Team Status Report for April 29

What are the most significant risks that could jeopardize the success of the project? How are these risks being managed? What contingency plans are ready?

We are pushing toward a much more refined design in both software and hardware than the current MVP. There’s still plenty of work to be done integrating the user app and hardware. The user app is unfinished and the build of new hardware design is contingent on the arrival of new components, which we expect to arrive by May 4. These risks are managed by having the team working together more often than before and choosing shipping options that can arrive on time. Contingency plan is the current MVP.

Were any changes made to the existing design of the system (requirements, block diagram, system spec, etc)? Why was this change necessary, what costs does the change incur, and how will these costs be mitigated going forward? Provide an updated schedule if changes have occurred.

Lots of changes are made to the design of the system as we try to integrate the hardware with the soon to be finished user app. The ble firmware now uses data mode to receive about 750 bytes defining the display state of the LED matrix. The firmware now also requires user to send password to unlock the earring. On the hardware side, we are reducing the thickness of the earring by placing the battery and matrix both on top of the feather board and we plan to add a switch for turning on and off the system as well as a push button for receiving ble data packet so that the microcontroller doesn’t have to poll for data. (The push button is for power saving purpose). The software is under development to allow frame-defined moving pattern and ble data transfer between hardware and user app.

Please enumerate how you have adjusted your team work assignments to fill in gaps related to either new design challenges or team shortfalls.

Madi is working on the software and Shize keeps firmware updated to accommodate for software. The firmware now prioritizes software as it takes more work to develop the software and it’s easy to rework the firmware. The team discussed and agreed on the changes on hardware design and Saniya will assemble the new design once the parts are arrived.

Team Status Report for April 22

What are the most significant risks that could jeopardize the success of the project? How are these risks being managed? What contingency plans are ready?

The key risks for our project at this point in time are primarily related to integration. In particular, as we are behind with the development of the mobile application, we are concerned about having enough time to fully flesh out and test the iOS Bluetooth Code. Additionally we have had some delays in the production of our PCB board, so we are concerned about having enough time to test everything works.

Were any changes made to the existing design of the system (requirements, block diagram, system spec, etc)? Why was this change necessary, what costs does the change incur, and how will these costs be mitigated going forward? Provide an updated schedule if changes have occurred.

We have made some simplifications to our overall design by removing some of the more complicated features for pattern design and editing, to focus on getting our subsystems integrated

Team Status Report for April 8

What are the most significant risks that could jeopardize the success of the project? How are these risks being managed? What contingency plans are ready?

Our key concern for our project continues to be integrating the Bluetooth modules for the software and hardware portions of our project. As we are running behind schedule according to our Gantt Chart, we have been left with less time than previously planned for combing our work and testing the final product.

Were any changes made to the existing design of the system (requirements, block diagram, system spec, etc)? Why was this change necessary, what costs does the change incur, and how will these costs be mitigated going forward? Provide an updated schedule if changes have occurred.

Whilst we have not made any major changes to our overall design, we have decided to prioritise working on our MVP LED Matrix Device. Previously we were working on both the LED Matrix and our stretch goal, the LCD Screen, in parallel, however as all of our group members have had a busy semester, we have collectively decided to focus on producing a single, functional final product.

Please enumerate how you have adjusted your team work assignments to fill in gaps related to either new design challenges or team shortfalls.

Team Status Report for April 1

What are the most significant risks that could jeopardize the success of the project? How are these risks being managed? What contingency plans are ready?

As we are slightly behind schedule in terms of both the hardware and mobile application development, currently our primary concerning is having enough time for testing and integration.

Were any changes made to the existing design of the system (requirements, block diagram, system spec, etc)? Why was this change necessary, what costs does the change incur, and how will these costs be mitigated going forward? Provide an updated schedule if changes have occurred.

We have not made any major changes to our schedule or our design system this week.

Please enumerate how you have adjusted your team work assignments to fill in gaps related to either new design challenges or team shortfalls.

Although we mentioned having issues with our Hardware design and PCB development in our last status report, we were able to make a breakthrough this week. Particularly we were able to meet with a Professor to work through a draft of our PCB board to fast-track manufacturing a prototype, and we able to successfully program our STMWB to communicate wth an iOS device via BLE. We are hoping this will reduce the time required for firmware development and allow Saniya to swap back over to assisting with iOS development

Team Status Report for March 25

What are the most significant risks that could jeopardize the success of the project? How are these risks being managed? What contingency plans are ready?

PCB Development:

Based on discussions with the Professor & TA after receiving our Design Review feedback, we realised there may be more challenges surrounding custom PCB development than we had previously planned for. We had originally planned on using the STMWB Nucleo board we are currently using for testing and development as a point of reference for our PCB design, however we have realised this is not sufficient to ensure seamless integration with our selected peripherals. To address this we have completed additional research on the specs of our STMWB processor and are currently prioritising drafting & manufacturing an initial design so we can start testing.

BLE Connectivity:

Whilst working on initial development & testing STMWB Nucleo board , we have discovered that the integrated BLE module is not always reliable / is more challenging to work with than we initially thought. To address this issue we are looking more in-depthly at documentation & integrating external crystals. As a last resort back-up option we have also looked at replacing our microcontroller with an Adafruit feather.

