| Literature DB >> 25730482 |
Ricardo Badia-Melis1, Luis Ruiz-Garcia2, Javier Garcia-Hierro3, Jose I Robla Villalba4.
Abstract
Every day, millions of tons of temperature-sensitive goods are produced, transported, stored or distributed worldwide, thus making their temperature and humidity control essential. Quality control and monitoring of goods during the cold chain is an increasing concern for producers, suppliers, logistic decision makers and consumers. In this paper we present the results of a combination of RFID and WSN devices in a set of studies performed in three commercial wholesale chambers of 1848 m3 with different set points and products. Up to 90 semi-passive RFID temperature loggers were installed simultaneously together with seven motes, during one week in each chamber. 3D temperature mapping charts were obtained and also the psychrometric data model from ASABE was implemented for the calculation of enthalpy changes and the absolute water content of air. Thus thank to the feedback of data, between RFID and WSN it is possible to estimate energy consumption in the cold room, water loss from the products and detect any condensation over the stored commodities.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25730482 PMCID: PMC4435195 DOI: 10.3390/s150304781
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Experimental conditions.
| Cold Store Number | Set Point (°C) | Experimentation Time (days) | Dates |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | 8 | 13 | 7–19 July |
| 29 | 7 | 8 | 20–27 July |
| 40 | 14 | 4 | 28–31 July |
Figure 1Scheme of the cold rooms and sensor distribution.
Coefficients used to compute the psychrometric data, according to Equation (7) [20].
| R = 22,105,649.25 | D = 0.12558 × 10−3 |
| A = −27,405.526 | E = −0.48502 × 10−7 |
| B = 97.5413 | F = 4.34903 |
| C = −0.146244 | G = 0.39381 × 10−2 |
Percentage of data lost packets and standard error during the experiments.
| Cold Store Number | Mote Inside (Data) | Mote Outside (Data) |
|---|---|---|
| 11 | 0.26 ± 0.01 (6117) | 1.25 ± 0.01 (6007) |
| 29 | 0.24 ± 0.02 (3244) | 0.89 ± 0.02 (3223) |
| 40 | 0.21 ± 0.02 (1846) | 0.70 ± 0.02 (1826) |
Figure 33D plot of Normalized Temperature Difference and Indoor Variance in Chamber 11.
Figure 43D plot of Normalized Temperature Difference and Indoor Variance in Chamber 29.
Figure 2(a) Absolute temperature inside chamber 29; (b) Absolute temperature pre-chamber 29.
Figure 5Psychrometric chart in Chamber 29.
Figure 6Psychrometric chart in Chamber 40.