Posted on

Team Status Report for 4/27

This week, we were able to integrate the new, higher torque motor with the stand and rest of the system. The new motor has sufficient torque to turn the screw of the platform jack and adjust the height of the stand. We are currently working on doing more tests with the fully integrated system as well as creating a new mount for the motor to attach the motor to the platform jack.

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?

Risks:

Currently, the most significant risks we are facing are the is mounting the new motor to the stand. Since the new motor is noticeably heavier than the previous one, we need to be certain that the motor mount will be able to support the weight of the motor. We also have to adjust and tune the speeds and steps we use to increase the height of the stand since there will be variations in speed when going up versus down.

Changes:

Due to the new stepper motor having different dimensions than the previous one, we had to start a new 3D print for a motor mount with these new dimensions. This cost about 60 dollars and was necessary since it is the most feasible solution to ensuring the motor is constantly in contact with the screw even when the screw’s height changes.

No changes were made to our schedule.

Unit Tests and Overall System Tests:

Unit tests we have conducted consist of testing the functionality of the linear actuator subsystem, motor control, and height and angle adjustment computations. We have conducted overall system tests of a full adjustment process – both height and angle adjustment – as well as calibration. We conducted these tests over 9 trials with the screen at starting angles and height. We found that the adjustment process took an average of 33.56 seconds, and the calibration process took an average of 6.7 seconds. The height adjustment had an error margin of about 0.95 inches, and the angle adjustment had an error margin of about 2.44 degrees.

Posted on

Team Status Report for 4/20

Our most significant risk is generating enough torque to lift the stand. We are currently managing this risk by purchasing a new motor that has almost 7 times the amount of torque than the one we have now. Furthermore, we have developed some ways of lightening the top of the stand. If this does not work, we will buy a motor with higher torque by the end of next week. We can also start the stand at a higher position that the motor is able to lift.

We did not make any significant changes to the design of the system other than purchasing a new motor. We also decided to include a shelf to hold the linear actuators, although this change will not incur major costs or threaten our existing schedule. This was necessary so that the laptop will start at a lower angle.

 

 

 

Posted on

Team Status Report for 4/6

The most significant risks to the project are: the new motor shield not supplying enough voltage to the motor. From here we can go in two directions: we can order a higher torque motor, or we can use a shield with a higher input voltage. If our motor is not torque-y enough, we will pursue both options because we have money to spend and we need a short execution latency because we only have 3 weeks left.

The main change to the block diagram was using a new motor shield with higher input voltage. If that shield is not enough, we will use a driver with an even higher input voltage, however, since this driver is not a shield that means will need two arduinos, one to control the actuators and the other to control the motor. This will be more difficult to integrate.

We are on schedule.

Week specific answers:

Tests we have run: stepping the motor with the driver, stepping the motor while it is mounted to the platform jack, running the motor continuously while mounted (these tests tested the structural integrity of the motor mount and the torque of the motor), and also height/angle adjustment without using actuation (i.e. we use our hands to manually change the height and the angle of the computer).

Future tests to run: torque of motor with new motor driver, running motor continuously with new motor driver, structural test of linear actuator mount. When system is fully integrated: time to complete height/angle adjustment (our goal is < 5 sec). Total weight of system (our goal is < 8 lbs). When running height adjustment, we will see if the top platform tilts, the is not good because it means the computer might fall over. We will ensure that the stand does not change height too quickly so people do not hurt themselves when sticking their fingers in between the jack arms.

Posted on

Team Status Report for 3/30

This week, we met to work on integrating the mechanical aspects of our project with our software. We worked on putting together the mount that will be attached to the stand to hold the motor and tested the motor code with the Arduino and the motor which proved to be successful. We are continuing to work on integrating the OpenCV programs and height adjustment process with the firmware for the interim demo.

Currently, the most significant risks we are facing with our project is the mechanical design and making sure that the modifications we made to the screw of the jack will allow the platform to raise smoothly and not break. Additionally, the mount we created to hold the motor will need to be sturdy and securely attached to the beams of the jack to allow the motor to be joined with the screw in order to automate the height adjustment process. To mitigate these risks, we have thought of modifications that may need to be made to our CAD designs in the case that there are issues with the stability and size of the mount.

