Role of Wi-Fi Data Loggers in Remote Labs Ecosystem

  • Venkata Vivek GowripeddiEmail author
  • B. Kalyan Ram
  • J. Pavan
  • C. R. Yamuna Devi
  • B. Sivakumar
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 22)


All data are important and useful but what is more important is the way this data is used. Wi-Fi Data-logger is a major step towards making use of data for effective management of a remote lab. The purpose is to build a real-time data-logger with Wi-Fi capabilities to remotely monitor the equipment status and environmental conditions inside a remote lab containing high-end electrical and electronic machinery. This device should be adaptive, flexible, easy to use and should give deterministic results to take action.

The structure of Wi-Fi data logger consists of two zones: (a) device-level-hardware zone and (b) server-level-software zone.

  1. (a)

    A micro-controller is connected to various sensors such as Temperature, Humidity, Gas, motion sensors and to fault testing lines of the equipment and peripherals. The data is continuously obtained in real time is pumped through Wi-Fi over TCP/IP or UDP protocols to a server computer.

  2. (b)

    It consists of a simple program running on the server computer to receive the data from micro-controller through Wi-Fi and organize it. This program also has a script running which throws up possible a warning in case of malfunctioning and possible solution with step-wise instructions is displayed.


Key Outcomes include: (a) Seamless integration of the device with the existing machinery requiring minimal effort (b) Protection to components (c) Over 40% reduction in the time required to detect and fix an issue achieved by impeccable synchronous effort of device and software.

Thus, these Wi-Fi data-loggers enhance the way remote labs operate by taking care of safety issues and increasing the stability of the whole remote labs architecture. This technology can pave way for more complex architecture of remote labs and the evolution of Wi-Fi data-logger technology will result in evolution of remote labs.


Remote labs Internet of Things (IoT) Wireless monitoring Real time Safety Revolutionary 



The authors wish to extend thanks to various universities and industries across India and across the world for providing with opportunities to test the datalogger architecture and make findings.


  1. 1.
    Auer, M.E.: Virtual lab versus remote lab. In: 20th World Conference on Open Learning and Distance Education (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ram, B.K., Kumar, S.A., Sarma, B.M., Mahesh, B., Kulkarni, C.S.: Remote software laboratories: facilitating access to engineering softwares online. In: 2016 13th International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation (REV), pp. 409–413. IEEE, February 2016Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pruthvi, P., Jackson, D., Hegde, S.R., Hiremath, P.S., Kumar, S.A.: A distinctive approach to enhance the utility of laboratories in Indian academia. In: 2015 12th International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation (REV), pp. 238–241. IEEE, February 2015Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Esche, S.K., Chassapis, C., Nazalewicz, J.W., Hromin, D.J.: An architecture for multi-user remote laboratories, dynamics (with a typical class size of 20 students), 5, 6 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Outram, J.D., Outram, R.G.: Adaptive data logger. U.S. Patent No. 4,910,692, 20 March 1990Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yunlong, F., Fang, A., Li, N.: Cortex-M0 processor: an initial survey. Microcontrollers Embed. Syst. 6, 33 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D’Ausilio, A.: Arduino: a low-cost multipurpose lab equipment. Behav. Res. Methods 44(2), 305–313 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gontean, A., Szabó, R., Lie, I.: LabVIEW powered remote lab. In: 2009 15th International Symposium for Design and Technology of Electronics Packages (SIITME). IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Auer, M., Pester, A., Ursutiu, D., Samoila, C.: Distributed virtual and remote labs in engineering. In: 2003 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, vol. 2, pp. 1208–1213. IEEE, December 2003Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aloni, E., Arev, A.: System and method for notification of an event. U.S. Patent No. 6,965,917, 15 November 2005Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shnayder, V., Hempstead, M., Chen, B.R., Allen, G.W., Welsh, M.: Simulating the power consumption of large-scale sensor network applications. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, pp. 188–200. ACM, November 2004Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tinga, T.: Application of physical failure models to enable usage and load based maintenance. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 95(10), 1061–1075 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vuletid, M., Pozzi, L., Ienne, P.: Seamless hardware-software integration in reconfigurable computing systems. IEEE Des. Test Comput. 22(2), 102–113 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robinson, R.: Cost-effectiveness analysis. BMJ 307(6907), 793–795 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tanner, M., Eckel, R., Senevirathne, I.: Enhanced low current, voltage, and power dissipation measurements via Arduino Uno microcontroller with modified commercially available sensors. APS March Meeting Abstracts (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Venkata Vivek Gowripeddi
    • 1
    Email author
  • B. Kalyan Ram
    • 2
  • J. Pavan
    • 1
  • C. R. Yamuna Devi
    • 1
  • B. Sivakumar
    • 1
  1. 1.Dr. Ambedkar Institute of TechnologyBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.BITS-Pilani KK Birla Goa CampusGoaIndia

Personalised recommendations