Week 11: HABL Ballon Launch

Introduction:

This week in class we launched the HABL rig into the upper atmosphere. The rig contained a flipcam which would document the journey, hopefully to ‘space’, in video form. The balloon we used had the possibility of reaching altitudes of over 60,000 feet, which would technically be in the Stratosphere. Luckily we got a warm clear day for the launch, our class gathered and brought the balloon out to the center of campus and let it fly.

Methodology:

We had been working in preparation of launch for over a month. We began almost halfway through the semester with initial designs and research of what the balloon would need to survive a flight to the stratosphere. We had no goal for the official height the balloon reached; we just hoped to see the curvature of the earth and potentially the black of ‘space’. On launch day we brought the rig out and prepped it by placing the camera inside along with a GPS, saran wrap, hand warmers and insulation. The view hole was big enough for a clear view of video at all times. The balloon was filled to nearly a diameter of 8 feet and the rig was attached with about 4 feet of slack. We didn’t fill the balloon to capacity because it would increase in size as it rose. The helium molecules in the balloon increase size as the surrounding air pressure goes down; as a result the balloon volume goes up. With the camera rig hanging below the balloon we had hopes of the camera staying mostly at a downward angle through the upper air turbulence. Also the rig had an attached parachute to help protect it as it fell back to earth.

Discussion:

The balloon took off with high hopes, there wasn’t much wind, and there was a good amount of uplift from the balloon itself. There was a brief scare when it was leaving campus as it flew within about 20ft of a construction crane. However, after that close call it had a rather glorious flight up. After a few minutes we lost sight of the balloon and had to wait for the fateful return of the attached GPS to earth.

See this launch video taken by a camera on campus.

After about an hour we finally got a tracking signal from the GPS unit telling us that the rig had landed near Marshfield, WI. The balloon went up for over an hour and landed about an hour drive away from campus, that’s some good fuel efficiency! Unfortunately the camera only could hold one hour of footage so the video cut out shortly after the balloon popping. Luckily there are some fantastic images we were able to take from the video. Take a look at the images here.

Conclusion:

This was by far the most amazing thing we did in this class. How many people can say they launched a balloon into ‘outer space’? We did it as a class with a relatively small price tag, and a great experience working as a team. Though there were a few issues with the rig, for example the condensation on the video camera lens about a half hour into the video. However, these things can easily be adjusted for greater success for other runs or for the future generation.

This link is to the classes edited video of the balloon rig video.

Yeah we sent a balloon into space.

Week 12: Arc Pad Data Collection

Introduction:
This week in Field Methods we set up a geodatabase for deployment and collected data in the field. This geodatabase was set up for a Trimble Juno GPS unit. Our goal was to go out and collect data on features that can be found at the UWEC Priory. The gathered data will be compiled into useful maps for the University to use for upkeep and possibly renovation for the Priory.

Study Area:
 The UWEC Priory was the location for field collection for our created domains. The Priory is located south of Eau Claire, WI (see Figure 8-1) and is useful to our university as a nature and children’s center. Since we had visited the Priory multiple times we were familiar with the landscape which made the process easier.

Methods: 
The first part of this activity was to make our geodatabase for data collection in the field with my group; Laurel, Phil and I. Each group in the class was tasked with the development of a geodatabase that would house our GPS data. We were responsible for deciding what features we would collect data on, our group decided to collect data on trees. To aid with the collection process we created domains for features within the geodatabase for classifying the collected trees. These tree domains included the condition, notable features and type of tree. The condition of tree domains were as follows; woodpecker damage, visible damage, fallen, new growth and other. For the notable tree features the options were; extra-large, extra-small, new growth and other. For both of these tree domains we added ‘other’ in case there was a remarkable trait that wasn’t a predefined domain. If there was a trait listed as ‘other’ we could enter that trait as text in the field that correlated to the feature domain. To be accurate when finding the types of trees we found the typical species of foliage that grew in the Eau Claire area; mixed hardwood, aspen, oak, red pine, white pine and jack pine. The feature class was then ready to be used for collecting data. (see Figure 12-1)
 For collecting data in the field our instructor provided each class member with a Trimble Juno GPS unit complete with the ArcPad application. These units are capable of nearly everything; they can be used as a cellular phone, palm pilot, internet browser, GPS, e-mail and more. The units were connected to the computer and we loaded our ArcMap map onto it, the map had the point boundary and trees feature class added in. With the ArcPad application on the Juno we could add points and edit feature classes as we saw fit.
We headed out to the Priory with our Juno’s ‘ready’ to go. The plan was to go out and walk the paths and take note of notable trees along those paths. Once my group arrived at the Priory we found out that only one of us had a Juno with the items properly loaded on. So we set out with only one working Juno and began gathering data on trees along the paths. To add data to our created feature classes is simple, in ArcPad you just click the add point tool and it creates a new point. This new point has the GPS coordinates attached and we just had to enter all the features the tree had. After some time we decided it was best to go along another path and collect trees on the other side of the Priory. We retraced and crossed the field and walked along a different path.
Data collection came to a close and we went back to campus to upload our gathered data to the geodatabase on the computer. When uploaded the created points and data are added to the trees feature class in ArcMap. (see Figure 12-2)

Discussion:
As mentioned before we were unable to gather data on a large number of trees due to time constraints. However, we were able to create maps with a fair amount of notable trees along the trails. Figure 12-3 shows the various types of trees that are located along the trails. We were surprised to not find any Jack Pine trees and only one Red Pine. From reading about the foliage in the county I suspected that there would be many trees of that type. When I was recording data I was looking specifically for a Jack Pine in hopes of getting at least one, unfortunately I was unsuccessful. The other trees that are of the <all other value> classification are dead or dying trees and we were unable to verify the species that they were.
The next feature of trees that I mapped out was the notable characteristic that each tree had. (see Figure 12-4) There are a lot of extra-large trees that caught our eyes as we hiked along the trails.The trees that are classified as Other were fallen trees or had visible damage, which leads into the next mapped out classification, tree conditions.
Most of the trees were healthy and notable because of their size, but a few had conditions that could be noted upon. (see Figure 12-5) The trees with different types of damage consisted of some that were fallen, some with storm damage and some with wildlife damage. There seems to be a sizable population of woodpeckers just north of the Priory building considering how many trees were affected by woodpeckers. Surveying the foliage in the area could be very interesting to help try and pinpoint wildlife populations and potential threats to the trees.
Though we were able to gather some data, the gathering process went awry at the start. Two of our group members didn’t have the data on the Juno properly uploaded, and only Laurel knew how to use ArcPad. We had to have a crash course on ArcPad from our instructor and GIS facilitator before we were able to go out and collect data. We also needed to have more than one person gathering data; in the allotted time we were only able to gather data on 14 trees.

Conclusion: 
The exercise was very beneficial in a few ways. The first benefit being that I was able to learn how to use ArcPad on a Juno. This skill set will be very beneficial to me as I further encompass myself into the geospatial realm. Another plus to doing this assignment was we had to trouble shoot our own methods of the entire process. We had only one out of three working Junos, and our group barely knew how to use ArcPad prior to the exercise. Though it wasn’t the most efficient way of learning how to use software, it was a good heads up for us to always be prepared.