Due to the incompatibility of the Arduino Uno Rev4 with the L293D motor driver that we had previously purchased, we made a change to the design of the system by switching the Arduino with an older version, the R3. This is a component that we already had on hand, so no additional charges are incurred.

Posted on

Team Status Report 3/23

  • Right now, our largest risk is rotating the screw of for the platform jack. Because the screw head does not remain completely still while the stand is being raised, we are worried about how we are going to keep the motor stable. However, we are managing this risk by creating new components to attach to the stand in order to keep the motor in place. We have multiple design ideas in case one fails.
  • The changes made to our design are the addition of new components to keep the screw in place, a block, as well as another attachment to keep stable and connected to the bar.
  • We are still using our current schedule. As we had some slack time built in, we should be able to recover from adding these new components.
Posted on

Team Status Report for 3/16

The biggest current risk is still the mechanical design as it has many uncertainties and because the software components have been mostly fleshed out already. To mitigate this risk we have gone ahead and ordered the platform jack we plan on using. We will begin testing next Monday. Depending on the friction of the linkages in the jack, we will determine how much torque we need in our stepper motor.

In case the platform jack fails for whatever reason (too much torque required or its top platform is not level), we will purchase a more expensive jack that is manufactured better but is also heavier.

One minor change to the design is that we are now planning on using bluetooth communication between the computer and the arduino since this is simpler than we thought and will contribute to our use case requirement of our product having a smooth and simple user interface. There were no real costs associated with this change since getting the bluetooth code written was minimal work.

Posted on

Team Status Report for 3/9

Currently, the most significant risk to the success of the project is the mechanical side (mainly including the platform jack). We have already made proof of concepts for the posture tracking and facial landmark tracking which will be used for motor control. However, what remains a question is whether the actual stand will hold up to the stress from the computer on top, whether the motor will be forceful enough, whether the stand will stay level, how much friction there is in the platform jack screw, how big and heavy the whole stand will be after our modifications to add a battery/arduino compartment and the linear actuator compartment. 

The way this risk is currently being managed is by ordering the stand as soon as possible to begin testing. The stand will be ordered at the start of this week. Additionally, Sebastian has done a lot of research on different stands by reading customer reviews to select the best one. The contingency plan is to simply buy progressively more expensive platform jacks which (according to reviews) are more stable and are machined with greater precision so they have less friction. 

The only change we made to the existing design is to modify an off-the-shelf platform jack instead of making one from scratch. This change was necessary because creating a new platform jack was outside the scope of our experience. The only cost is the price of the stand, the design time of the stand has gone down because now Mary only has to design the compartments above and below the stand. 

Part A (written by Sebastian): 

Our product has an immense global impact because poor posture is a problem affecting almost all industrialized countries where consumer electronics are common. The most widely used consumer electronics are mobile phones and PCs, both of which promote poor posture. This contributes to the global health crisis where people in wealthy nations are becoming unhealthy. As a result, they require more and more expensive medications and treatments, which causes inflation, which lowers the quality of life even more for most people. So, as a result of poor posture, a vicious cycle is created. While this statement is a bit of a stretch, I believe that using technology to collectively improve our posture will considerably improve the general health of ourselves. Now SmartStand will hopefully only make a small dent in the general posture health of the public, but it is a first, and important step.

Part B (written by Olivia):  

Our project was created with the target audience being students and people who may work remotely. Since these groups of people often have to work from public places and many different areas, they may not be able to have the most comfortable working environment. This is why we decided to include the height adjustment functionality of a laptop stand, in order to help such individuals improve their productivity and reduce pain from using their laptop for extended periods of time. Additionally, since these groups are often commuting and traveling, we are constantly considering the portability and convenience of our product, which is why we decided to make SmartStand battery powered, compatible with bluetooth, and compactly designed.

