Paper ID #12752

Developing a Remote Laboratory at TAMUQ Based on a Novel Unified Framework
Mr. Ning Wang, University of Houston
Dr. Siu Chun Michael Ho, University of Houston
Mr. Qianlong Lan, Texas Southern University
Dpt. of Computer Science Graduate Student
Dr. Xuemin Chen, Texas Southern University
Dr. Xuemin Chen is the founding Director of Virtual and Remote Laboratory and an Associate Professorof Computer Engineering Technology at the Texas Southern University. He received his BS, MS and
Ph.D. degrees in Electrical Engineering from the Nanjing University of Science and Technology (NJUST),
China, in 1985, 1988 and 1991 respectively. He joined the faculty of Texas Southern University (TSU) in
the Department of Engineering Technology in September 2006. Prior to that, he had fifteen years working
experience in academia with six years (1991-1997) at NJUST and another nine years (1997-2006) atUniversity of Houston. He was the recipient of the Top Research Innovations and Findings Award from
Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) for his contribution in the ”Thickness Measurement ofReinforced Concrete Pavement by Using Ground Penetrating Radar” in 2004. Upon joining the TSU, he
actively engaged in the conception and implementation of next-generation remote laboratory. He initiatedthe Virtual and Remote Laboratory (VR-Lab) at TSU in 2008. With the support of NSF HBCU-UP,
CCLI and IEECI programs, and Qatar NPRP Cycle 4 award, he has established a state of the art VR-Lab
at TSU. Now, the VR-Lab website is being served as portal for students to conduct various virtual andremote experiments. He was recognized for excellence in mentoring undergraduate research at TSU in
2012.
Dr. Gangbing Song, University of Houston (CoE)Dr. Hamid R. Parsaei, Texas A&M University at Qatar
Hamid R. Parsaei is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Director of Academic Outreach Office at
Texas A&M University at Qatar. Dr. Parsaei is also a Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineeringand Mechanical Engineering in Texas A&M University in College Station. Dr. Parsaei is a Fellow ofAmerican Society for Engineering Education and Fellow of Institute of Industrial Engineers. he has
published over 220 articles in the refereed archival journals and conference proceedings. Dr. Parsaei is a
registered professional engineer in Texas.

Page 26.487.1

c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015

Developing a Remote Laboratory at TAMUQ Based on a Novel Unified
Framework
Ning Wang
Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of Houston
Houston, TX 77004
nwang@uh.edu
Michael Ho
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
University of Houston
Houston, TX 77004
smho@uh.edu
Qianlong Lan
Dept. of Computer Science
Texas Southern University
Houston, TX 77004
q.lan7324@student.tsu.edu
Xuemin Chen
Dept. of Engineering
Texas Southern University
Houston, TX 77004
chenxm@tsu.edu
Gangbing Song
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
University of Houston
Houston, TX 77004
gsong@uh.edu
Hamid Parsaei
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Texas A&M University at Qatar
Doha, Qatar
hamid.parsaei@qatar.tamu.edu

1Page 26.487.2

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

ABSTRACTIn order to benefit teaching engineering courses while sharing resources with other universities
and colleges, a remote laboratory has been successfully developed based on a novel unified
framework. The laboratory is established through a collaborative effort between three
universities which are Texas A&M University Qatar (TAMUQ), University of Houston (UH)and Texas Southern University (TSU). Two remote engineering experiments are designed andimplemented in the off-site laboratory for teaching purposes, and a generic scheduler isdeveloped for managing the distance operations. End-users can remotely operate or view realtime procedures through most current web browsers on any PC or portable device without
firewall issues and the need for a third party plug-in. Student survey data are collected from amechanical engineering course teaching by using the off-site laboratory at TAMUQ. The survey
data are also presented and analyzed in the paper.
INTRODUCTION
The concept of a remote laboratory implies the use of Internet and system control technologies to
conduct real-time experiments from alternate sites. Because of the effectiveness, flexibility andcost-savings of a remote laboratory, many applications are being recognized in science,technology, engineering and math (STEM) education. These laboratories can be highly effective
tools for helping a wider range of students, regardless of geographic constraints, to obtain
practical experience needed for competency in science and engineering. This locationindependent access is especially useful in scenarios where space is limited, or for distanceeducation 1. The concept of a remote laboratory was discussed in parallel with the introduction of
the Internet in the 1970s and has evolved from the union of online-learning programs, such as
MIT OpenCourseWare, PROLEARN, and other distance laboratory efforts around the world 2,3.
More than 100 remote laboratories for different types of applications can be found around theworld resulting from both individual efforts as well as large scale, multi-national, multiinstitutional efforts 3. Newer modalities of remote laboratories are now beginning to appear,including a LabVIEW-based triple access mode (hands-on, virtual, remote virtual, and remote)laboratory 4, and even multi-user remote laboratory systems 5. Some of the most prominent
examples of remote laboratories are briefly described below, with emphasis on their purpose,architecture and platform.
••

