P10010: MSD I-Detail Design Review Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation1

Core Team & Roles David Monahan- Project Manager (ME) Brian Glod- Data Lead (CE) Assis Ngolo – Communication Lead (CE) Jahanavi Gauthaman- Sensor Technology Lead (EE) Cory Laudenslager- Sensor- MCU Interface Lead (EE) James Stern- Sensor- Human Interface Lead (ME) Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation2

Assistive Devices Family Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation3

P10010 Mission Statement To research sensors and implementation methods for portable motion tracking systems capable of measuring patients' range of motion in their natural environments. The primary ranges of motion of interest:  Motion of a human limb, where a limb is defined as a 3-bar linkage, for example: upper leg, lower leg, and foot.  Motion of a human's lower back, where lower back is defined as the lumbar region, with 3 points of contact: sacrum, L1-L2, L3-L5. Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation4

Project Deliverables Design concepts ranked according to customer needs for use by future MSD projects. Analysis of possible solutions for: Sensors, MCUs, ICs, circuitry, communication devices. Work with P10011 to research compatible enclosures for the system. Testing methods/ fixtures to test future systems. Test several prototype sensors and systems (MSDII) Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation5

Customer Needs 6

Customer Needs (contd.) 7

Customer Needs II – P10011 Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation8 Need #CategoryImportanceDescription Body Part Addressed by Spec # CNAP Keep each group informed of progres: Each group should understand what the other group is doing, and know how they plan to continue their projectsBothE22 CNBP Design for multiple sensors: Need to know if there is a need to design around multiple types of sensorsBothE22 CNCP Location of sensors: Need a list of appropriate placement of sensors on body to adhere to comfort styles of each part of the body affectedBothE22 CNDP Accuracy of Sensors: Need to know what degree the enclosure can affect the sensor reading and still allow the system to generate meaningful dataBothE25 CNEP Durability: Need to know how well the sensor modules need to be protected by enclosures and how much impact the enclosure must ablate to protect the sensorBoth? CNFP Size: Need a list of sizes of sensor units involved to design enclosures they will fit inBothE3 CNGP Weight: Need to know approximate or worst case scenario weight to know the maximum weight enclosures can add to systemBothE9, E12

Target Customer Specifications Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation9

Target Customer Specifications (contd.) Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation10

System Overview Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation11 Human Interface (P10011) Sensors Interface Circuitry Microcontrolle r Unit Communication Interface Analog-to-Digital Conversion Active Filtering Signal Amplification Storage Interface [ ] [ ]

Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation12

Sensor Feasibility Overview Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation13 Spec Number Customer Need Design SpecificationUnitsIdeal Value Flex Sensor Rank (1-10) LIS302DL Digital Output Accelorometer Rank (1-10) Tilt Sensor IMU Board Rank (1-10) DE-ACCM3D2 Accelorometer Rank (1-10) Atomic IMU - 6DoF Rank (1-10) Razor IMU - 6DoF Rank (1-10) 1CN14AccuracyDegrees±1± 10% CN16RangeDegrees CN6Size of Sensormm x mm x mm30x30x154.5x3x593X5X11025X20.4X x 10x x 37 x x 15 x110 4CN13Degrees of FreedomAxis CN3Input VoltageV95V10Digital ( ) to 15V (onboard regulator) 2.4 to 3.6 (no onboard regulator) CN3Output VoltageV Digital CN21Set-up TimeMinutes CN7Weight of Sensorsg105g CN7 Comfort of Sensors on PersonSubjectiveHigh 8 10High 10High10 Low 6 High10 19CN28Patient SafetySubjective Patient is Safe Safe8 10 Safe10Safe10Safe10Safe CostDollars Medium ($35) RANK

Resistive Response Flex Sensor Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation devices.sapp.org/component/flex/

How Position Sensors work (example) Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation15

DE-ACCM3D2 Buffered ±2g Tri-axis Accelerometer  3 axis output in the x, y, and z  Sensitive (up to 720 mV/g)  Low power, input voltage, and low current draw  Light weight and small  Voltage regulator  Short protection  Limitation: stand-alone accelerometer Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation16

LIS302DL Smart Digital Output “Piccolo” Accelerometer 2.16 V to 3.6 V supply voltage <1 mW power consumption +-2g/+-8g dynamically selectable full- scale I2C/SPI digital output interface Embedded high pass filter 10000g high shock survivability Low cost (~$10) Limitation: stand-alone accelerometer Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation17

