kick-off meeting - wp1

Project SLOPE1

WP 1– Definition of requirements and system analysis

Project SLOPE2

T 1.1 – User requirements

Trento, January 08th, 2014

Index3

1. Scope

2. Workplan

3. Methodology

4. Time Schedule

5. Contact info

1. Scope4

This task aims to: Identify users that will use SLOPE tools Understand their needs of SLOPE Understand the system requirements so it is useful for users

To be developed from M1 to M3

Includes development of “D1.0.1 user requirements report” Due to Month 3.

Partners involved: all ITENE (leader), GRAPHITECH, CNR, KESLA, COAST, MHG,

BOKU, FLY, GRE, TRE

2. Proposed Workplan5

1. Identify user groups ITENE will contact the partners to develop a join

classification based on each partners experience. : Foresters, and other decision makers also logistic

operators, brokers, end-users, and forest owners Final classification needs to be validated by consortium Ends with agreed classification.

2. Define questionnaires Questionnaires for each use group will be developed by

ITENE with the help of partners Final questionnaires needs to be validated by consortium Ends with developed questionnaries.

2. Proposed Workplan6

3. Perform questionnaires Each partner will contact a small quantity of users

(to be defined) from different user groups.

4. Gather and analyse data By ITENE Validated by consortium

Development of D1.0.1 ITENE will ask for contribution from partners

3. Methodology7

Partners contribution GRAPHITECH (IT): input for system requirements (3D

technologies and simulation of planning operations) CNR- Trees and Timber Institute- IVALSA (IT), input

for systems requirements, contact with end users KESLA (FI): input for system requirements(cranes,

harvester heads, strokes), contact with end users Coastway Ltd (IR): input for system requirements

(forest mapping, routes, planning requirements).

3. Methodology8

Partners contribution MHG (Fin): system requirements (ERP material quantity,

quality and availability ) BOKU (AU): system requirements (near infrared

spectroscopic measurements and hyperspectral imaging for model-based quality control of mountain forest production)

Flyby S.r.l.(IT):system requirements (forest inventory) Greifenberg teleferiche sas (IT): system requirements

(machinery for wires, cranes )and contact with ens users

3. Methodology9

Work will be done based on specific methodologies for data gathering i.e. Métrica v3 methodology used by MAP (Spanish

Public Management Ministry) to gather methodological needs for TIC developments

i.e. Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge (IEEE)

3. Methodology10

Preliminary groups Logistic operators (transport of timber)

MHG Systems Land owners (own the land)

CNR- IVALSA BOKU

End users (cut down trees, sell timber and wood) KESLA, GREIFENBERG

Other?

1 questionnaire model per each group

Minimum of 5 questionnaires filled per group

3. Methodology11

Filling the questionnaires Each SLOPE partner should:

Explain the Project to the selected user Read and explain the questionnaire to him Write down his answers

Example questions: Which information would you be interested in

receiving from the management system? What information do other platforms provide? What

do you find lacking?

4. Time Schedule12

5. Contact info13

Juan de Dios Díaz [email protected]

Emilio Gonzalez [email protected]

Patricia Bellver [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



14

Thanks for your attention!!!

Task 1.2 Hardware and equipment definition

Kick-off Meeting 8-9/jan/2014

The existing and possible new technical solutions are so many that we have to work from the end user upwards. This is the reason why the complete definition of T.1.2. Hardware and equipment definition (KESLA) is mainly based on the results of WP1- T.1.1.: Users and System requirements (ITENE). Questionnaire directed to:

• Forest owners• Harvesting contractors• Transport companies• Mill companies• Biomass processing companies• Others…

Task 1.2Hardware and equipment definition


Definition of requirements …

• A fixed RFID reader integrated in the Harvester Head.• Each processed log will be measured and recorder on real time.• GPS in the base machine.• Marking system log by log.• Base machine logs.