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

2

Page 26.487.3

iCampus iLabs: The iLab at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has developed a“distributed software toolkit and middleware service infrastructure to support Internet
accessible laboratories and promote their sharing among schools and universities on aworldwide scale.” 6.The iLab is based on Client-Server Architecture.
WebLab-Deusto: WebLab-Deusto is an “open-source distributed remote laboratory usedwith students at the University of Deusto since February 2005 and is an essential tool forpractice in different engineering-related subjects. It makes possible the offering of real

•

•

•

•

experiments (e.g., FPGA, CPLD, PIC microcontrollers) to a particular group of users throughany computer network.” 7. This remote laboratory uses Browser-Server architecture software.
UTS Remote Labs: UTS Remote Labs is “part of Lab share, an Australian Government
funded project that aims to create a national network of shared, remotely accessible
laboratories.” 8. This lab also uses Client-Server architecture software.
LiLa (Library of Labs): LiLa was created from the alliance of the eight European
universities and three enterprises. The goal of LiLa is “the composition and dissemination ofa European infrastructure for the mutual exchange of experimental setups and simulations,expressly targeted toward undergraduate studies in engineering and science.” 9 In LiLa, there
are virtual laboratories (simulation environments) and remote laboratories (remotely
controlled, real laboratories via the Internet). For the implementation of remote laboratories,
a browser plug-in can be used to gain control over all devices. LiLa uses a Browser-Server
architecture remote laboratory system with plug-in capability.
Smart Material Remote Labs: The goal of the remote laboratories at University of Houston(UH) is to provide users with an interface that will work in most Internet-enabled webbrowsers without the need to install a software plug-in 10.
Virtual and Remote Laboratory (VR-Lab): Collaboration with UH, Texas Southern
University (TSU) is carried out to develop a plug-in free remote experiment platform. Data
Communication virtual and remote experiments and the remote Digital Signal Processing(DSP) experiments were designed. Their remote laboratory is also the Browser-Server
architecture software system. 11.

As shown above, off-site, distance-accessed laboratories are a vibrant area of research, and there
is continuous development leading to innovative methods of delivering laboratory experiences
independent of physical location. Research indicates most of these laboratories above are basedon two software architecture paradigms: Client-Server architecture and Browser-Server
architecture. Most of recently developed remote laboratories are based on Browser-Server
architecture. Usaually, the remote laboratory includes: a server to host remote experiments, theexperiment device itself, a local computer workstation which is used to control the experimentdevice and plays a role as gateway between server and experiment device, remote access devices(PCs or mobile devices), and users. Most of the devices must be locally handled by a workstationin order to be controlled over the Internet.
Some challenges remain and are as of yet are unresolved which are as follows: 1.) How to
improve the lack of reusability issues in system deployment 2.) How to improve cross-platform
performance and resolve the client-side software without plug-in issues 3.) How to resolve thereal-time experimental data and experimental video traversing network firewall transmission
issues 4.) How to improve the experimental device compatibility issues and 5.) How to improvesystem security issues.12,13