Part C (written by Mary Rose):

Seeing as our product is not very large, or particularly hard to produce, it is difficult to determine if it would have any effect on natural resources, or non-human living organisms. In addition, our device is intended to be used indoors, so it will not have much interaction with the environment. However, as one of the main goals of our device is centered around improving human health (helping people to fix their posture), it can be said that our device would have a positive effect on some living organisms (humans).

Posted on

Team Status Report for 2/24

This week, we solidified the mechanical design of the stand as a platform jack as the base to change height and 2 linear actuators on the top platform to apply torque to the laptop.

We also decided to change our approach to the posture detection by using OpenCV instead of OpenPose. This was because we are more comfortable with OpenCV, and it will be more accommodating for incorporating libraries in OpenCV as well as integrate the face detection, posture, and interface all in Python.

 

Posted on

Team Status Report 2/17

Overall Team Report:

This week, our team worked on finalizing aspects of the design. During our meetings, we discussed the materials we had already purchased, and whether or not we had anything left to get. Unfortunately, there was an issue with our 3D printed prototype design, so we will reprint it for next week. In addition, we worked together to finalize important metrics for our design, including timing, and power consumption aspects. Furthermore, we discussed some new ways to tilt the laptop, which included redesigning our stand so that it can tilt. However, we decided to hold off on this for now, and just use the linear actuator model to achieve MVP. We also worked on our slides for the Design Presentation. 

 

Part A (by Mary Rose Rubino):

Many people who spend long periods using a laptop suffer from back and neck pain, as well as eye strain, which can cause lasting damage. To combat this issue, SmartStand will raise to the most ergonomic height for each user. In addition, once it is at this height, it will notify users of a significant change in posture, allowing the user to quickly adjust back to a more optimal position. In addition, we will track eye movement, which will ensure that users’ eyes are not strained from long periods of staring at the screen. Our app will display this information in an easy-to-read format that will help users monitor their progress over time. 

 

Part B (by Olivia Yang):

Our project is ideated with the target demographic being students or professionals who spend much of their time using laptops and commuting. With these social groups in mind, we geared our user experience to be convenient for those who are trying to prioritize productivity by providing alerts to users when they are not focusing. Additionally, we would like this product to be helpful to such users by minimizing physical strain due to extended use of their laptop by providing adjustable height in the laptop stand as well as encouraging users to take regular breaks with reminder notifications through the user interface. We are also stressing the importance of portability and ease of use to further suit those who would need a portable device that is lightweight and convenient.

 

Part C (by Sebastian Garcia): 

This product will be produced using conventional means (i.e. in a factory with a high amount of automation for placing components into the stand’s frame). Most of the construction of the stand can be done automatically since the finished product would use a platform jack made of metal. Then, internally there would be a PCB with a USB transceiver and motor controller). This PCB would be built mostly automatically. The motors would be off-the-shelf. In terms of distribution, this product is consumer-facing so it could be distributed using the Amazon system where users purchase the product online our team’s only job would be to supply the product to Amazon warehouses. In terms of consumption, this product would be an investment in the health of the user. It is both good in terms of being a physical device and a service in that it improves the general well-being of the consumer.

Posted on

Team Status Report for 2/10

After receiving feedback from our proposal, we met to discuss and solidify the details of the stand’s mechanics. We are currently thinking about using a 3D printed platform jack as the base of our stand that can smoothly raise a laptop by turning a knob. We found an open source design of a platform jack and sent that to be printed at a smaller scale so that we can see how the mechanism would work with our weight and size requirements.

We have decided to continue our design process with a smaller version of the stand since it would take up a large portion of our budget to fully 3D print the design of the stand with the dimensions we have in mind for the final product. So, we will use this smaller model to experiment with the weight, decide how much torque is needed to turn the dial and raise the stand, and how we can tweak the design to be more portable and compact before we finally print the full sized stand. 

Additionally, we would like to see how the linear actuator can be used in combination with the platform jack to tilt the screen of a laptop. We will then discern how we can incorporate this mechanism into our final design, and in what ways we will need to scale the dimensions to better fit our requirements.