Were any changes made to the existing design of the system (requirements, block diagram, system spec, etc)? Why was this change necessary, what costs does the change incur, and how will these costs be mitigated going forward?

At this point in time we have not made any overall changes to the structure of our system, however as previously mentioned we have had to work on updating the schematics proposed in our design review .

Provide an updated schedule if changes have occurred.

As mentioned above, we have slightly moved around our proposed schedule to ensure we have ample time to refine our PCB design.  Our goal is to have a draft of our design as soon as possible to account for time and cost expenditures if several rounds of prototyping are required.

Additionally, during early March all of our group members were preoccupied with external commitments (phD visits, conference, other project due dates etc.) so we did not have much time to progress on our capstone work. Whilst we did initially plan for these shortcomings, we are still slightly more behind than projected and have had to adjust our workload to accomodate this.

Please enumerate how you have adjusted your team work assignments to fill in gaps related to either new design challenges or team shortfalls.

Saniya has swapped from working in between the software / hardware tasks, to primarily focus on PCB design to assist Shize. As a key part of our project is effectively miniaturising our system whilst balancing other design constraints, our group believes it is vital to direct our time/resources to this aspect of the project.

Team Status Report for Feb 25

What are the most significant risks that could jeopardize the success of the project? How are these risks being managed? What contingency plans are ready?

The primary concern (which we mentioned in the previous report) is still the PCB design. To address this concern further, we have multiple people on the team now working with Fusion 360 to create schematics and board layouts, as well as writing preliminary circuit plans. Another concern is the BLE connection to the device: since our microcontrollers arrived at the beginning of the week, we were able to start working with them and familiarize ourselves with how the device I/O works with BLE. Due to this, the concern around connectivity is generally less but we will see how the iOS development end of the process will go.

Were any changes made to the existing design of the system (requirements, block diagram, system spec, etc)? Why was this change necessary, what costs does the change incur, and how will these costs be mitigated going forward?

There are a few small changes made to the design of our system, mostly in the approach we were taking to the hardware design. Upon starting this project, we conceptualized our hardware design process in a way that would require a lot more time to create our own low-level functions to interact with the matrix, in the way we have learned to interact with peripherals in our classwork. However, this would be a lot more time-intensive than is necessary, and would make it more difficult for us to move much beyond our MVP.  Going forward, we want to spend more hardware design time rese arching and utilizing the multitude of resources to interact with our parts and create a better device for the user. After understanding better how to the STM microelectronics libraries with the Adafruit libraries, we will create an updated block diagram.

Provide an updated schedule if changes have occurred.

Our initial Gantt chart had us starting hardware design for the LCD immediately after the LED matrix; we have modified that to ensure that we complete our MVP fully first, with working wireless communication and designs, before moving on to the more complicated LCD implementation.

Please enumerate how you have adjusted your team work assignments to fill in gaps related to either new design challenges or team shortfalls.

Our team work assignments have not changed drastically from the roles we initially defined. Due to midterms, we all had less time this week to work on our tasks, but have rearranged the approach to hardware designing by splitting up the process in a slightly different way. We initially were planning to collaboratively work through the design and coding, but have now split it so that Shize will focus on the base set up of STM32 and I will focus on the peripherals, currently interacting with the LED matrix. Going forward, we will continue to make adjustments to more effectively take on the design of our system.

Team Status Report for Feb 18

What are the most significant risks that could jeopardize the success of the project? How are these risks being managed? What contingency plans are ready?

We anticipate that we may run into issues during the integration process, specifically in regards to the BLE communication between the software and hardware sides. At the moment we are managing this by ensuring we are using compatible libraries, hardware etc. to minimise potential challenges. On the hardware side, we may run into issues regarding PCB design, because none of our group members have PCB experiences, the PCB design process may take longer than our expectation. We manage this by starting the PCB design early. In particular, we already started the PCB file in fusion360 and should have a baseline circuit design by the design presentation to demonstrate our baseline circuit connection.

Were any changes made to the existing design of the system (requirements, block diagram, system spec, etc)? Why was this change necessary, what costs does the change incur, and how will these costs be mitigated going forward?

At this point in time we have not made any significantly large changes to our project. As we are still in the early stages of the design process, we have not yet run into significant bottlenecks that would require a re-evaluation of our proposed solution. We are currently conducting as much research as possible to construct holistic plans with a range of backup solutions. We hope that if we encounter issues during testing and development, this will allow us to make minor adaptations to our design without a large lapse in productivity. On the hardware side, we made more detailed circuit diagram and started the PCB file in fusion360. This change is necessary because we on in the process of refining the circuit design and plans to get PCB working as soon as possible.

Provide an updated schedule if changes have occurred.

There are no updates to our schedule as of now.

Please enumerate one or more principles of engineering, science and mathematics that your team used to develop the the design solution for your project.

In the past week, we thought more about user experience and how that affects our design choices. Specifically, while it’s easier to connect a battery pack to the earrings, we still want to incorporate a battery socket in our PCB to maximize user comfort.