…and system analysis:

The integration of all information described above will allow for the analysis.The integration of all data in one single system is the key to analyse and provide withvaluable information along the procurement chain. The combination on the describeddata will provide more information and that information we will have to decide how andwhich information is transferred (Bluetooth, wireless, by colour marking, print, USB,other…) MHG expertise is very important here. Systems to be combined:

1. A fixed RFID reader integrated in the Harvester Head.2. Each processed log measured. *13. GPS in the base machine.4. Marking system log by log.5. Base machine logs.

*1 - Kesla Control unit interface Linux based: StanForD Standard ( StanForD: Standar For Data).Link with more info about the communication protocol: http://www.skogforsk.se/en/About-skogforsk/Collaboration-groups/StanForD/StanForD-2010/

http://www.skogforsk.se/en/About-skogforsk/Collaboration-groups/StanForD/StanForD-2010/



QuestionnaireT1.1.

Hardware and

Software meets all needs?

Market needsHardware definition

T1.2.

Software definition

Machine Interface (HMI)T1.3

Intelligent processor head T 3.4

% Covered Needs



Working assumptions on the following Information:

• Inventory by laser scan.• RFID tag on each tree.• Tree cut by chainsaw.• Whole length transport by cable to a landing zone.• Landing zone with Excavator + Kesla Harvester Head • Tree by tree traceability must be kept and integrated into the platform.• Harvester information updated on real time.• Tree species is Norway spruce.



Scenario A:Norway Spruce with a normal diameter distribution where 85% of the trees have a diameter under 55CMUpper limit 670mm diameter.For that Scenario the possible combinations Kesla Harvester Head + Base machine are:

A.1. Kesla 25RHS-II + Excavator A.2 Kesla 25RH-II + Rubber wheel machine



A.1. Kesla 25RHS-II + Excavator

Excavator requirements:Weight from 14 to 17 TonesOil Pressure: 210-240 bar (3045-3480 PSI)Oil flow: 170-210 l/min (45-55 gpm US)Engine power: 60-85 kW (80 – 115 hp)



A.1. Kesla 25RHS-II + Rubber wheel

Requirements:Weight from 13 to 20 TonesOil Pressure: 210-240 bar (3045-3480 PSI)Oil flow: 200-250 l/min (53-66 gpm US)Engine power: 75-100 kW (100 – 135 hp)



Equipment Limitations for modifications introduced in the Harvester head:

• Size• Weight• Protected against Shock• Protected against Dirt• Protected against Moist• Protected against High temperatures• Protected against Vibrations

TASK 1.3Human Machine Interface (HMI)

definition

Work Package 1: Definition of requirements and system analysis

Work Package 1: Definition of Requirements and

System Analysis

Starting : January 2014Ending: June 2014

Objectives

• Identify the targeted users and specifically their needs and requirements.• Define state of the art processes for planning, managing and assessing harvesting

operations and supply chains in mountainous areas.• Define a comprehensive set of information to support the implementation of more

timely decisions, and improve the quality of decisions• Detail the data and metadata model covering the use of SLOPE• Define the hardware, equipment, sensors and mobile devices to be used• Define the HMI requirements, especially for the on-field devices and machines• Define and document the system architecture to be used• Define the project technicalities and technical requirements such as use case special

conditions

Task 1.3: Human Machine Interface definition

Task Leader: GraphitechTask Partecipants: Kesla,MHG Systems,Greifenberg,Treemetrics,Itene

Deliverable D1.02: Human Machine Interface:A document detailing the results of T1.3. It will contain the identification of the Human Machine Interfaces and their specifications related the project purposeDelivery Date= April 2014Estimated person Month= 6.00

Task Leader 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1 Definition of requirements and System analysis MHG

1.1 Users and System requirements Itene

1.2 Hardware and equipment definition Kesla

1.3 Human Machine Interface definition Graphitech

1.4 Mountainous Forest Inventory data model definition CNR

1.5 System Architecture MHG

Task 1.3:ScheduleTask Leader: GraphitechTask Partecipants: Kesla,MHG Systems,Greifenberg,Treemetrics,Itene

Objective: Delivering a document with the Human Machine Interfaces mockup in the different project scenarios