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

3

Page 26.487.4

To address some of the essential challenges such as cross platform access and third party plug-in
free etc. which are listed above, a novel easy-to-use unified framework has been designed andimplemented through the collaborative effort of Texas A&M University Qatar (TAMUQ),
University of Houston and Texas Southern University.
METHODOLOGY
To implement a remote laboratory, there are two tasks needed to be accomplished: software
platform development, and the experimental hardware platform set up. This software platform isbased on the novel unified framework we proposed and developed.
The Novel Unified Framework for Remote Laboratory Development
The novel unified framework is based on the Web 2.0 technology and includes three parts: theclient web application, the server application, and an experiment control application. The client
web application runs on most popular browsers and is based on HyperText Markup Language(HTML), Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), and JQuery/JQuery-Mobile JavaScript libraries; further,it uses Mashup technology for user interface implementation. The server application is based on
Web Service technology and is directly built on top of a MySQL database an Apache web server
engine, and Node.js web server engine 14,15. The server application also uses JSON and Socket.io
16which was developed based on web socket protocol to implement the real-time communication
between the server application and client web application. The server application runs on a Linuxserver. The experiment control application is developed with the LabVIEW, and also uses
Socket.IO to real-time communicate with the server application. The experimental application
runs on a Windows workstation. For the entire novel unified remote laboratory framework, threevital technologies are primarily used in the implementation, These technologies are Socket.io
and Node-HTTP-Proxy used for experiment data and control commands transmission andtraversing firewall, a novel video transmission approach is based on HLS protocol for real-timesystem monitoring, and Mashup technology is used for user interface implementation. The newframework also makes two crucial improvements: real-time experiment live streaming video
across firewall transmissions 17, and real-time control command and experimental datatransmission across a firewall 18. The Table 1 depicts the technical characteristics of the
improved unified remote laboratory framework in detail.

1
2
3

4
5

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

4

Page 26.487.5

6
7

Table 1. Technology/protocol/software list for the new solution.
Name
Technology/Protocol/Software
RemarkHTTP Proxy
Node-HTTP-Proxy
Part of Node.js
Data Protocol
Socket.IO
Part of Node.js
Real-time
HTTP Live Streaming Protocol
experiment video/FFMPEG /Segmenter softwaretransmission
package
Database
MySQL
Client – User
Mashup technology, JavaScript
InterfaceServer - Web Service Apache, Node.js, JSON
LtoN (LabVIEW to
Node.js)
Equipment Control
LabView

To address the network security concern, an isolated experimental network for the remotelaboratory is established. In this private network, all experimental equipment is connected to thecentral server through network switch. The experiment control workstation cannot accessInternet even it has network connection with server. This central server controls all thecommunications between the user and network enabled devices. The user cannot directly accessany networked devices such as experiment camera and workstation. Figure 1 depicts the newisolated experimental network architecture.

Figure 1. The new isolated experiment network architecture

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

5

Page 26.487.6

Two Remote Experiments in Laboratory
Initially, two Mechanical Engineering (ME) experiments, SVP (Smart Vibration Platform) andSMA (Shape Memory Alloy), were incorporated as part of the remote laboratory series used in
the Intelligent Structural Systems (ISS) course. This course, which included both senior
undergraduates and graduate students, introduced students to the applications of smart materials

in structural applications with a strong emphasis on vibration control. In the ISS course, students
were expected to learn about the application of intelligent materials, as well as the mechanicalprinciples governing the control of such materials. After completion of these experiments, thestudents needed to submit a report which included analysis of the experimental data andexperimental data.
Hardware Platform Setup of Remote SVP and SMA Experiments
Two remote experiments are developed in the remote laboratory. As shown in Figure 2, SVP
experiment, and Figure 3, SMA experiment, are ready for use via the Internet.