Tilt Sensor IMU Board Gyro and Tilt sensor Low Voltage Operation: 5V Regulated Highly Accurate/High Sensitivity Rated Analog Output Self Test For Both Sensors Small and light weight Cost: $ Limitations: High cost; Only 2 axis Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation18

IDG500/ADXL335 IMU 5 Degrees of Freedom Accurate Measurement Dual‐axis gyroscope and Triple-axis accelerometer 0.1" footprint roll, pitch, and tilt measurements Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation19

Atomic IMU – 6 Degrees of Freedom  Input: 5V from MCU Rail  Output: 0-3.3V Digital (UART)  (6) 10 Bit ADCs on Board W/ Programmable Sampling Rates  Uses (1) MMA7260Q accelerometer + (3) LISY300AL Gyros  Size: 47 x 37 x 25 mm  Cost: $ Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation20

Razor-Ultra-Thin IMU – 6 Degrees of Freedom  Input: 3.3V from MCU Rail  Output: Analog Voltage (Centered at 1.5V)  Uses (1) ADXL335 Accelerometer + (3) Gyros-(2) LPR530AL + (1) LY530ALH  Size: 15 x 30 x 2 mm  Cost: $89.95 Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation21

Feasibility – Rabbit LP3500  Size: 2.60” x 3.65” x 0.45”  Power consumption  <20mA, 3 V DC at 7.4 MHz  <100µA sleep mode  ADC inputs  Differential mode  4 channels  12-bit (9-bit accuracy)  Single-ended  8 channels  11-bit (8-bit accuracy)  Up to 200 samples/sec  Flash: 512K  SRAM: 512K  Digital inputs: 16  Digital outputs: 10  Cost: $199 for board; $399 for starter kit LP3500 [ RCM3900 [

Feasibility – TI MSP-EXP430F5438  Power consumption:  18 MHz – 10 mA (no LCD); 30 mA (with LCD)  1 MHz – 280 µA  Digital I/O: 34 pins  ADC inputs  5 channels, 12-bits  Communication  4x UART/LIN/IrDA/SPI  4x I2C/SPI  USB  Flash: 256KB  SRAM: 16KB  Development software  Free version limits to <4 KB program  No non-volatile storage (microSD/SD)  Cost  $149 for board  $99 for programmer TI MSP-EXP430F5438 [ TI MSP-FET430UIF [

Feasibility – Technologic Systems TS-7800  Size: unknown  ARM9 CPU 500 MHz  Supported by GNU GCC [free]  12,000 LUT Lattice FPGA  Power consumption: 5 V 800 mA  General Purpose I/O: 110 pins  ADC inputs: 5 channels, 10-bits  Communication  2x SATA  10 RS-232/serial  Ethernet 10/100/1000  2x USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/s)  Flash: 512 MB  RAM: 128 MB DDR  Non-volatile storage  Standard/full SD  microSD  Cost  $269 for board  $100 for development kit  ~$10 additional ADCs TS-7800 [ KIT-ARM Dev Kit [

Feasibility – Technologic Systems TS-7500  Size: 2.9” x 2.6”  ARM9 CPU 250 MHz  Supported by GNU GCC [free]  5,000 LUT Lattice FPGA  Power consumption: 5 V 400 mA  General Purpose I/O: 33 pins  ADC inputs: 0  Communication  8 TTL UART  Ethernet 10/100  2x USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/s)  Flash: 4 MB  RAM: 64 MB DDR  Non-volatile storage  microSD  Cost  $139 for board  $200 for development kit  ~$10 additional ADCs TS-7500 [ KIT-ARM Dev Kit [

Feasibility –Technologic Systems TS-7260  Size: 3.8” x 4.8”  ARM9 CPU 200 MHz  Supported by GNU GCC [free]  Power consumption: 5 V 200 mA  General Purpose I/O: 30 pins  ADC inputs: 2 channels, 12-bit  Communication  Ethernet 10/100  2x USB 2.0 (12 Mbit/s)  Flash: 32 MB  RAM: 32 MB  Non-volatile storage  microSD option +$8  Cost  $179 for board  $100 for development kit  $8 microSD option  ~$10 additional ADCs TS-7260 [ KIT-ARM Dev Kit [

