StunAssure → Hardware design
Hardware design

Cheap, isolated, buildable.

Three small devices give the verification stack its physical senses. This is a costed design — what we will build — not yet a built product. Every measurement is galvanically isolated and non-intrusive.

Why hardware

Poultry has a stun monitor. Fish has nothing.

Poultry processing uses a regulator-accepted inline stun-current monitor; for fish there is no field dose-verification at all — guidance recommends parameters but is silent on how operators confirm delivery, and the required field strength depends on water conductivity. We close that with three cheap devices.

Build item 1 · ready now

Inline stun-dose + recovery logger

The fish equivalent of the poultry stun-current monitor — a sub-$100 box that clips onto an existing stunner and measures, per batch, the dose delivered and the stun→bleed interval. This is the first device we build.

ComponentExample partRoleIndicative €
MCU / edgeESP32-S3 dev boardacquisition, on-device verdict, BLE/MQTT8–12
Voltage sense (isolated)differential probe + ADS1115 16-bit ADCstun voltage, galvanically isolated6–10
Current sensesplit-core CT clampstun current (rms), non-intrusive8–15
Field electrodesgraphite/Ti pair, fixed spacingin-water field-strength proxy (V/cm)5–10
Conductivity (EC)analog EC probeconductivity for field interpretation12–20
Water temperatureDS18B20 waterproofcontext + correction2–4
Interval inputbutton / opto line-triggerstun→bleed timing1–3
Power + isolationisolated DC-DC, RCD-protectedsafety8–15
EnclosureIP65 box + cable glandswet environment6–12
Indicative bill of materials. Target: a sub-$100 device that turns an existing stunner into a verified one.

Firmware computes rms current, peak field and duration at the stun event, reads conductivity and temperature, runs the recovery-clock, and produces the same signed batch record the software core already generates — buffering offline and syncing when a link appears.

Build item 2 · novel

The “dummy-fish” conductivity phantom

A passive strip can’t honestly read field strength in conductivity-varying water — so we don’t use one. Instead, a reusable fish-shaped phantom, tuned to fish-tissue conductivity with embedded electrodes, runs through the stunner periodically to confirm the field actually delivers into a fish-like load.

It is a go/no-go commissioning check: if the internal field is below the species target, the stunner is mis-set before any fish is harmed. No fish-conductivity phantom at stun frequencies exists today — a cheap, reusable, novel opening we can build first.

What it is

  • Agar/saline gel, fish-shaped, conductivity-tuned
  • Embedded head/tail electrodes measure internal field
  • Tiny logger or electrochromic strip = go/no-go readout
  • Per-species / per-water reference card & SOP
Build item 3 · the differentiator (research stretch)

Echo-Stun contact evoked-response rig

The bold layer: a cheap proxy for lab-only EEG. A small probe pulse, then we measure the suppression of the evoked muscle/neural response — a 0–100 “insensibility index,” modelled on the human BIS anesthesia monitor that proves such an index is deployable.

ComponentExample partRoleIndicative €
Biopotential front-endADS1299 (8-ch, 24-bit) / AD8232µV-scale evoked-response capture10–40
Stimulus driverisolated probe-pulse generatorevoke a response to test suppression10–20
ElectrodesAg/AgCl or dry contact padsskin-surface pickup2–6
Edge computeRaspberry Pi 5 / Jetson Orin Nanosignal processing, BIS-like index70–250
Shielding / isolationFaraday + medical-grade isolationSNR + safety15–40
Contact/skin-surface variant first (de-risked). Fully-contactless in-water sensing is unproven — water shunts the signal — and is treated as a funded research question, validated against expert/EEG ground truth.

Safety first. In-water electrical stunning involves lethal voltages and currents. All sensing is galvanically isolated and non-intrusive (clamp/inline taps that never break the stun circuit). Any bench work with energised stunners requires a qualified electrical engineer and proper isolation / RCD protection. The Echo-Stun rig is optional and never gates the cheaper, lower-risk tiers.

Deployment tiers

Automation levels — not different welfare standards.

The same fail-safe logic runs at every tier. Lower tiers are more conservative (more “check manually”), never less safe. We never relax welfare by budget or country.

Tier 1

Lite

Small / low-resource farms & vessels

€0–200
  • Phone/tablet app
  • Manual recovery-clock
  • Species checklist & SOP
  • Signed batch record
Tier 3

Camera / Echo-Stun

Advanced sites

€2k–10k+
  • + camera and/or
  • Echo-Stun index
  • Edge inference
  • Higher assurance
Tier 4

Validation

Labs / certifiers

Project-based
  • EEG/VER collaboration
  • Expert labels
  • Open benchmark
  • Species evidence DB

Recommended first bench build: Item 1 + Item 2 — real welfare value and an auditable record now, with zero live fish.

Deployment cost tiers

Automation levels — not different welfare standards. Log scale (site cost €).

Hardware / BOM site cost: Lite €0–200 · Sensor Box €100–2,000 · Camera/Echo-Stun €2,000–10,000 · Validation project-based. (Full deployment tiers — incl. software, setup and support — are quoted separately in USD.)

Cost leverage vs the alternative

A sub-$100 verifier rides on top of an existing ~€150k in-water stunner. Log scale (€).

In-water stunner install ~€150k/vessel (manufacturer survey incl. Ace Aquatec — EA Forum 2024); StunAssure inline logger €60–110 — assurance added on top for a small fraction of the stunner's cost.

What already exists

In-water stunners; poultry inline current monitors; lab EEG/VER; cheap biopotential front-ends; the ESP32 + sensor ecosystem. We build on mature components.

What we build

The fish inline dose + interval logger; the fish-conductivity phantom; the contact Echo-Stun index — none of which exist for fish today.