Open Call for Open Science Equipment + $50 reward

[kingjacob]

Hello everyone,

I'm emailing to announce that The Citizen Science Quarterly is currently holding an open call for open source ideas for scientific equipment.  I've attached the full post beloew but in short the goal is simply to get more people thinking about Open Science Equipment and the best idea will receive a $50 credit to Ponoko to construct the idea.

Announcement link: http://thecitizensciencequarterly.com/2010/11/25/open-call-for-open-science-equipment/

==============================

Currently, most of the equipment in “garage” science labs come from auctions, craigslist and what ever people can scavenge.  While occasionally you can find a gem that doesnt break the bank. Most of whats out there is usually outdated, broken or missing manuals. If citizen science is expected to make real discoveries, we need new tools. Specifically tools that are open source and of good design so that they can be built upon and improved by the community. Off the top of my head I can think of only 2 open sourced pieces of equipment that I can go out, buy and be able to use within a week or two, The Pearl Gel Box and the dremelfuge.  There a few more projects in the early stages of production. But overall there is a severe lack of Open Science equipment.  To help get more people thinking and designing we are holding a call for Open Science Design Ideas. And thanks to the support of Ponoko the best idea will receive $50 in credit to make their idea.

To enter an idea be sure to follow the instructions below and email your idea to jacob(at)thecitizensciencequarterly.com

• Describe your idea so a lay person will understand its use.
• To be picked, idea must be able to be built using Ponoko/sparkfun components
• Prove that you are capable of completing your idea it i.e. drawings, CADs, Schematics, past work, whatever you think will convince us.
• Must agree to be licensed under at least a CC BY-NC-SA. If you'd prefer a more open license thats okay too, just let us know.

On Dec 15th we’ll pick the best idea and they’ll recieve the $50 credit to put towards the construction of their idea.  Good luck brainstorming and If you have any questions, please leave a comment.

P.s. Thanks again to Ponoko for supporting this project.

--

Thank You,
Jacob Shiach

Editor

CitizenScienceQuarterly

[Cathal Garvey]

Love the competition, but the Noncommercial clause, while entirely the right of a designer to impose, doesn't fit the definition of open-source hardware. I grappled with this one for a while with Dremelfuge, before deciding to remove it in the spirit of OSH.

I'd suggest altering it to BY-SA for an "Open Source Hardware Competition", but other than that it all looks great.

I really wish I could take part. :( Someday soon I shall experiment with Ponoko's personal factory service, and fun things will hopefully emerge.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.

--
letters.cunningprojects.com
twitter.com/onetruecathal
twitter.com/labsfromfabs

[kingjacob]

Yeah, I struggled with that but ended up allowing the NC clause since it doesn't interfere with those who want to build there own and with personal manufacturing places like ponoko that should be just about anyone. And it does offer a useful protection for those designers who plan to also manufacture and sell their creations. Of course I also believe the NC clause should only be temporary in order to give the original creator a head start on "counterfeiters" who can sell it for less since they didn't incur the cost of designing (i.e. the original purpose of patents) and should be dropped shortly after the original creator is established. 

 

Cheers,
Jacob Shiach

[Marc Juul]

On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Cathal Garvey <cathal...@gmail.com> wrote:

Love the competition, but the Noncommercial clause, while entirely the right of a designer to impose, doesn't fit the definition of open-source hardware. I grappled with this one for a while with Dremelfuge, before deciding to remove it in the spirit of OSH.

Completely agree.

Great competition, but you really shouldn't call it Open if you're allowing the non-commercial clause. That's very misleading. I'd suggest changing the license or changing the name of the competition.

--
Marc Juul

[Forrest Flanagan]

That's the minimum amount of openness. 

Must agree to be licensed under at least a CC BY-NC-SA. If you’d prefer a more open license thats okay too, just let us know.

--

[Patrik]

Here's a few ideas I posted for the <a href=http://
sciencehackday.pbworks.com/w/page/29731842/SF-Project-
List>Sciencehackday</a> in SF last month. If someone wants to pick
these up and run with it - go for it!

- A <a href = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaker_%28laboratory%29>Shaker
platform</a>. Very basic, somewhat essential, but frankly a little
boring, IMHO. Biggest challenge might be to design something that can
run continuously for a decent amount of time without burning out,
creating fatigue fractures, or shaking itself apart.

- A <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_handling_robot>Liquid
Handling Robot</a>. A much more ambitious project, but well within
reach for a DIY project, considering that there are already open 3D
printer XYZ platforms that have a much finer resolution than would be
needed for, say standard 96-well or even 384-well plates, at a price
of around $600-$2000 (see <a href = http://www.makerbot.com/>MakerBot</a>,
<a href = http://reprap.org/>RepRap</a>). Some enterprising spirits
have even started liquid handling robot designs, built using LEGO
Mindstorm:
<a href = http://2009.igem.org/Team:Washington-Software>BioBrick-A-Bot:
Lego Robot for Automated BioBrick DNA Assembly</a>
<a href = http://openwetware.org/wiki/Mike_Barnkob:Projects/Liquid_handling_robot>Liquid
handling robot</a>

- <a href = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_cytometry>Flow
Cytometry</a>?

- <a href = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescence_microscope>Epifluorescence
Microscope</a>? Typically requires a strong wide-spectrum light
source, dichroic mirror, and a bank of filters for each wavelength.
Instead, we could use a rotating mirror or a disk with slits to
briefly illuminate the specimen, and then image the emitted light less
than a microsecond later. Use a series of different colored LEDs
(including UV) to illuminate, so you can scan the wavelength of the
incoming light. Image using a cheap color microscope. You should be
able to image multiple fluorophores at a time, by cycling through the
LEDs and correlating the incoming spectrum with the rgb value of the
emitted light.

[Cathal Garvey]

Re: Epifluorescence, a nice feature of LEDs is that, when reverse-biased and charged, they discharge at a rate proportional to incoming light but only if that light is of a frequency equal to or greater than their normal emission spectrum.

In other words, in addition to exciting the sample with a bank of LEDs you could use a bank of LEDs to parse the signal into rough frequency bands, too.

Sent from my Android.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.

To po...

[Patrik]

On Dec 6, 12:45 am, Cathal Garvey <cathalgar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Re: Epifluorescence, a nice feature of LEDs is that, when reverse-biased and
> charged, they discharge at a rate proportional to incoming light but only if
> that light is of a frequency equal to or greater than their normal emission
> spectrum.
>
> In other words, in addition to exciting the sample with a bank of LEDs you
> could use a bank of LEDs to parse the signal into rough frequency bands,
> too.

True. Although I suspect a color CCD camera will wind up being far
more sensitive and practical. It would be cool to have a cheap
hyperspectral imager rather than having to rely on good old RGB
filters. But I suspect the convenience of using an off-the-shelf
camera and image processing software easily outweighs the headaches of
redesigning the imaging side.

[Jordan Miller]

I bet it would work for a fluorimeter when you have a highly concentrated sample and can take a single integrated measure for a given well in a multiwell plate.

jordan

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.