1. Ian Frank Matt Walter Jesse Steiner Luke Spencer Mike Celentano Nick Balducci Team Lead Chief Engineer Electrical Engineer Industrial Engineer Electrical Engineer Mechanical Engineer Sponsor: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency P3 Design Competition Grant Aiding Organizations: SOIL & H.O.P.E.

2.  Affordably provide clean, reliable, high-quality lighting  Establish a relationship with a sponsoring organization for field testing and product feedback  Market: People in developing nations without clean/healthy lighting Key High Level Customer Needs/Engineering Specs  Low Purchase CostLight Module Cost < $40 Power Module Cost < $160  Long Operation TimeStorage Capacity @ 100 Lumens > 4hrs Battery Lifetime > 3 years Base Unit Lifetime > 10 Years  Universal ApplicabilityUseable Temperature 4.5°C-38°C Survives 3 meter drop Water Resistant to IPX Std. 3 Value Added in Local Economy >25%

4. Bike Trainer Generator Power Module Box Charging Leads

5. Power Switch Charging Jack LED/Diffuser Plate Tin/Aluminum Can Handle

7.  Sponsoring organizations identified and working connections established to test prototypes and get user feedback  Alpha prototype construction complete  Current power module design fails under high power loading  Circuit failure necessitates altered design to work under all conditions  Current light module functional and is capable of 0.8W operation  LED driver limits output power and as such the desired light is not currently possible  Field testing on hold until a working power module can be provided

8. Life Cycle assessment completed in SimaPro Proposed LED lighting system consists of 1 light module and 1/20 of a power module Proposed system has less than 3% of negative environmental effects of the currently used kerosene lamps This is largely due to the refining, shipping, and burning of kerosene

9.  Given the state of the project, it has not been possible to prove the product’s compliance with all engineering specifications  Two main areas were identified for testing  Discharge duration – to determine the battery life per charge  Light intensity and distribution  Additional testing was done to:  Characterize the power generator at various speeds  Determine the operational temperature of the LED at maximum power  Determine exterior temperature of light module  Determine if the light module needs additional shock protection

10. When used as a reading lamp (on the stand) the light provided by the alpha prototype light module follows the distribution below Light close to the center of the lamp is more than sufficient for reading Further out, the light is still better than current kerosene lamps but is not as useful as it could be

11. Light module was monitored throughout a complete discharge cycle. Special interest was paid to the voltage supplied by the batteries and the power supplied to the LED LED Driver requires 3.4 V for operation System shuts down when batteries drop to 3.4 V Power supplied remained fairly constant throughout the discharge cycle

12.  Specs met by component specs  Useable temperature range (0-50)°C  Battery lifetime (≥3 years)  Base unit lifetime (≥10 years)  Color of light (CRI=75)  Light Temperature (5,000-10,000K)  No combustion  Scratch Resistant  Recyclability by weight (>75%)  Components meet ROHS

13.  Specs met through design  Particulate Resistant (sealed unit)  Hook-up time (DC Jack)  Start time (instant elec. current)  Local value added & simple manufacture process  Most parts can easily be assembled in developing nations  Light module weight (<3kg)

14.  Specs met through testing  Storage capacity (13 hrs)  Light distribution (10 lux) – NOT MET!  Electrical shock (none)  Surface Temperature (within 5°C of ambient)  Specs met through material and projected production costs  Light module cost  Power module cost

15.  Proposed micro-business model provides waste-stream & life cycle management  Specs not tested for but with plan in place  Water Resistance  Drop Test  Charge Time

16.  Supplies/Material Budget: $3,767  Concept/Benchmarking Exp. $350  Prototype Materials Exp. $1,770  Total Expenses to Date: $2,120  Remaining Supplies and Material Budget: $1,647  Surplus from Travel: $172  Surplus from Contractual: $320  Total Surplus: $2,139  Necessary for further development and field testing  Did not receive stage II funding from EPA P3 Award Competition Category PlannedActual ItemizedTotalItemizedTotal RIT Indirect Cost (40.5% Rate)2,883 Travel to DC Vehicle600 169 Gas100 137.07 Hotel1000 1554.25 Food500 776.13 Misc800 191.8 Total 3,000 2828.25 Supply Benchmarking500 349.98 Power Module750 975.98 Lighting Module750 794.11 Other Prototypes for Field Testing1767 Total 3,767 2,120.06 Contractual Poster Printing200 30.10 Prototype Shipping150 Total 350 30.10 Grand Total10000 7,861.41

17. SUCCESSES  Established a working relationship with two non-profit organizations with focus in Haiti  Established the base technology for the light and power modules  Base light module technology is a significant improvement over current kerosene lighting  Design meets most specs  Functioned effectively as a team throughout the course of the project FAILURES  Power module is not fully functional  Light module does not perform as highly as anticipated  Unable to send the alpha prototypes to Haiti for field testing  Unable to complete testing with system to determine compliance with specifications

18. Suggestions for future work in the product line  Solve issues with power module – protect module from over- current due to higher input  Increasing lighting levels – LED driver limits light levels but it would be beneficial if the module could produce more light  Send fully functional system (lights and power module) to Haiti for field testing  Revise design of both modules based on the results of field testing and feedback provided by the end users