1. P14045: Mobile Pediatric Stander System Design Review

2. ●I ntroduction ●Background/Problem statement ●Customer Requirements ●Engineering Requirements ●Benchmarking Specs ●Functional Decomposition ●Concept Generation/Selection ●System Architecture ●Risk Assessment ●Engineering Analysis ●Test Plan Outline ●Project Schedule Agenda 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13 2

3. Greg Roeth: Project Manager/Mechanical Engineer Alex Hebert: Lead Mechanical Engineer Emily Courtney: Mechanical Engineer Martha Vargas: Lead Electrical Engineer John Daley: Electrical Engineer Who’s who? 3 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

4. ●Predominantly pre-school kids with Cerebral Palsy (CP) CP is a “non progressive brain disorder” caused by damage to a developing brain o disconnection between muscles and the brain  wide range of motor skills/control o condition typically doesn’t worsen or improve over time Some users are on the Autism spectrum as well Project Background *taken from familymedicinehelp.com Who will use our mobilized standers? *taken from cprochester.org 4 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

5. Teaching Style: - Push In vs. Pull Out Happier Kids Physiological and psychological benefits to standing vs. sitting Snug Seat Product Guide 2013 What is a mobile pediatric stander? Project Background 5 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

6. Problem Statement: ●A motorized pediatric stander is a device similar to a wheelchair, meant to assist a disabled child to move around their environment in an upright position. The device should be able to provide safe, comfortable, and smooth transportation of the passenger, with the ability to be controlled by a third party. A previous prototype used buttons to control its movement, but the start/stop was found to be very jerky and the stander did not track straight. The remote control functionality was attempted, but was not fully implemented. Safety features were not fully developed. ●The goals for this project are to modify the existing prototype to include better safety features such as collision detection and a remote control for a third party. Since there are no standing patents on automated standers key constraints are cost and weight of the components we add. Project Background 6 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

7. Customer Requirements 7 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

8. 8

9. Benchmarking Old Systems 9 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

10. 10 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

11. ●Control System Mounting ●Electronics housing ●Wheel System ●Microprocessor ●Bluetooth Module ●Control Scheme Concept Selection 11 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

12. http://images.worldofapple.com / https://www.ssidisplays.co m/ http://www.etac.com/ 12 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

13. Control System Mounting 13 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

14. Pros: ●Avoids sharp corners adjustable ●Multi Size Cons: ●potential break down ●weight restrictions Gooseneck Arm http://www.1800wheelchair.com/ 14 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

15. Pros: ●Fully Adjustable Cons: ●Limited Orientation ●iPad only Swivel Arm http://www.rehabmart.com/ 15 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

16. Pro: ●wide workspace Cons: ●Fixed ●Doesn’t move out of the way ●toucan only Snug Seat Tray 16 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

17. Concept Selection Process 17 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

18. ●Magnetic tray ●Swappable Touchpad/iPad ●Collapsible Final Concept 18 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

19. ●Control System Mounting ●Electronics housing ●Wheel System ●Microprocessor ●Bluetooth Module ●Control Scheme Concept Selection 19 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

20. Electronics Housing - Current Design Pros: 1) Battery is secure Cons: 1) Components and wires are exposed 2) Battery tray is rusty and sharp 3)Battery tray in way of stander angle adjustment 20 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

21. Electronics Housing - Option 1 Pros: 1) Battery is secure, yet accessible 2) One box, One location 3) Baffles allow airflow and provide spill protection Cons: 1) Need to create mounting area 2) May interfere with folding control mount 21 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

22. Pros: 1) All components contained and separate 2) Utilizes available mounting space 3) Utilizes current battery tray mounting Electronics Housing - Option 2 *taken from tadpoleadaptive.com Cons: 1) Multiple parts, multiple locations (3) *taken from ozprodrivers.com.au *taken from123rf.com 22 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

23. Electronics Housing - Option 3 Pros: 1) Battery is secure, yet accessible and separate 2) One location - utilizes current tray mounting Cons: 1) Cumbersome - may interfere with angle adjust + a. b. 23 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

24. Electronics Housing - Concept selection vs. + 24 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

25. ●Control System Mounting ●Electronics housing ●Wheel System ●Microprocessor ●Bluetooth Module ●Control Scheme Concept Selection 25 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

26. Current Design: Pros: ●Already implemented on stander. ●Integrates well with parallax motor bearing block. Cons: ●Stander had to be roughly modified for assembly. ●Assembly and stander adaptation is difficult. We would like to implement a solution that integrates with the stander and the motor mounts in an easier way. Wheel System 26 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

27. Concept 1: New Bracket New Wheel Mount Concepts Pros: ●More easily attaches to stander ●Doesn’t require modification to stander parts Cons ●Potentially difficult to manufacture 27 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

28. Concept 2: New Adapter New Wheel Mount Concepts Pros: ●More easily attaches to stander ●Doesn’t require modification to stander parts ●Utilizes existing adapter block Cons: ●Potential difficulty of assembly. 28 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

29. New Wheel Mount Concepts 29 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

30. ●From the preliminary Pugh charts, it seems like the new adapter is the way to go. ●Still to-do ○ Measure existing stander mounts ○ Perform preliminary engineering analysis on current designs. New Wheel Mount Concepts 30 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

31. ●Control System Mounting ●Electronics housing ●Wheel System ●Microprocessor ●Bluetooth Module ●Control Scheme Concept Selection 31 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