Steps

15/02 Providing the table of context of the document 01/03 Draft of the Interface Mockup for all the scenarios from every partecipants involved15/03 Definition of the interfaces relatively to the User Requirements Draft(Task 1.1)01/04 First completed draft of the final documents15/04 Final version of the document reviewed30/04 Completed and Validated Deliverable Document

Task 1.3:PartecipantsTask Leader: GraphitechTask Partecipants: Kesla,MHG Systems,Greifenberg,Treemetrics,Itene

Graphitech: Project leader, will coordinate all the partecipants to this task and in particular will definethe interfaces for on field in vehicle devices considering easyness of use.

MHG and Treemetrics: will define the web and mobile interfaces for forestry data analysis

Kesla: provide expertise and product components mainly harvester head technology, will support thedefinition of the interfaces in the context of useness for harvesting expert operators

Greifenberg: with its device, Tecno, a totally autonomous remote controlled self propellled motorcarriage, will help to define the requirements of human machine interface for on field operation

Itene: is in charge for the activity of traceability of the wood, and assisted in interface definition for treemarking.

T1.3 ObjectivesThe objective of this task is to define user interface for the whole SLOPE system:• Specify user interface needs (offline devices, web)• Specify web user interface requirements• Specify user interface in-vehicle and on field devices

Detailed investigation of the possible interactions and of the designof the different machine interfaces should be performed speciallyin terms of views and usability

T1.3 ObjectivesConsider different types of scenario:• Office planning• Harvesting on field• Post Harvesting Resource Planning..with different types of devices:• Mobile • Web• Desktop PC• In vehicle unit or embedded systems

Particular attention will be paid to the mobile and on vehicle interface for ease of access and usability into on-field conditions (Graphitech).

The mobile and web interface will be designed by MHG and TreeMetrics to allow forestry data analysis and synthesis using charts, diagrams and maps on specific database views

Forest Operation Planning

Mountain Forest Surveying System: characterize the forest physical and geometric propertyModel Based Planning System for Forest Managment : integration of spatial information,such as Digital TerrainModels, Digital Surface Models and Canopy Models, together withmultisensor data and resources from existing databases and forest management plans

User Interface would provide

Accurate 3D models of the forest areas to enable forestry planners to access the best routes and most cost effective methods of harvesting

3D visualization of forest to be used to visualize stand succession, landscapetransformation, and regional planning, and to improve decision-making processesand understanding forest management in general

Combine of 3D visualization of trees and ecosystem information with managementpractices, to create realistic visual scenarios of forest management

Forest Operation Planning

Selection of the most suitable cable crane set-up and positioning for each forest plot,minimizing or eliminating the time-demanding field survey

Coordination of tree marking with the subsequent harvesting operations for enhancedproductivity, work safety and reduction of damages to the remaining standing trees to theminimum, sharing the GPS position of the future cable crane lines

Harvesting on Field

Dedicated Human Machine Interfaces will ensure easier and safer use of harvestingmachines, particularly by providing an increased control of machine interactions

• Cable Crane Carriage will operate with high degree of automation but the operator willbe informed by a set of sensors integrated in the machine to constantly monitor itsconditions or any critical event.

• in the Cable Crane and in the Processor Head equipment Intelligent Systems will beincluded, in order to support automatic/continuous acquisition of all available resourcecharacteristics that will be saved as information data forwarded to external servers.

Harvesting on Field

On-field data, acquired in real-time during harvesting operations will be stored and sharedthrough a dedicated “cloud”-based repository and integrated in a comprehensive dynamicnetwork

Residual biomass (wood chips) will be estimated as a difference between the mass ofextracted loads (cable crane) and mass of timber assortments (processor). Its traceabilitywill be based on the information provided by the logistic ERP.

