1. Emergency Child Guidance System Team Number:May01-03 Team Members: Chris Bloomquist Abbey Arends Lisa DeLashmutt Angela Nystrom Karen James Faculty Advisors & Clients: Dr. John Lamont Dr. Ralph Patterson III Date:April 25, 2001

2. Agenda Problem StatementProblem Statement DemoDemo Design ObjectivesDesign Objectives End-Product DescriptionEnd-Product Description Assumptions & LimitationsAssumptions & Limitations Project Risks & ConcernsProject Risks & Concerns Technical ApproachTechnical Approach –Prototype –Conceptual System Evaluation of Project SuccessEvaluation of Project Success Recommendations for Further WorkRecommendations for Further Work Human & Financial BudgetsHuman & Financial Budgets Lessons LearnedLessons Learned Closing SummaryClosing Summary

3. Project Basis Where there’s smoke, There’s FIRE!

4. Problem Statement Develop guidance system Develop guidance system Receive signal Receive signal Lights and voice guide child Lights and voice guide child Reduce the number of deaths Reduce the number of deaths

5. Demo

6. Design Objectives Functionality: Transceiver on ceiling for both alarm sensor and central transmitterTransceiver on ceiling for both alarm sensor and central transmitter Transceiver and recording device on lightsTransceiver and recording device on lights Lights emit parent’s recorded messageLights emit parent’s recorded message

7. Design Objectives Design Constraints: Temperature (central transmitter)Temperature (central transmitter) WaterWater LightweightLightweight DurabilityDurability Power LossPower Loss LocationLocation

8. Design Objectives Users & Uses: UsersUsers –2-8 yr old children UsesUses – direct child to safety – altered for school, nursing home, etc.

9. End-Product Description

10. Assumptions & Limitations Assumptions: Working smoke alarmWorking smoke alarm Children in bedroomChildren in bedroom

11. Assumptions & Limitations Limitations: Check batteries regularlyCheck batteries regularly Child may not respondChild may not respond All devices not 100% fireproofAll devices not 100% fireproof Not guaranteed to save livesNot guaranteed to save lives Might not always be a safe routeMight not always be a safe route

12. Project Risks & Concerns Loss of a team memberLoss of a team member Slow or non-delivered parts – occurred (prototype)Slow or non-delivered parts – occurred (prototype) Time Constraints – occurred (prototype)Time Constraints – occurred (prototype) Change of requirementsChange of requirements

13. Technical Approach Two Systems: Prototype: Alarm SensorsAlarm Sensors Light/voice recordingLight/voice recording

14. Technical Approach Prototype Schematic:

15. Technical Approach Conceptual System: Alarm SensorsAlarm Sensors Central TransmitterCentral Transmitter Lights/voice recordingLights/voice recording

16. Evaluation of Project Success Milestones Met Learn about DetectorsImplement System Research Integrate System Finalize Design Test/Evaluate System Make prototype Document

17. Recommendations for Further Work Conceptual SystemAdd Ons Smoke AlarmsCarbon Monoxide Alarm SensorsRope / Ladder Central Transmitter“Smart” System Battery-Powered Lights Master Home Alarm System Rechargeable LightsRemote Control to Test/Reset Low Battery Light

18. Personnel Effort Budget Total Hours = 650

19. Financial Budget

20. Lessons Learned Transmitters/receivers Transmitters/receivers Adaptability (prototype) Adaptability (prototype) Meet Weekly Meet Weekly Document Document Delegate Delegate Have Fun Have Fun

21. Project Results FailureSuccess

22. Acknowledgements Special Thanks: Mr. Fred Malven, Ames Fire- Nevada Fire Chief Mr. George Oster, Training Director Ames 2 nd shift Fire Squad Dr. John Lamont Dr. Ralph Patterson III

23. Questions?