ME 472 İnterim Proposal report
Ocean sensor For detecting pollition
With the development of prduction and unending demand rised usage of factories and cargoships. Only
with these to reason most of the ocean ecosystem in great danger. In Condor more than thirty three
percent of marine species destroyed by ocean pollition. As a team we want to find a solition to improve
this systems. Our plan is improving and if neccesary developing a water sensors to attach any kind of
ships to detect pollition of any kind. With this improvment we can get more clear data of any kind. Such
as change in the water in that spesifc part of ocean. Evenmore with the improvent we can detect the
source of the pollution. This paper is about how to sense plastic pollition and salt levels.
Şekil 1
Plastic is the most prevalent type of marine debris found in our ocean and Great Lakes. Plastic debris can
come in all shapes and sizes, but those that are less than five millimeters in length (or about the size of a
sesame seed) are called “microplastics.” Microplastics is the hardest subject so far as they maket he
ninetyseven percent of the ocean surface and effecting our health and life quailty. In ‘Şekil 1’ the
microplastic pollition percantage getting higher higher every year.
A photodiode sensor can detect the microplastics. The photodiode sensor is a PN-junction diode that
consumes light energy to produce an electric current. In ‘şekil 2’ we can see The specular reflection
signals of averaged measurements for the microplastics. We can see that they are not very stable against
LPDE5 due to dynamic and free nature of microplastic. While further investigating the singnals the The
transparent PET- plastic, screening the whole beam, has a higher specular reflection signal than that of
the water. This suggests the presence of a material with higher RI than water. On the contrary, the
translucent LDPE5 with lower RI mismatch strongly diffuses the light in a hemisphere resulting in a lower
reflection signal than that of water. For a smaller area of the diverging beam screened by the LDPE1, the
larger part of the beam escapes to the surrounding water. As we can see all the other signals, the
oscillation amplitudes is near symmetric in the vertical way regarding the period of oscillation about the
mean value except for PET1, for which the signal is very asymmetric and is stronger for negative
amplitude. Basically we want to separate microplastics by using light and their difference in output
wavelength.
Şekil 2
For the calculations of pollution there are many equations for plastics, heavy metals and ions but we
want to focus on microplastic and heavy metal pollution on this paper.
For microplastics pollition, Samples were collected by a neuston net (mesh size: 300 μm; mouth area:
0.5 m2 [length 1 m, height 0.5 m]). Microplastics from each sample were enumerated and bulk weighed
using an analytical microbalance ( readability = 0.1 mg). Then each sample passed trough
stereomicroscope.
Plastic abundance, total surface area (SA), total of the longest length measurements (LL) and total weight
were calculated per km2 using two different methodologies, both commonly used in surface water
microplastic studies. Both methodologies calculate the areal concentration by dividing the quantification
value by the area sampled. When calculating sampling area there is two methods as Ship2s method as
Method A, and the method we are using now, multiplying the total count, flowmeter, by
the Impeller Constant (0.245) and by the width of the net(1m), henceforth referred to as Method B. For
both methods the area sampled was divided by one million to convert to km2. Method B was also used to
calculate microplastic concentration per m3 by multiplying the total count, produced by an attached
flowmeter, by the Impeller Constant and the area of the net opening (0.5 m2) to calculate the sampling
volume.
Şekil 3 Black/ships log----- White/flowmeter
Overall, paired t-tests did not identify a significant difference (t = 1.333, p = 0.199),
because of high variability in plastic across samples. For example, two replicates at
Kelvin Seamount had a difference of ~280,000 fragments km−2 when using method
B There were significant correlations between calculated fragment variables (Pearson's correlation):
abundance vs SA, r = 0.894, p < 0.001; abundance vs total weight, r = 0.987, p < 0.001; abundance vs LL,
r = 0.998, p < 0.001; SA vs LL(live load), r = 0.897, p < 0.001; SA vs total weight, r = 0.918, p < 0.001.
However, SA(structure analysis) and LL show two and three outliers, respectively, all of which are samples
with the greatest total surface areas and three have the largest plastic abundance . Additionally, all
outliers were identified as extreme outliers. Paired sample t-tests also found no significant differences
between SA and abundance (t = 1.845, p = 0.082) and SA and LL (t = 1.813, p = 0.086). Finally, the actual
and expected SA were not significantly different (t = 0.131, p = 0.897), but in one case the actual SA was
almost thirteen times the expected SA.
Scatter plot showing the relationships between abundance and total surface area of
plastic debris (F1,18 = 67.624, p < 0.001, r = 0.894), and between total surface area
and total of the longest lengths (F1,18 = 70.131, p < 0.001, r = 0.897), calculated
using a flowmeter. Blue data points and trend line represent plastic abundance, red
data points and trend line represent total plastic longest lengths.
Source
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11434-012-5395-5
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/optical-
measuring-instrument
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045653519310495
https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57204394717
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12398364/
https://nevonprojects.com/iot-water-pollution-monitor-rc-boat/
