Desarrollo de aplicaciones de comunicaciones inalámbricas en sistemas de monitorización estructural desarrollados en aeronáutica.

Los Sistemas de SHM o de monitorización de la integridad estructural surgen ante la necesidad de mejorar los métodos de evaluación y de test no destructivos convencionales. De esta manera, se puede tener controlado todo tipo de estructuras en las cuales su correcto estado o funcionamiento suponga un factor crítico. Un Sistema SHM permite analizar una estructura concreta capturando de manera periódica el estado de la integridad estructural, que en este proyecto se ha aplicado a estructuras aeronáuticas. P.A.M.E.L.A. (Phase Array Monitoring for Enhanced Life Assessment) es la denominación utilizada para definir una serie de equipos electrónicos para Sistemas SHM desarrollados por AERNOVA y los Grupos de Diseño Electrónico de las universidades UPV/EHU y UPM. Los dispositivos P.A.M.E.L.A. originalmente no cuentan con tecnología Wi-Fi, por lo que incorporan un módulo hardware independiente que se encarga de las comunicaciones inalámbricas, a los que se les denomina Nodos. Estos Nodos poseen un Sistema Operativo propio y todo lo necesario para administrar y organizar la red Mallada Wi-Fi. De esta manera se obtiene una red mallada inalámbrica compuesta por Nodos que interconectan los Sistemas SHM y que se encargan de transmitir los datos a los equipos que procesan los resultados adquiridos por P.A.M.E.L.A. Los Nodos son dispositivos empotrados que llevan instalados un firmware basado en una distribución de Linux para Nodos (o Routers), llamado Openwrt. Que para disponer de una red mallada necesitan de un protocolo orientado a este tipo de redes. Entre las opciones de protocolo más destacadas se puede mencionar: DSDV (Destination Sequenced Distance Vector), OLSR (Optimized Link State Routing), B.A.T.M.A.N-Adv (Better Approach To Mobile Adhoc Networking Advance), BMX (una versión de B.A.T.M.A.N-Adv), AODV (Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector) y el DSR (Dynamic Source Routing). Además de la existencia de protocolos orientados a las redes malladas, también hay organizaciones que se dedican a desarrollar firmware que los utilizan, como es el caso del firmware llamado Nightwing que utiliza BMX, Freifunk que utiliza OLSR o Potato Mesh que utiliza B.A.T.M.A.N-Adv. La ventaja de estos tres firmwares mencionados es que las agrupaciones que las desarrollan proporcionan las imágenes precompiladas del sistema,listas para cargarlas en distintos modelos de Nodos. En este proyecto se han instalado las imágenes en los Nodos y se han probado los protocolos BMX, OLSR y B.A.T.M.A.N.-Adv. Concluyendo que la red gestionada por B.A.T.M.A.N.-Adv era la que mejor rendimiento obtenía en cuanto a estabilidad y ancho de banda. Después de haber definido el protocolo a usar, se procedió a desarrollar una distribución basada en Openwrt, que utilice B.A.T.M.A.N.-Adv para crear la red mallada, pero que se ajuste mejor a las necesidades del proyecto, ya que Nightwing, Freifunk y Potato Mesh no lo hacían. Además se implementan aplicaciones en lenguaje ANSI C y en LabVIEW para interactuar con los Nodos y los Sistemas SHM. También se procede a hacer alguna modificación en el Hardware de P.A.M.E.L.A. y del Nodo para obtener una mejor integración entre los dos dispositivos. Y por ultimo, se prueba la transferencia de datos de los Nodos en distintos escenarios. ABSTRACT. Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) systems arise from the need of improving assessment methods and conventional nondestructive tests. Critical structures can be monitored using SHM. A SHM system analyzes periodically a specific structure capturing the state of structural integrity. The aim of this project is to contribute in the implementation of Mesh network for SHM system in aircraft structures. P.A.M.E.L.A. (Phase Array Monitoring for Enhanced Life Assessment) is the name for electronic equipment developed by AERNOVA, the Electronic Design Groups of university UPV/EHU and the Instrumentation and Applied Acoustics research group from UPM. P.A.M.E.L.A. devices were not originally equipped with Wi-Fi interface. In this project a separate hardware module that handles wireless communications (nodes) has been added. The nodes include an operating system for manage the Wi-Fi Mesh Network and they form the wireless mesh network to link SHM systems with monitoring equipment. Nodes are embedded devices with an installed firmware based on special Linux distribution used in routers or nodes, called OpenWRT. They need a Mesh Protocol to stablish the network. The most common protocols options are: DSDV (Destination Sequenced Distance Vector), OLSR (Optimized Link State Routing), BATMAN-Adv (Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking Advance), BMX (a version of BATMAN-Adv) AODV (Ad hoc on-Demand Distance Vector) and DSR (Dynamic Source Routing). In addition, there are organizations that are dedicated to develope firmware using these Mesh Protocols, for instance: Nightwing uses BMX, Freifunk use OLSR and Potato Mesh uses BATMAN-Adv. The advantage of these three firmwares is that these groups develop pre-compiled images of the system ready to be loaded in several models of Nodes. In this project the images were installed in the nodes. In this way, BMX, OLSR and BATMAN-Adv have been tested. We conclude that the protocol BATMAN-Adv has better performance in terms of stability and bandwidth. After choosing the protocol, the objective was to develop a distribution based on OpenWRT, using BATMAN-Adv to create the mesh network. This distribution is fitted to the requirements of this project. Besides, in this project it has been developed applications in C language and LabVIEW to interact with the Nodes and the SHM systems. The project also address some modifications to the PAMELA hardware and the Node, for better integration between both elements. Finally, data transfer tests among the different nodes in different scenarios has been carried out.