Team Status Report for Feb 11

Our project considers the environmental, societal, and cultural values of our target consumer in the context of current economical and global trends.

Economic & Global Considerations

Breaking into the consumer electronics  market from a high fashion/ luxury standpoint not only capitalises on the increasing value ( Expected value of $USD 186.14 billion by 2030) of the wearable segment, but it also takes advantage of the movement in the fashion industry towards digitisation and virtual design [2].

The optimal target market demographic for this project is consumers of all demographics between the ages of 15 – 35, as they represent $350 million of spending power in the US as of 2020 [3]. Additionally, according to a 2023 forecast conducted by the business of fashion [4],  the younger generation prioritises spending money on fashion over traditional entertainment categories (e.g. dining, music media etc.)

Environmental, Societal and Cultural Considerations

We believe our product aptly considers the needs and values of our proposed user base.

The key differentiation factor of our product is that it enables users to purchase a single accessory that they can easily customise through an associated application. Unlike previous, generations younger consumers place a high value on fashion that reflects their values and self expression [3], with 82% of GenZ believing fashion is an important tool to establish identity [5]. We believe our product directly address this trend towards personalisation, by enabling users generate unique to articulate their individuality.

Moreover, we believe our product offers an environmentally sustainable option, by promoting reduced consumption. Adaptable fashion inherently has a larger number of use cases than traditional apparel. Cyber jewellery can be instantly adjusted for different events, trends or environments, reducing the need to buy multiple products for different situations. This is economically beneficial and reduces strain on the environment by limiting material, product and distribution wastes. Furthermore, emphasising the sustainability of our product appeals to the ethical values of our market. Specifically, younger consumers tend to spend more on sustainable products.

Sources:

  1. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/wearable-technology-market#:~:text=How%20big%20is%20the%20wearable,the%20wearable%20technology%20market%20growth%3F
  2. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/state-of-fashion
  3. \https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries/Retail/Our%20Insights/Renewed%20optimism%20for%20the%20fashion%20industry/The-state-of-fashion-2018-FINAL.ash
  4. https://www.businessoffashion.com/reports/news-analysis/the-state-of-fashion-2023-industry-report-bof-mckinsey/
  5. https://www.businessoffashion.com/reports/retail/gen-z-fashion-in-the-age-of-realism-bof-insights-social-media-report/

What are the most significant risks that could jeopardize the success of the project? How are these risks being managed? What contingency plans are ready?

The key issues we have identified that present the capacity to jeopardise our project center around two factors: user comfort and communication between our device and the application interface:

Size, Weight & Ergonomic Constraints

As our group is not addressing a particular existing need, but rather attempting to create product that offers a unique luxury experience for consumers, it is important for us to focus on delivering a comfortable and safe product to appeal to our end-user. Thus our largest design hurdle will be working around the small weight and size constraints.

To address this issue from a design standpoint we are looking at potentially adopting an ear cuff design to increase the available surface area we have to work with and to reduce strain on the ear lobe. Additionally, though we had originally considered casting our design in metal, we have researched alternative, more lightweight materials such as biopolymers and resins. Beyond research, throughout the design process we plan to periodically prototype, test (user trials, stress tests etc.) and refine our design to optimise user comfort. 

From a hardware perspective, we also believe that there will be a risk that the overall size of the PCB and battery will exceed our proposed constraints. We plan to  manage the PCB size risk by thinking about the PCB design as early as possible. We need to identify the additional circuit components besides the microcontroller and think about how we can use as least components as possible. Additionally, if the battery we need to use to fulfill the battery life requirement exceeds the required size, we plan to prioritize the size requirement and consider shortening the required battery life.

BLE Communication

Additionally, we anticipate that achieving reliable and fast communication between our application and peripherals will be a major obstacle across the course of our project.  We have planned to use BLE due to its high data transfer rate and high compatibility with smartphones, however there is a potential to have issues getting the BLE to work with a python script.

The BLE risk is managed through developing firmware on the nucleo boards. Nucleo boards are easier to work with than customized PCB. Making the peripheral driver work first on nucleo is an effective way to manage the BLE risk. Additionally, we found a GitHub repo that demonstrates the BLE functionality on STM32WB: https://github.com/vladimir-vakhter/stm32wb55_ble_p2p/blob/main/STM32_WPAN/App/app_ble.c. Consulting the code in this repo when get stuck is also a strategy on managing the BLE risk. Since STM32 firmware is generally finicky, a contingency plan is using another microcontroller that has BLE functionality such as ESP320.

Were any changes made to the existing design of the system (requirements, block diagram, system spec, etc)? Why was this change necessary, what costs does the change incur, and how will these costs be mitigated going forward? ” Provide an updated schedule if changes have occurred:

At this point in time, we have not made any significant updates or changes to the design or schedule presented in our proposal. As our project is highly dependent on physical design constraints, we are currently waiting to receive our parts and conduct initial testing before we present a fully fleshed out design.  We aim to finalise our development plans and preliminary designs across hardware, software and industrial design this week to ensure we are fully prepared and streamlined for when our parts arrive