1 / 53

Spring 2005 Design Review

Spring 2005 Design Review. Advisors: Prof. David Ebert and Kirk Riley TA: Steve Gunawan. Agenda. Adjustable Bookshelf (ABS) GPS Device for the Visually Impaired (GPS-DVI) Interactive Campus Map (ICM) Discussions to follow each project presentation. ODOS - Adjustable Book Shelf.

gail
Download Presentation

Spring 2005 Design Review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Spring 2005 Design Review Advisors: Prof. David Ebert and Kirk Riley TA: Steve Gunawan

  2. Agenda • Adjustable Bookshelf (ABS) • GPS Device for the Visually Impaired (GPS-DVI) • Interactive Campus Map (ICM) • Discussions to follow each project presentation

  3. ODOS - Adjustable Book Shelf Manish Handa

  4. Presentation Outline • Problem Definition • Concept Generation • Concept Evaluation • Current Progress • Modifications • Expected Semester Outcome • Overall Project Plan

  5. The Dorm Desk and Bookshelf

  6. Problem Definition • Bookshelf unit in dorm rooms do not follow the guidelines set by ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). • Height range of 9” to 48”: Lowest point of current shelf is approximately 50”. • Front reach maximum of 25”: The current shelf unit is located at exactly 25”. • Goal: To design a shelf unit that is within the guidelines set by ADA, within the limited space available in a dorm room. *User must not insert more than 5 lb of force to access the bookshelf.

  7. Concepts Generated • Sliding Down Bookshelf • Bookshelf will be placed in existing bookshelf in dorm, lowered and raised onto desk • Side of Desk – Low • Bookshelf placed underneath desk, moved in and out • Side of Desk – High • Bookshelf placed on side of desk. Above desk such that there is no need for it to move • Swing Shelf • Placed underneath desk, swings towards user.

  8. Concept Evaluation • Evaluation was done using decision matrix • Evaluated each concept against customer requirements such as Reachability, Ease of Access, Cost. • Compared each concept with the existing bookshelf, and the prototype. • Side of Desk – High, was chosen for its reachability and use of space.

  9. Current Progress • Dimensions of shelf unit and platform complete • Force analysis on the prototype complete. Result modification needed on prototype. • Preparing design modification. • Designing support system. • Designing moving mechanism and switch

  10. Current Progress

  11. Current Progress

  12. Modifications • The prototype had only a single shelf, but the new prototype will have three shelves, which would distribute the weight of the books and hence prevent failure. • The prototype didn’t have any support system, the new one will have support. • The prototype was not constructed as to dimensions, reconstruction will be enforced.

  13. Force Analysis • Stress Analysis • Plywood structure is strong enough for the bookshelf • Weight of motor mechanism to be determined • Acceleration of shelf • 0.13 ft/sec2 for movement in 5 seconds • This number determines force needed by the motor.

  14. Expected Semester Outcome • Complete Design • Finish designing moving mechanism • Choose materials, parts • Complete Prototype • Complete as designed • Test

  15. Overall Project Plan • Prototype completed this semester • Start testing prototype, continue testing in Fall • Delivery in December, 2005

  16. Discussion

  17. EPICS-ODOS: GPS-DVI Jay Gengelbach Rohit Vankipuram Jonathan Timura

  18. Overview • Introduction • Fault tolerance – improving usability by recovering from common mistakes • Forward mobility – make code maintenance simpler for the future • Scalability – improve asymptotic performance • Data Formats – allow for extensibility

  19. Introduction • GPS-DVI: Global Positioning System Device for the Visually Impaired • Goal: To create a device that blind students can use to find their way around on campus

  20. Introduction (cont.) • Current Device: • HP iPAQ PDA with CF GPS receiver • Current Data: • 22 nodes around the engineering mall • Implementation: • Map stored as a weighted graph • Paths calculated using Dijkstra’s shortest path algorithm

  21. Fault Tolerance • Before: • Power-cycling would cause failure • Running the program twice (accidental double-click) caused failure • Now: • Device recalibrates after a power cycle • Only one instance of program can run (token file) • Future: • More stable way to detect program instances

  22. Forward Mobility • Before: • Power PC 2002 • Now: • Power PC 2003 • Change is easily removable for backwards compatibility • Future: • Future versions will be more similar to PPC 2003 than 2002, so further upgrades will be simpler

  23. Forward Mobility (cont.) • Before: • Few files (newgui.cpp, newguiDialog.cpp) • Unclear what tasks each file performs • Generally poor comments: /* Implements Dijkstra’s Algorithm */ void DoDijkstra(…)

  24. Forward Mobility (cont.) • Now: • Many files (Dijkstra.cpp, path.cpp, AdjacencyVector.cpp) • Files perform a few specific tasks and are well-documented: /* Path.cpp: * This file contains various functions required to perform path calculation, etc. * The data in this file is specific to our implementation. This file employs * Dijkstra.cpp, which contains generalized pathfinding code. * Jay Gengelbach - February 27, 2005 */

