Enabling Sensor* Interoperability, Portland, Maine, October 16-18 2006: workshop proceedings

The ACT workshop "Enabling Sensor Interoperability" addressed the need for protocols at the hardware, firmware, and higher levels in order to attain instrument interoperability within and between ocean observing systems. For the purpose of the workshop, participants spoke in tern of "instruments" rather than "sensors," defining an instrument as a device that contains one or more sensors or actuators and can convert signals from analog to digital. An increase in the abundance, variety, and complexity of instruments and observing systems suggests that effective standards would greatly improve "plug-and-work" capabilities. However, there are few standards or standards bodies that currently address instrument interoperability and configuration. Instrument interoperability issues span the length and breadth of these systems, from the measurement to the end user, including middleware services. There are three major components of instrument interoperability including physical, communication, and application/control layers. Participants identified the essential issues, current obstacles, and enabling technologies and standards, then came up with a series of short and long term solutions. The top three recommended actions, deemed achievable within 6 months of the release of this report are: A list of recommendations for enabling instrument interoperability should be put together and distributed to instrument developers. A recommendation for funding sources to achieve instrument interoperability should be drafted. Funding should be provided (for example through NOPP or an IOOS request for proposals) to develop and demonstrate instrument interoperability technologies involving instrument manufacturers, observing system operators, and cyberinfrastructure groups. Program managers should be identified and made to understand that milestones for achieving instrument interoperability include a) selection of a methodology for uniquely identifying an instrument, b) development of a common protocol for automatic instrument discovery, c) agreement on uniform methods for measurements, d) enablement of end user controlled power cycling, and e) implementation of a registry component for IDS and attributes. The top three recommended actions, deemed achievable within S years of the release of this report are: An ocean observing interoperability standards body should be established that addresses standards for a) metadata, b) commands, c) protocols, d) processes, e) exclusivity, and f) naming authorities.[PDF contains 48 pages]

Meteorological Buoy Sensor Workshop, Solomons, Maryland, April 19-21, 2006: workshop proceedings

The co-organized Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) and National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) Workshop "Meteorological Buoy Sensors Workshop" convened in Solomons, Maryland, April 19 to 21,2006, sponsored by the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES) Chesapeake Bay Laboratory (CBL), an ACT partner institution. Participants from various sectors including resource managers and industry representatives collaborated to focus on technologies and sensors that measure the near surface variables of wind speed and direction, barometric pressure, humidity and air temperature. The vendor list was accordingly targeted at companies that produced these types of sensors. The managers represented a cross section of federal, regional and academic marine observing interests from around the country. Workshop discussions focused on the challenges associated with making marine meteorological observations in general and problems that were specific to a particular variable. Discussions also explored methods to mitigate these challenges through the adoption of best practices, improved technologies and increased standardization. Some of the key workshop outcomes and recommendations included: 0cean.US should establish a committee devoted to observations. The committee would have a key role in developing observing standards. The community should adopt the target cost, reliability and performance standards drafted for a typical meteorological package to be used by a regional observing system. A forum should be established to allow users and manufacturers to share best practices for the employment of marine meteorological sensors. The ACT website would host the forum. Federal activities that evaluate meteorological sensors should make their results publicly available. ACT should extend their evaluation process to include meteorological sensors. A follow on workshop should be conducted that covers the observing of meteorological variables not addressed by this workshop. (pdf contains 18 pages)

Hydrocarbon sensors for oil spill prevention and response, Seward, Alaska, April 8th-10th, 2008: workshop proceedings

During April 8th-10th, 2008, the Aliance for Coastal Technology (ACT) partner institutions, University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), and the Oil Spill Recovery Institute (OSRI) hosted a workshop entitled: "Hydrocarbon sensors for oil spill prevention and response" in Seward, Alaska. The main focus was to bring together 29 workshop participants-representing workshop managers, scientists, and technology developers - together to discuss current and future hydrocarbon in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors as they apply to oil spill prevention and response. [PDF contains 28 pages] Hydrocarbons and their derivatives still remain one of the most important energy sources in the world. To effectively manage these energy sources, proper protocol must be implemented to ensure prevention and responses to oil spills, as there are significant economic and environmental costs when oil spills occur. Hydrocarbon sensors provide the means to detect and monitor oil spills before, during, and after they occur. Capitalizing on the properties of oil, developers have designed in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors that absorb or reflect the electromagnetic energy at different spectral bands. Workshop participants identified current hydrocarbon sensors (in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors) and their overall performance. To achieve the most comprehensive understanding of oil spills, multiple sensors will be needed to gather oil spill extent, location, movement, thickness, condition, and classification. No single hydrocarbon sensor has the capability to collect all this information. Participants, therefore, suggested the development of means to combine sensor equipment to effectively and rapidly establish a spill response. As the exploration of oil continues at polar latitudes, sensor equipment must be developed to withstand harsh arctic climates, be able to detect oil under ice, and reduce the need for ground teams because ice extent is far too large of an area to cover. Participants also recognized the need for ground teams because ice extent is far too large of an area to cover. Participants also recognized the need for the U.S. to adopt a multi-agency cooperation for oil spill response, as the majority of issues surounding oil spill response focuses not on the hydrocarbon sensors but on an effective contingency plan adopted by all agencies. It is recommended that the U.S. could model contingency planning based on other nations such as Germany and Norway. Workshop participants were asked to make recommendations at the conclusion of the workshop and are summarized below without prioritization: *Outreach materials must be delivered to funding sources and Congressional delegates regarding the importance of oil spill prevention and response and the development of proper sensors to achieve effective response. *Develop protocols for training resource managers as new sensors become available. *Develop or adopt standard instrument specifications and testing protocols to assist manufacturers in further developing new sensor technology. *As oil exploration continues at polar latitudes, more research and development should be allocated to develop a suite of instruments that are applicable to oil detection under ice.

Recent Developments in In Situ Nutrient Sensors: applications and future directions, Savannah, Georgia, December 11-13, 2006: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a Workshop on "Recent Developments in In Situ Nutrient Sensors: Applications and Future Directions" from 11-13 December, 2006. The workshop was held at the Georgia Coastal Center in Savannah, Georgia, with local coordination provided by the ACT partner at the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography (University System of Georgia). Since its formation in 2000, ACT partners have been conducting workshops on various sensor technologies and supporting infrastructure for sensor systems. This was the first workshop to revisit a topic area addressed previously by ACT. An earlier workshop on the "State of Technology in the Development and Application of Nutrient Sensors" was held in Savannah, Georgia from 10-12 March, 2003. Participants in the first workshop included representatives from management, industry, and research sectors. Among the topics addressed at the first workshop were characteristics of "ideal" in situ nutrient sensors, particularly with regard to applications in coastal marine waters. In contrast, the present workshop focused on the existing commercial solutions. The in situ nutrient sensor technologies that appear likely to remain the dominant commercial options for the next decade are reagent-based in situ auto-analyzers (or fluidics systems) and an optical approach (spectrophotometric measurement of nitrate). The number of available commercial systems has expanded since 2003, and community support for expanded application and further development of these technologies appears warranted. Application in coastal observing systems, including freshwater as well as estuarine and marine environments, was a focus of the present workshop. This included discussion of possible refinements for sustained deployments as part of integrated instrument packages and means to better promote broader use of nutrient sensors in observing system and management applications. The present workshop also made a number of specific recommendations concerning plans for a demonstration of in situ nutrient sensor technologies that ACT will be conducting in coordination with sensor manufacturers.[PDF contains 40 pages]