Physics and Mathematics in the Engineering Curriculum: Correlation with Applied Subjects

This paper presents a study in which the relationship between basic subjects (Mathematics and Physics) and applied engineering subjects (related to Machinery, Electrical Engineering, Topography and Buildings) in higher engineering education curricula is evaluated. The analysis has been conducted using the academic records of 206 students for five years. Furthermore, 34 surveys and personal interviews were conducted to analyze the connections between the contents taught in each subject and to identify student perceptions of the correlation with other subjects or disciplines. At the same time, the content of the different subjects have been analyzed to verify the relationship among the disciplines.Aproper coordination among subjects will allow students to relate and interconnect topics of different subjects, even with the ones learnt in previous courses, while also helping to reduce dropout rates and student failures in successfully accomplishing the different courses.

Survey on integration of Applied Geology and Geomorphology in Civil Engineering curricula in the framework of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by using practical trips

The engineer must have sufficient theoretical knowledge to be applied to solve specific problems, with the necessary capacity to simplify these approaches, and taking into account factors such as speed, simplicity, quality and economy. In Geology, its ultimate goal is the exploration of the history of the geological events through observation, deduction, reasoning and, in exceptional cases by the direct underground exploration or experimentation. Experimentation is very limited in Geology. Reproduction laboratory of certain phenomena or geological processes is difficult because both time and space become a large scale. For this reason, some Earth Sciences are in a nearly descriptive stage whereas others closest to the experimental, Geophysics and Geochemistry, have assimilated progress experienced by the physics and chemistry. Thus, Anglo-Saxon countries clearly separate Engineering Geology from Geological Engineering, i.e. Applied Geology to the Geological Engineering concepts. Although there is a big professional overlap, the first one corresponds to scientific approach, while the last one corresponds to a technological one. Applied Geology to Engineering could be defined as the Science and Applied Geology to the design, construction and performance of engineering infrastructures in and field geology discipline. There has been much discussion on the primacy of theory over practice. Today prevails the exaggeration of practice, but you get good workers and routine and mediocre teachers. This idea forgets too that teaching problem is a problem of right balance. The approach of the action lines on the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) framework provides for such balance. Applied Geology subject represents the first real contact with the physical environment with the practice profession and works. Besides, the situation of the topic in the first trace of Study Plans for many students implies the link to other subjects and topics of the career (tunnels, dams, groundwater, roads, etc). This work analyses in depth the justification of such practical trips. It shows the criteria and methods of planning and the result which manifests itself in pupils. Once practical trips experience developed, the objective work tries to know about results and changes on student’s motivation in learning perspective. This is done regardless of the outcome of their knowledge achievements assessed properly and they are not subject to such work. For this objective, it has been designed a survey about their motivation before and after trip. Survey was made by the Unidad Docente de Geología Aplicada of the Departamento de Ingeniería y Morfología del Terreno (Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid). It was completely anonymous. Its objective was to collect the opinion of the student as a key agent of learning and teaching of the subject. All the work takes place under new teaching/learning criteria approach at the European framework in Higher Education. The results are exceptionally good with 90% of student’s participation and with very high scores in a number of questions as the itineraries, teachers and visited places (range of 4.5 to 4.2 in a 5 points scale). The majority of students are very satisfied (average of 4.5 in a 5 points scale).