Figure 2. SVP experiment

Figure 3. SMA experiment

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

6

Page 26.487.7

Remote SVP Experiment: The SVP device, as shown in Figure 2, is assembled by using
fabricated and purchased components. The SVP has a two-story flexible steel frame fixed on topof a plexi-glass box. In the plexi-glass box, there are electric circuit boards made to control theexperiment. It is designed and built by students in the Smart Materials and Structures Laboratory
at the University of Houston. Other than the flexible steel frame, the SVP has a motor, SMA
wires and a purchased magnetic iron clamped on a container of Magneto-Rheological (MR)fluid. The motor with a weight is mounted on the top of the frame and connected to the driverfrom the box on the bottom. When the user controls the current going through the electricalcircuit, the speed of the motor can be adjusted. The rotation of the motor leads the flexible frame
to vibrate. Two SMA wires are hung across the frame. When the current goes through the wires,the temperature will increase. At a certain point of rising temperature, the SMA wires will shrink
in length to reduce the vibration of the frame; this is called a SMA brace. A red steel tongue isplaced downwards into the container of MR fluid. The magnetic iron clamped on the container
can generate magnetic field when it is turned on. That increases the viscosity of MR fluidbecause MR fluid changes from fluid state to semi-fluid state under the magnetic field; this iscalled MR damper.
Remote SMA Experiment: The SMA device, as shown in Figure 4, is assembled by using
fabricated and purchased components also. The mainframe uses L shape aluminum bar fixed byscrews. There are plexiglass sheets fixed on several sides of the SMA to protect and decorate theexperiment. On the bottom, blue LED lights are used to illuminate the experiment. In the middleof SMA device, a red block is lifted by SMA wire and pulled down by two springs. A power
supply, as shown in Figure 5, is connected to a SSR (Solid State Relay) and the SMA wire. The
voltage is always set around 16.7 V. The control of the SSR is determined by computer
intelligence algorithm. A NI (National Instruments) DAQ 6008 USB based real-time system isused for control and data acquisition. A voltage output from the DAQ 6008 is connected to the
SSR. When the voltage output is on, the SSR is on and the 16.7 voltage goes through to SMA,
vice versa. The displacement of the block is measured by a linear sensor at the front bottom. The
sensor is connected to the voltage output and voltage input of the DAQ 6008. The voltage output
from the DAQ 6008 to the sensor is always 4.5 V. When the sensor detects a displacement, it
gives a voltage that can be recorded by the DAQ 6008. Three ceramic pulleys are used toperform this movement of the block and the SMA wire. The SMA wire is tied one head to blockand the other head to one of the bottom frames.

Figure 4. SMA experiment - front view

Figure 5. Power supply

Remote Experiment Camera: Because this is a remote lab, users are permitted to control theexperiment remotely, and are allowed to view the real-time response of experiment. So far, two
web cameras are connected in the lab. The camera for SVP is placed on a camera tripod in frontof the experiment and the other camera for the SMA experiment is fixed on the back side of the
SMA. The models of the two cameras are an Axis M1114 for SVP, as shown in Figure 6, and an
Axis M3005V for SMA, as shown in Figure 4.

7

Page 26.487.8

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

Figure 6. Camera for SVP experiment
Experimental Control Workstations: There are two workstations, as shown in Figure 7, andeach workstation controls one experiment device. LabVIEW 2012 (32-bit) is installed on both
workstations. Three DAQ 6008 USBs are connected to the workstations, and their voltage
outputs and voltage inputs are controlled and sensed by programed code in LabVIEW running on
both workstations. These workstations are also connected to our web server via a network. Alldata generated by LabVIEW is sent to the server. Control commands for the experiment from theInternet are also sent from the server to the workstations.

Figure 7. Workstations

Figure 8. Central Server

Network setup: The server, as shown in Figure 8, is playing the role of communicating with theInternet. All networked devices in an Intranet are connected to the server. The model of theserver we purchased is HP ProLiant DL380e Gen8. The network architecture is shown in Figure
1.

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

8

Page 26.487.9

Sample Paradigms of Two Remote Experiments

The remote experimental user interface can be run on most platforms without any additional
plug-in or software. Only Java runtime engine is required for Microsoft IE for real-time video
stream. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the novel unified framework, a revamped remote
SMA and SVP experiment is implemented based on the novel framework. Figure 9 and Figure10
illustrate the screenshots on desktop PC, iPhone, and iPad when the users conducted the remote
SMA and SVP experiments.
Desktop

iPhoneiPad

Figure 9. Screenshots of SMA Experiment on PC and portable devices

Desktop

IPhoneiPad

Figure 10. Screenshots of SVP Experiment on PC and portable devices

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

9

Page 26.487.10

Here, the remote SMA experiment is used to illustrate the remote experiment operation. Whenthe power indicator on the left corner of the user interface is turned on, the user can move theslide bar by changing the control values of experiments. The sensor output, which indicates thereal-time experiments output values, is shown in the middle of the web page. With our novel data
and video transmission solution, the real-time experimental video can be transferred to different
platforms without a firewall issue. The capability of running remote experiments on portabledevices (such as Android phone, iPhone, iPad etc.) will significantly increase the instrument
utilization and will let users gain insights by observing and interacting with the real instrument inan efficient way.