  25. Forward Mobility (cont.) • Conclusions: • Code sharing will be simpler with logically separate files • Finding the code that performs X will be easier due to specificity of each file

  26. Scalability • Before: • n x n Adjacency Matrix • Takes n2 space. BIG disadvantage • Lookup takes 1 or 2 indirections

  27. Scalability (cont.) • Now: • Vector of linked lists • Space < k*n where k is the maximum vertex degree (4) • Maximum indirections = k 1 2 3 … n 2 1 n 1 3 3 2 1 n 3 2 1

  28. Scalability (cont.) Analysis of Dijkstra’s algorithm: • Before: • Relaxation step takes O(n) time: for(i = 0;i < Number_of_Nodes;i++) if(distance(currentNode,i) != -1) relax(currentNode, i);

  29. Scalability (cont.) • Now: • Relaxation step takes O(k) time: currentNode.reset(); while(currentNode.hasMore()) relax(currentNode, currentNode.next()); • Closest node kept in sorted list, so next iteration can be determined in constant time • Dijkstra’s algorithm runs in O(n*k) time – essentially linear

  30. Scalability (cont.) • Before: • Adjacency matrix recalculated every time a path is requested • Now: • Calculate adjacency lists at program launch • Prevents unnecessary file I/O

  31. Data Formats • Before: • Node database file only allows latitude and longitude to be specified • Nodes are specified only by number • Adjacency matrix format assumes no node will ever be adjacent to 5 or more others • A node that borders more will require the format to change and every line to be altered • Adjacency matrix only stores edge weights

  32. Data Formats (cont.) • Future: • Adjacency matrix stores only one edge per line, and additional data/metadata can be appended • Node database supports storing building names and other data alongside GPS data • File becomes a lot more human-readable • Both formats support addition of new flags without changing unaffected lines

  33. Summary • Updates focus on extensibility • Code and data easier to maintain and update • More scalable code allows campus map to be expanded with minimal impact

  34. Discussion

  35. ICM Interactive Campus Map Brian Eng Matteo Mannino

  36. Overview • Introduction • Semester Goals • ICM Overview • Node Database Software

  37. Interactive Campus Map • Objective: To help students with physical disabilities locate the best accessible path between campus locations by drawing a map

  38. Semester Goals • Prepare kiosk for use and place in MSEE • Collect user feedback • Make changes based on feedback • Deliver project • Create node database software

  39. How does ICM work? • User gives start/end information on website • Calculate shortest path • Draw map • Encode image • Display map

  40. Breakdown of Components • Node Database • Path Finding Algorithm (Dijkstra’s Algorithm) • File I/O, Image Manipulation • Web Interface • Today, we will only be discussing aspects of the node database

  41. Nodes on the Map

  42. Node Database • Uses pseudo GPS coordinates • Scaled pixel coordinates • Ability to swap map images easily • This assumes maps are to scale • Currently around 300 nodes in database

  43. Database Example Node Coordinates Neighbors 0 123,456 1,3,4 Description 1 213,522 0,2,3 Description 2 211,222 1 Description 3 887,818 0,1 Description

  44. Node Database Software • Justification for software • Several bugs in database from past semesters • Tracking down which node is faulty is many times difficult and very time consuming • The only nodes with meaningful descriptions are door nodes • Debugging gets harder as database grows with expanding campus

  45. Node Database Software • Node software allows those who are maintaining ICM to: • easily update the map • add and delete nodes • debug paths • Interface is user-friendly and easy to learn • No technical background needed to operate • Point and click operation • No need to follow confusing input file format rules

  46. Node Database Software • Data Structures • Quadtree - allows for point and click operation on map • Problem: user clicks on a node to modify its information • Solution: use a quadtree and descend it to determine if the pixel the user clicked on occupies a spatial partition, and if so, return which node it is • Advantage of trees: all essential operations are simple tree traversal or descent • Our implementation • Worst case number of traversals: O(lg(n)/2) • Worst case time complexity: O(n) • Worst case memory complexity: O(4/3*n)

  47. Node Database Software • Data structures (cont.) • Linked list – allows for loading of existing database and output to text file ordered by node index • Easy to insert and delete data • Search time complexity: O(n)

  48. Kiosk • Wheelchair accessible • To be placed in MSEE Atrium • Waiting on monitor support system

  49. This Semester • Prepare kiosk for use and place in MSEE • Monitor support system to be completed by this weekend at the very latest • Collect user feedback • Prof. Jameison acting as Principal Investigator • Online certification completed • User feedback survey completed • Exemption form submitted to Purdue IRB • Waiting for kiosk to be placed

More Related