusion (1mm) l Bacteria Introduced * l Visual Quality Inspection Rating (1-10) l Estimated Years of Service (5 yrs] l # of Uses (melon types, sizes, etc.) * l Cost/Cycle (parts, upkeep, etc) ($.001/cycle)

14. Functional Benchmarking l Acoustic/Impact Tests- Sound signature and Resonance lAcoustic Sensors - microphones, AE sensors lImpact Devices - pendulums, hammers, spring loaded, etc. lAcoustic data acquisition devices lAcoustic/Resonance Analysis Software Packages l Testing of Rind Quality lAccelerometers and related tracking devices l Resistivity Testing lAvailable information of resistivity of biological materials lProbes, measuring devices, necessary equipment

15. Functional Benchmarking (Cont’d) l Ultrasonic testing lUse on biological materials lAvailble Machines l Sizing Devices lOversized calipers lScales l Sampling devices and methods lSyringes, automated sucrometers

16. **Note on Benchmarking l Functional Benchmarking will be ongoing because of the nature of the project l Still determining best testing method l Must get most accurate and reliable correlation l Potentially the most important step in process l All future designs depend on selection l As we gain experience - better benchmarking

17. Target / Test Values l Target/Test Values were obtained through customer dialogue and functional benchmarking l Customer dialogue included calling potential customers and regulatory agencies l Functional benchmarking also gives rise to test values such as a speed target value from NMR plum testing

18. Concept Generation l Initial Concepts l Impact/Resonance sensor l Ultrasonic tester l Resistivity testing l Syringe sampling lRind properties tester

19. Primary Initial Concept

20. Primary Initial Concept (cont’d) l Basic principle: Trying to analyze the resonance properties which are audible by the human ear l Advantages of this design: weight, size, transportation, cost, time, food quality, versatility l Still must determine viability/accuracy l Other metrics will depend on design details

21. Activities to Date l Contacted customers- determined wants (Group) l Benchmarking ( Group) l Obtain Watermelons (Group) l Perform Traditional Tests (Group) l Acoustic Testing - Dr. Sun’s Laboratory (Jason/Dave) l Ultrasonic Testing - CCM (Matt/Alan) l Initial Concept Development (Group) l Resistivity Testing (Matt) l … and still more Benchmarking! (Group)

22. Detailed Future Schedule Dave, Jason Matt Matt, Dave, Jason Alan Group

23. General Schedule l Development of testing procedures l Testing and data acquisition l Data interpretation l Concept design

24. Estimated Budget l Testing equipment: $1,000 (depending on availability of equipment) è Sensors, Scales, Syringes l Prototype construction: $2,000 è Sensors, Building Supplies, Electronics, Etc. l Produce for Testing: $0 l Total Budget: $3,000

25. Conclusion l Presently testing and gathering data to determine most viable testing solution l Continued benchmarking - contacting experts in the fields of testing l When testing is complete, method will be selected and design will commence

26. Project Goal Satisfied Customers!