32. Last Year’s Group: Stellaris ●Fully developed Board, lots of unnecessary additions ●Used Ti’s Code Composer ●Expensive, mitigated by the MCU contest (now finished) Contenders Launchpad - Stellaris or MSP430 ●TI products - similar to last years group ●Cheap ●Lots of add-ons, lots of support Arduino ●Lots of add-ons ●Extensive libraries, easy to use Raspberry Pi ●single board computer (overkill) ●Linux environment STM32 F3 ●ARM processor similar to last years Microprocessor *image from mouser.com 32 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

33. Microprocessor *images from wiki.ti.com, en.wikipedia.org, jaunty-electronics.com, bit-tech.net 33 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

34. ●Control System Mounting ●Electronics housing ●Wheel System ●Microprocessor ●Bluetooth Module ●Control Scheme Concept Selection 34 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

35. Bluetooth Module Images from robotshop.com,, processors.wiki.ti.com/, bluegiga.com,, and sparkfun.com, 35 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

36. ●Control System Mounting ●Electronics housing ●Wheel System ●Microprocessor ●Bluetooth Module ●Control Scheme Concept Selection 36 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

37. Control Scheme - Pugh Concept Selection Decision Matrix Cited Sources: Imageshttp://www.etac.com/uploa d/NL-Etac/E800/Wheelchair- accessories-R-NET-Controller- Joystick-36-0.jpghttp://www.etac.com/uploa d/NL-Etac/E800/Wheelchair- accessories-R-NET-Controller- Joystick-36-0.jpg http://img.diytrade.com/cdimg/146 0607/22277139/0/1309847401/Pr ogrammable_Control_System_Wir eless_Touch_Screen.jpg https://www.ssidisplays.com/sites/ default/files/img_2352.jpg http://images.worldofapple.com/ http://i01.i.aliimg.com/wsphoto/v0/ 1246873025_1/6-pcs-of-60mm- lighted-font-b-button-b-font-font-b- Illuminated-b-font-round.jpg 37 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

38. ●Custom design based on P13045. ●Reduce size and adapt ergonomically to user. ●Use same uController as main system. Remote Control Last year’s model consisted on a TI Stellaris Launchpad controller encased in a box with 5 buttons and two switches. 38 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

39. ●Control System Mounting ●Electronics housing ●Wheel System ●Microprocessor ●Bluetooth Module ●Control Scheme Concept Selection 39 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

40. 4014045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

41. System architecture: Level 1 41 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

42. 42 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

43. Risk Assessment IDRisk ItemEffectCauseLSIAction to Minimize RiskOwner 1 Damage to electronics Loss of injured component, increase in cost to replace items Overloads, water, blunt force trauma, gunshots, angry group members 326 Work on electronics in a lab and use proper ESD protection, design protective casing, Perform weather test very carefully and without electronics. Group split 2 Motors don’t drive straight User had to compensate, or device is unusable Poor software development 133Proper testingEEs 3Damage to standerIncreased cost/time Crashing, improper operation, ill considered modifications 133 Proper planning and testing only in controlled environment, design reviews before proposed modifications, Group split 4 Injuring user Loss of test subject, possible end of project, lawsuit Improper operation, improper design 133 Design correct specs, tests of modifications, tested by dummy before patient Group split 5Injuring bystander Possible end of project, lawsuit Improper operation, improper design 133 Design correct specs, test in controlled environment Group split 6Software is buggyDevice could not function, could just have quirks little experience in programming 224Have expert review over software, pull in extra resources around RIT EEs 43 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

44. Risk Assessment (Cont.) IDRisk ItemEffectCauseLSIAction to Minimize RiskOwner 7 Work not completed on time Loss of time and goodwill in group, failure to complete project fully Poor planning and time management 236In depth project plan that is FOLLOWEDEveryone 8Lack of funds Can’t buy components overspending, lack of support from sponsor 122 Good project plan, very awesome faculty guide Leads 9 Inconsistent team priorities Wasted time and money, interpersonal tension Lack of team values, poor communications, poor management/planni ng 122Weekly meetings Leads and Guides 10 Customer changes mind in focuses Wasted time, product does not satisfy customer Poor communication with Linda/Steve, bad problem statement 133 Meet with Linda and Email her on major project updates and major branches of development 11Conflicting customer ideas Compromises that leave everyone dissatisfied Poor communication between Linda and Steve 313Include Dr. Day and Linda on meetings and design reviews, encourage dialogue in email 44 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

45. Risk Assessment (Cont.) IDRisk ItemEffectCauseLSIAction to Minimize RiskOwner 12Processor Change Loss of time due to changed code, more money and development costs Choice made too quickly and too early in development 122 Make code in higher level language, such as C instead of assembly 13Tipping Injuring user, damage to stander, especially upper portions Poorly thought out modifications, too much acceleration 133 Do better testing and survey the usage site. Make sure deceleration is not very large, govern the speed. 14Battery Overheating Damage to Electronics Poor Airflow, too much insulation and overuse 133 Monitor temperature, thermal shut offs, good enclosure design, don’t use a li-po 15 Dangerous Stander Design Injuring user Sharp edges and loose connection (electrical and mechanical) 224 No sharp edges, check all electrical connections that no powered surface is accessible 16Long lead time on parts Delay of project due to lack of parts so no testing, design, building Long lead time from manufacturers, parts out of stock 224Order early, order often, have alternatives for things to work on, do fab. work in house 45 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

46. Engineering Analysis 46 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

47. Test Plan Outline 47 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

48. Test Plan Outline 48 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

49. Project Schedule 49 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

50. ●I ntroduction ●Background/Problem statement ●Customer Requirements ●Engineering Requirements ●Benchmarking Specs ●Functional Decomposition ●Concept Generation/Selection ●System Architecture ●Risk Assessment ●Engineering Analysis ●Test Plan Outline ●Project Schedule Agenda 50 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13

51. Questions? 51 14045 Week 6 Project Presentation - 10/1/13