The Design Of Arduino Prototype For Monitoring Septic Tank Using Message Gateway
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26905/jeemecs.v3i2.4404Keywords:
Arduino, Prototype, Septik tank, Sensor MQ-2, SIM800LAbstract
The housing that is currently being built usually only has a small septic tank, which can lead to problems with the tank if the tank is full. Starting from the blocked septic tank can even explode. The purpose of this research is to make prototype in monitoring a tank in a septic tank with Message Gateway. The tools used in this study are Arduino Uno which is tntegrated with ultrasonic sensors, MQ-2 sensors and SIM800L Modules, after which the LCD receives data from Arduino and is displayed on the LCD followed by a LED light. And fro SIM800L it will automatically send a short message. The result of this research if this study after Arduino processed data from the HC-SR04 Ultrasonic Sensor and MQ-2 Sensor then the sensor sent a signal to SIM800L and SIM800L sent a Message to the user with a warning of 30%, 50% and 100% water level septic tank. The MQ-2 sensor can only detect gas in the septic tank, if the gas in the septic tank is more than 15.000 ppm it will automatically send a Message to the user that the Danger Gas, which indicates that this prototype has been running as expected
DOI :Â https://doi.org/10.26905/jeemecs.v3i2.4404
References
D. M. Wisesa, “Perencanaan Instalasi Pengolahan Air Limbah di Rumah Susun Tanah Merah Surabaya.†Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, 2016.
H. S. I. Pertiwi, M. Rahardjo, and N. Nurjazuli, “Hubungan Pengetahuan, Sikap BAB, dan Kepemilikan Septic Tank Dengan Status ODF (Open Defecation Free) di Kecamatan Candisari Kota Semarang,†J. Kesehat. Masy., vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 143–149, 2018.
Mochamad Fajar Wicaksono, Aplikasi Arduino dan Sensor : Disertai 32 Proyek Sensor dan 5 Proyek Robot. Bandung: Informatika Bandung, 2019.
D. Setiawan, J. E. Candra, and C. E. Suharyanto, “Perancangan Sistem Pengontrol Keamanan Rumah Dengan Smart CCTV Menggunakan Arduino Berbasis Telegram,†InfoTekJar J. Nas. Inform. dan Teknol. Jar., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 185–190, 2019.
P. D. P. Adi and R. Arifuddin, “Design Of Tsunami Detector Based Sort Message Service Using Arduino and SIM900A to GSM/GPRS Module,†JEEMECS (Journal Electr. Eng. Mechatron. Comput. Sci., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–4, 2018.
F. Saftari, “Proyek Robotik Keren dengan Arduino,†Jakarta Elex Media Komputindo, 2015.
S. Sadi and I. S. Putra, “Rancang Bangun Monitoring Ketinggian Air dan Sistem Kontrol pada Pintu Air Berbasis Arduino dan SMS Gateway,†J. Tek, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 77–91, 2018.
Downloads
Published
2020-08-30
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
