P11017 Tactile Navigation Interface “Dream Team” P11017 Tactile Navigation Interface Dream Team Members: Christian Seemayer Robert Proietti Timothy DeBellis Timothy Giguere William Kelly

Project Status Fully functioning device All testing currently complete Keypad accepts and stores user inputs Inputs set as certain directions or proximity to demonstrate proper direction relay and use of vibration motor Direction currently understandable to device user Operational device charger All testing currently complete Lacks certain features for standalone device. On/Off button Low power mode Button Lock Indicator for Valid Inputs

Device Improvements Simple Improvements Possible Future Projects Do not use Garolite Correction of Battery gap structural flaw Use of tubular solenoids possibly Overall optimization of device weight and size as design improves Adjustable curvature in bottom housing Research how close tactile pegs can be before too close Improved battery Improved attachment method 2 part device with wireless communication technology Possible Future Projects Continue development of software features Integrate with P11016 team. May be better to work on improving device design depending on P11016 project status

Original Project Plan

Final Project Plan

Engineering Specifications

Original Risk Assessment Risks faced Device was dropped, but did not break. Besides that many risks were not faced. The risk assessment was unable to be tested fully as this project needs to work with the P11016 first. Current risk assessment still the same Possibility of more risks, but none were encountered during project

Edge Documentation What can be found on Edge under MSD II. Test Results Table of Test Data Assembly/Manufacturing Documentation Demonstration Videos Microcontroller Software files Software Flowchart Imagine and Final Poster MSD Paper All group presentations MSD II Schedule Updates under System Level Design Also updated CAD drawings/files, ExpressSCH, and ExpressPCB files under System Level Design Drawing Packages Any other files or documentation needed?

Lessons Learned during MSD I Too much time spent on paperwork Design phase too quick Device worked, but it was not pretty Many changes discovered last minute Interaction between groups was much more difficult than it should have been Scope was very unclear to many at first Should have talked with ABVI employees more than RIT students Provided more effective insight Were easily accessible

Lessons Learned during MSD I The addition of an EE or CE advisor Project focus was more EE and CE driven than any other engineering field Addition of more faculty workshops Example: PCB Design workshops Would it be possible to have a design customer in addition to VI/Blind community.

Lessons Learned during MSD II The Dream Team rarely struggles Additional Time for Design and Build Phase Ran into many last minute changes for both mechanical and electrical designs. Were unable to incorporate many features originally discussed. More thought into Engineer Team Selection Project work floated between Electrical Engineering/Computer Engineering realm. Lack of CE affected software development as team EE’s had no knowledge of PIC microcontroller. Would work be too easy for CE? Would it be possibly to have CE from other sister teams help with software development? Not a highly mechanical project. Future Iterations should not need many ME’s. Industrial and Systems engineer could have aided in initial design phase. Could help with future aesthetic and human comfort level features. Additional meetings at the SAU Good source for team building and collaboration of ideas.

Lessons Learned during MSD II Learn to understand project scope Helps development of project Also raises future ideas to incorporate Prevents group from setting unrealistic goals Constant and helpful team communication Prevents miscommunication during design stages Helps steer project from critical disasters After 22 weeks of work, best option still is the rabbit’s foot.

No Questions Please