SURVEY RESULTS OF USING THE REMOTE LABORATORYAs a pilot example, the remote Smart Vibration Platform experiment was used in selectedmechanical engineering courses being taught. A student satisfaction survey was designed for thispilot remote experiment and, in the survey, there were nine statements with four grades ofsatisfaction levels used to measure the survey statements. The survey metrics are listed asfollows:••••

4 - Very Effective/Very Friendly/Strongly Yes
3 - Effective/Friendly/Yes
2 - Somewhat Effective /Somewhat Friendly/No
1 - Not Effective/Not Friendly/Strongly No

Table 2 shows the results of the survey. In the table, all survey statements presented were
designed for students who selected the Mechanical Engineering (ME) courses, and the Average
Response Score (ARS) is calculated through the feedback of students based on the survey
metrics. The Opinions Implication of Average Score (OIAS) gives the detail illustration of themean about the ARS.

1

2

3

4

5

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

10

Page 26.487.11

Table 2. Average Response Percentage by students
Survey Statements
Average Opinions Implication of Average
Respons Scoree ScoreHow effective is the remote experiment
3.5
87.5% say that it’s effective toto help you to learn about shape memory
help them to learn about shapealloy materials
memory alloy materials
How effective is the remote experiment
3.7
92.5% believe that the remoteto demonstrate vibration control using
experiment is effective toshape memory alloy wire braces
demonstrate vibration control
using shape memory alloy wire
bracesHow effective is the remote experiment
3.1
77.5% feel that the remoteto help you to learn about Magnetoexperiment is effective to help
Rheological Fluid
them to learn about MagnetoRheological Fluid
How effective is this remote experiment 3.5
87.5% think that this remoteto demonstrate damping adjustment
experiment is effective tousing Magneto-Rheological Fluid
demonstrate damping adjustment
material
using Magneto-Rheological
Fluid material
How effective is the remote experiment 3.5
87.5% consider that the remoteto demonstrate to demonstrate vibration
experiment is effective tocontrol using Magneto-Rheologicaldemonstrate vibration control
Fluid

6

How effective is the remote experimentto help you to help you to learn about
Smart Materials
How friendly is the graphical userinterface for the remote experiment

3.7

8

The overall effectiveness of this remoteexperiment to assist your learning

3.4

9

Are you willing to see more remoteexperiments to help you learning in yourfuture classes

3.5

7

using Magneto-RheologicalFluid
92.5% think that this remoteexperiment is effective to learn
about Smart Materials
87.5% say that the graphical userinterface for the remoteexperiment is friendly
85.0% feel that this remoteexperiment is effective to assist
their learning
87.5% students willing to see
more remote experiments to help
them learning in future classes

3.5

Figure 11and Figure 12 are bar charts that show the survey results vividly, and, for all of thesurvey statement items, the ARS level is more than 3.4 and the OIAS level is more than 87%.
This result means that most of the students selected effective or very effective level. With theoverall level of OIAS is more than the average level, it can be concluded that a clear majority ofthe students in the pilot consider the remote experiments, based on the novel unified framework,
effective in helping them gain practical experience and knowledge.