Feasibility – Arduino mega  Size: 4” x 2.1”  Atmel ATmega1280 – 16 MHz clock  Power consumption: 7 V 50 mA  General Purpose I/O: 54 pins  ADC inputs: 2x8 channels, 10-bit  Communication  4 UART; SPI; I2C  USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/s)  Flash: 128 KB  RAM: 8 KB  Programming  Simple USB A male / USB B male  Free, open source hardware and software  Large community  Non-volatile storage  Libelium microSD “shield” +$30  Cost  $50 for board  $30 for microSD shield [libelium.com]  $50 for 2500 mAh Li-Ion Battery pack Arduino Mega [ microSD shield [ mAh Li-Ion Battery [

16 Analog channels at 10 bits of precision At full precision, the MCU can collect 15 kHZ of samples This is roughly 66.6 microseconds a 16 channel sweep would then take about 1 milicecond The ADC channels are split in two sections of 8 channels, so a sweep takes half the amount of time, around 0.5 milliseconds. We are aiming for a rate no higher than 200 Hz The ADC allows for both bipolar and monopolar inputs. We'll use monopolar for simplicity To each data value will be associated a 16 bit timestamp, which will be reset by software before overflow occurs. We will thus have data blocks lasting a certain lengths of time. This is good for the case of system malfunction (sensor falling out of place) because not all blocks need to be discarded.

Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation29  Total Max Power Consumption of 372mA (300mA-MCU, 72mA-(3) Atomic IMUs)  Ideal Customer Battery Life: 12 Hours  7.4V/4400mAH Lithium Ion Battery Pack  1.4 x 1.4 x 2.75 Inches /.4 Lbs  Rechargeable  Cost: $36.00 Battery Analysis

Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation30

Test Fixture Feasibility Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation31 Most specifications measurable with standard RIT lab equipment Three outliers Accuracy Degrees of Freedom Range Hence: Needed to identify alternative test methods capable of measuring the three “critical” specifications

Test Fixture Feasibility Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation32 Fixtures identified: P10007 Spine VICON Biomechatronic Robot Biomechatronic Arm Goniometers Custom Fixture

Test Fixture Feasibility Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation33

Test Plan: Subystems/Equipment Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation34 Subsystems: Sensor Microcontroller Test Fixture Software Equipment Needed: Goniometers Test Fixture(s)  Equipment Available:  EE/CE Labs  Oscilloscopes, Multimeters, varied resistors and capacitors, Soldering irons, Breadboards, PC, Power Supply, Signal Generator, Development Boards  Programs:  Arduino, IDE, Java, SolidWorks, Pspice, Altera  ME Labs  Drill Presses, Mills, Lathes  P10007 Spine Fixture

Test Plan: Phases Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation35 Device Acquisition (wks 10-11) Finalize BOM, Establish Plan B for each lab Component/Device (wks 12-13, 1-2 MSD2) Preparation for testing, Component Metrics Integration (wks 14-15, 3-4 MSD2) Combine Sensor/MCU Systems, System Metrics System Performance (wks 16-19, 5-8 MSD2) System Performance & Critical Specifications Test P10007 Fixture, Test with P Enclosures Final Evaluation (wks 20-22, 9-11 MSD2) Retrace any needed steps, Final Publication

Test Plan: Test Methods Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation36

Simple Fixture Fixture will test accuracy, DOF and range of motion (with current design, possibility of more tests for motion can be added). Sensor will be attached to the fixture with velcro bought from McMaster. Simple protractors will measure the rotational angle of the fixture to correlate with what is being read from the sensor.

Simple Fixture Most of the the parts on the fixture are being bought from McMaster-Carr, so machining cost and time will be low. The BOM price for the fixture is a high estimate because the material being bought to be machined is priced at a specific dimension which is more expensive then the bulk material ordered by the machine shop. Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation38

Simple Fixture Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation39

Test Methods BOM Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation40

Project Plan Overview Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation41

Project Plan (page1) Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation42

Project Plan (page2) Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation43

Project Plan (page3) Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation44

Risk Assessment Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation45

Risk Assessment Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation46

Risk Assessment Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation47

What’s Next? Week 10: Design Review with EE professors Finalize BOM Prepare for Project Review End of Quarter Peer Evaluations Week 11 Order parts before MSDII Project Review Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation48

What’s Next? II MSD2 Build Test Fixture Begin Testing & Resume Test Plan Evaluate interface between all system components Come up with detailed test plan for testing individual components Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation49

Unresolved Issues/Concerns Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation50 Customer Need CNE- How to Spec? How to test with sensitive circuit boards Concern: How much skin effects the sensor readings

Questions? Ideas? Concerns? [Source: draganflyer-x6/features/stability.phpg] Motion Tracking Technology Evaluation51