After Harvesting

Enterprise Resource Planning system for Mountain ForestThe system will integrate information about material origin, quality and availability that willbe accessible online and in real-time to a series of users(logistic operators, brokers, end-users, and forest owners) enabling online stock exchange

Information should be provided in easy accessible interface for non computer experts andcould permit to compute economically crucial parameters such as quantity and qualityindices of the differents assortments

Forest Information

System

WP1. Definition of use cases, requirements and system architecture


•Task 1.1 - Users and System requirements – ITENE• Partners: GRAPHITECH, CNR, KESLA, COAST, MHG, BOKU, FLY, GRE, TRE

• Task 1.2 Hardware and equipment definition – KESLA• Partners: CNR, COAST, MHG, BOKU, FLY, GRE, ITENE

• Task 1.3 Human Machine Interface (HMI) definition – GRAPHITECH• Partners: KESLA, MHG, GRE, TRE, ITENE

• Task 1.4 Mountainous Forest inventory data model definition – CNR• Partners: GRAPHITECH, COAST, MHG, BOKU, FLY, GRE, TRE

• Task 1.5 - System Architecture - MHG• Partners: GRAPHITECH, FLY, TRE, ITENE


WP1 Timeline, deliverables, communication – M01-M06

January February March April May June

ITENE:Task 1.1: D1.01UsersRequirementsReportKESLA:Task 1.2: D1.04TechnicalRequirementsReport

2-month report

Project meeting/6-

month report

GRAPHITECH:Task 1.3: D1.02HumanMachine Interface

CNR:Task 1.4: D1.03Data and Meta Data modelReportMHG:Task 1.5: D1.05System ArchitectureSpecifications

M M


WP1 Risk Control

• Timeframe; M01-M06• Very strict and organized execution is a must

• Communication• Skype & physical meetings (2-3)• Communication platform + Dropbox as a tool

• Person in charge per partner• ITENE:• KESLA:• GRAPHITECH• CNR:• COAST:• BOKU:• FLY:• TRE:


T 1.5 System architecture

System architecture

Users and System

requirements

Hardware and equipment definition

Human Machine Interface (HMI)

definition

Mountainous Forest inventory data

model definition

T 1.5 System architecture - overview


SLOPE Platform – Forest Information System

Ngos, Consumers, Producers, Contractors etc.

Collaboration, User management, Presentation, Social etc.

Integration Plugins / Data Integration Platform

Operational Management

Forest Inventory management &

optimization

Timber & Biomass Trading

Supply Management


T1.5 System architecture-Integration layers View Integration layer

Use Liferay open source portal as view level integration platform for providing good, seamless user experience for SLOPE platform users.

Iframe/Web Proxy plugin integration for standalone applications Native portal application development for custom views User management, authentication and authorization out of the box. Provides Single Sing-on framework

Data integration layer Use Integration Platform like Mule ESB for integrating different databases

and systems Integration Platform architecture the data/protocol transformation and

Integration logic is in one place Direct point-to-point integration possibilities must be considered too by

using SOAP or another standard base formats/protocols One application could be like integration platform that shares all needed

data to all integrated applications in the portal environment

T 1.5 System architecture -Data integration level


Integration Platform- Data/Protocol transformation and routing

- Publish Web Services from different systems and databases

Operational Management

Forest Inventory management &

optimization

Timber & Biomass Trading

Supply Tracking and Management

Direct SOAP interfaces

Data collection, sensors, tags etc.


T1.5 System architecture - MHG Biomass Manager example

Resource Management

Storage Management

Work Management

Mobile Management

• For real time management and control of all feedstock and forest resources, procurement and supply activities

• For optimal efficiency, transparency, increased value of feedstock and certifiable origin tracking

SOAP Interfaces


T1.5 System architecture - MHG Portal Platform for view integration

MHG Biomass Manager -Liferay portal plugin

example.

MHG Biomass Manageris one integrated tool in

MHG Portal Platformconcept.


T1.5 Technology plan

• Use SOA priciples for designing the SLOPE system architecture• Linux server instances on Vmware vSphere cloud platform• MySQL database and Glassfish application server for integration platform• Liferay open source portal platform for view level integration platform and user

management• Specify needed integration points and design SOAP interfaces• Use integration tool for data integration level. For example Mule ESB.

kick-off meeting - wp1

Education