Average Response Score (1-4)

4
3
2
1
0
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Statement Number
Figure11. Graph of Average Response Score

11

Page 26.487.12

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

Percentage Level of Opinions (%)

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Statement Number
Figure12. Graph of Percentage Level of Opinions

As Table 2 illustrates, if we assume the following percentages matrices to measure the OIAS:•••

80%-90%60%-79%Below 59%

-Notable effective/Friendly-Effective/Friendly-Weak Effective/Friendly

Then the following survey conclusions can be drawn based on the matrices:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

The remote experiment helped students learn about shape memory alloy materials.
The vibration control using memory alloy wire braces through remote experiment was
effectively demonstrated.
Magneto-Rheological Fluid may be difficult for some students to understand, but it was
shown that students can learn Magneto-Rheological Fluid through remote experimentation.
Demonstrating damping adjustment using Magneto-Rheological Fluid material with thisremote experiment was shown to be effective.
Vibration control using Magneto-Rheological Fluid demonstrated by remote experiment iseffective.
Smart material can be effectively demonstrated and understood by students through remoteexperimentation.
The graphical user interface for the remote experiment is user-friendly.
Remote experimentation to assist students learning is effective overall.
Students express desire to participate in remote experiments in future classes.

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

12

Page 26.487.13

As the above survey results illustrated, the remote laboratory platform based on the novel unified
framework provided a more effective way for teaching ME courses. Through the vivid remoteexperiments interface, student performance and output of ME course learning objectives wereenhanced.

CONTRIBUTIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS
As shown in Table 3, through this research project, three challenges for remote laboratory
development have been solved or improved.
Table 3. Solved and Improved Challenges.
Solved and Improved Challenges

•

•

•

I

Remote laboratory system cross-platform performance and the client side software
without plug-in issue (solved).

II

The real-time experiment data and real-time experiment video traversing network
firewall transmission issues (solved).

III

The remote laboratory system security issue (improved).

To improve Challenge I, a novel unified framework was proposed for implementing the
remote laboratory without the need of an extra plug-in. The user interface can be run on mostpopular Internet browsers in any platform without installing any additional plug-in. The
capability of running remote experiments on portable devices allowed users to gain insights
by observing and interacting with the real instrument in an efficient way.
To resolve Challenge II, two innovative solutions were proposed for remote laboratory
development to solve the real-time experimental video and real-time experimental datatransmission across network firewall issues.
To improve Challenge III, the new isolated experiment network and the authentication URL
were designed to improve the remote laboratory system security issues. These solutions were
implemented in the remote laboratory.

FUTURE WORKS
While the novel remote experiment solution, compared with traditional solutions usedpreviously, has been significantly improved, more development must be done to improve theremote laboratory system stability and security. Future development tasks are listed as follows:••

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

13

Page 26.487.14

Based on the current solution of Challenge I above, the Microsoft IE browser cannot support
MJPEG real-time video format very well. To solve the video display problem in Microsoft IE
browser, users will have to install the Java applet plug-in for the video display. Considering
the speed of software technology development, it is believed this problem can be resolved innear future.
Based on the current solution of Challenge III, encrypted URL authentication is used with the
MD5 encryption and a decryption algorithm to resolve authentication URL issues. A tensecond timer is used to control URL authentication effectiveness, but its stability needs to be
improved in future work.

CONCLUSIONSIn this paper, a remote laboratory based on a novel unified framework was presented. Tworemote experiments, SMA and SVP, were successfully implemented under this novel unified
framework. The real-time experimental video and real-time experimental control command anddata transmission across network firewall issues were successfully resolved through two
innovative solutions proposed for remote experiment development. With the new remotelaboratory solution enabled by the novel unified framework, users can operate or view the realtime remote experiments on most popular web browsers without firewall issues or the need forthird party plug-ins. The remote laboratory has successfully been used for teaching purposes
and, through a satisfaction survey of students in a pilot remote experiment, the new remotelaboratory was shown to be effective in student understanding of course objectives. The
capability of running remote experiments on portable devices permitted users to gain insights
through observing and interacting with the real instrument in a more flexible way. This research
project will improve future teaching and learning activities as well as significantly benefit remotelaboratory development.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This material is based upon work supported by the Qatar National Research Fund under Grant No. NPRP
4-892-2-335.

Bibliography

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education

14

Page 26.487.15

1. Kist, A. A., Gibbings, P., Maxwell, A. D., & Jolly, H. (2013). “Supporting remote laboratory activities at an
institutional level”. International Journal of Online Engineering (iJOE), 9(S5), pp-38.
2. Gomes, L., & Zubía, J. G. (2008). “Advances on remote laboratories and e-learning experiences”. Engineering(6), University of Deusto Publications.
3.Gustavsson, I., Nilsson, K., Zackrisson, J., Garcia-Zubia, J., Hernandez-Jayo, U., Nafalski, A. Hkansson, L.
(2009). On objectives of instructional laboratories, individual assessment, and use of collaborative remotelaboratories. Learning Technologies, IEEE Transactions on, 2(4), 263-274.
4. Abdulwahed, M., & Nagy, Z. K. (2013). Developing the TriLab, a triple access mode (hands-on, virtual, remote)laboratory, of a process control rig using LabVIEW and Joomla. Computer Applications in Engineering
Education, 21(4), 614-626.
5. Barrios, A., Panche, S., Duque, M., Grisales, V. H., Prieto, F., Villa, J. L. & Canu, M. (2013). A multi-user
remote academic laboratory system. Computers & Education, 62, 111-122.
6. Harward, V. J., Del Alamo, J. A., Lerman, S. R., Bailey, P. H., Carpenter, J., DeLong, K., Felknor, C., Hardison,J., Harrison, B., Jabbour, I., Long, P.D., Mao, T., Naamani, L., Northridge, J., Schulz, M., Talavera, D.,
Varadharajan, C., Wang, S., Yehia, K., Rabih Zbib, & Zych, D. (2008). The iLab shared architecture: A Web
Services infrastructure to build communities of Internet accessible laboratories. Proceedings of the IEEE, 96(6),931-950.
7. Orduña, P., Irurzun, J., Rodriguez-Gil, L., Zubía, J. G., Gazzola, F., & López-de-Ipiña, D. (2011). Adding New
Features to New and Existing Remote Experiments through their Integration in WebLab-Deusto. iJOE, 7(S2), 33-39.
8. Zubía, J. G., & Alves, G. R. (2011). “Using Remote Labs in Education - Two Little Ducks in Remote
Experimentation”. Engineering (8), University of Deusto Publications.
9. Mateos, V., Gallardo, A., Richter, T., Bellido, L., Debicki, P., & Villagrá, V. (2012). “Lila booking system:
Architecture and conceptual model of a rig booking system for on-line laboratories”. International Journal of Online
Engineering (iJOE), 7(4), 26-35.

10. Olmi, C., Cao, B., Chen, X., & Song, G. (2011). “A Unified Framework for Remote Laboratory Experiments”.
In Proceedings of the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.
11. Chen, X., Zhang, Y., Darayan, S., Kehinde, L., Olowokere, D., & Osakue, D. (2011). “Using Virtual andRemote Laboratory to Enhance Engineering Technology Education”. In Proc., ASEE Annual Conference &Exposition.
12. Gomes, L. & Bosgoyan, S. (2009). “Current trends in remote laboratories”, IEEE. Trans. on Industrial
Electronics, 56(12), pp. 4744-4756, December, ISSN: 0278-0046.
13. Rodriguez-Andina, J., Gomes, L. & Bogosyan, S. (2010). "Current trends in industrial electronics education",
IEEE. Trans. on Industrial Electronics, 57(10), 3242-3244, October, ISSN: 0278-0046.
14. Hughes-Croucher, Tom & Wilson, Mike (2012), “Up and Running with Node.js (First ed.)”, O'Reilly Media,
p. 204, ISBN 978-1-4493-9858-3
15. Herron, D., (2013). “Node Web Development, Second Edition”, Packt Publishing, ISBN 184951514X, Jul 19,
2013.
16. Rai, R., (2013). "Socket.IO Real-time Web Application Development”, O'Reilly Media, ISBN 178-2-1607-87,
February, 2013.
17. Wang, N., Chen, X., Song, G., & Parsaei, H. (2015). “A Novel Real-time Video Transmission Approach for
Remote Laboratory Development,” International Journal of Online Engineering, 11(1), 4-9.
18. Wang, N., Chen, X., Song, G., & Parsaei, H. (2015). “Using Node-HTTP-Proxy for Remote Experiment Data
Transmission Traversing Firewall,” International Journal of Online Engineering, 11(2), 60-67.

15

Page 26.487.16

Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE North Central Section Conference
Copyright © 2015, American Society for Engineering Education