PRE2016 4 Groep1: Difference between revisions
Line 269: | Line 269: | ||
On average, 12,175 children 0 to 19 years of age died each year in the United States from an | On average, 12,175 children 0 to 19 years of age died each year in the United States from an | ||
unintentional injury | unintentional injury. | ||
For children less than 1 year of age, two–thirds of injury deaths were due to suffocation. Drowning | For children less than 1 year of age, two–thirds of injury deaths were due to suffocation. Drowning | ||
Line 277: | Line 275: | ||
was the leading cause injury death for those 1 to 4 years of age. For children 5 to 19 years of age, the | was the leading cause injury death for those 1 to 4 years of age. For children 5 to 19 years of age, the | ||
most injury deaths were due to being an occupant in a motor vehicle traffic crash | most injury deaths were due to being an occupant in a motor vehicle traffic crash.[3] | ||
Line 298: | Line 290: | ||
For children ages 0 to 9, the next two leading causes were being stuck by or against an object and | For children ages 0 to 9, the next two leading causes were being stuck by or against an object and | ||
animal bites or insect stings | animal bites or insect stings. | ||
Nonfatal suffocation rates were highest for those less than 1 year of age. Rates for fires or burns, | Nonfatal suffocation rates were highest for those less than 1 year of age. Rates for fires or burns, | ||
Line 308: | Line 296: | ||
and drowning were highest for children 4 years and younger. Children 1 to 4 years of age had the | and drowning were highest for children 4 years and younger. Children 1 to 4 years of age had the | ||
highest rates of nonfatal falls and poisoning | highest rates of nonfatal falls and poisoning. [3] | ||
Between the ages of 1 and 4 and for all five-year age groups between the ages of 10 and 34, | Between the ages of 1 and 4 and for all five-year age groups between the ages of 10 and 34, | ||
accidents were the single most common cause of death | accidents were the single most common cause of death. [4] | ||
Line 336: | Line 308: | ||
particular, 20 % of deaths in children aged 1–4 occurred due to accidents (transport accidents, falls, | particular, 20 % of deaths in children aged 1–4 occurred due to accidents (transport accidents, falls, | ||
drowning and submersion, poisoning and other external causes | drowning and submersion, poisoning and other external causes). [5] | ||
Neoplasm is the main cause of death among children aged 5–9 (accounting for 28 % of total causes | Neoplasm is the main cause of death among children aged 5–9 (accounting for 28 % of total causes | ||
for this age group in 2011), followed by external causes of death (25 | for this age group in 2011), followed by external causes of death (25 %). [5] | ||
Revision as of 16:34, 3 May 2017
Group Members
- Sjoerd van Helden 0893960
- Stijn Middelhuis 0947014
- Roy Niemark 0956824
- Andrei Pintillie 0980402
- Dennis Struver 0955477
Week 1
Below the progress after the first week is given. There is worked on several different assignments and a start is made with the project.
Meeting outcome
Agreements for meetings: Monday after presentation/feedback we have a meeting of 1 hour. After that we can work on the divided Self Study Assignments (SSA’s) if we want but that is optional. When needed, there can also be a meeting planned at thursday afternoon.
Keep our wiki up to date, the wiki will be checked on Sunday evening for the feedback on Monday.
Possible subjects:
- SMART Home for children – Make the house safe for children, lock doors, keep cabinets locked, give alerts to the parent, turn down the hot water. Important: Cost (USE perspective).
- Educational robot for children with autism – Help children with autism get more communicative.
- Distribution robot – Distribute the right amount of medicine to an elderly person at the times he/she has to take his/her medicine.
- Green energy – Solar panels.
Assignments and results
Subject
The most important thing for parents is the safety of their child. Having to constantly watch the child costs a lot of time and effort for the parents. To help parents, we have come up with an idea so parents do not have to worry about the child, but guarantees safety.
The concept is a SMART house that enhances the safety of the child. For example, if the mother has to go grocery shopping, normally she would have to take the child with her. With a smart house she can leave the child at home and the house will keep the child safe for the duration the mother is away.
This is concept for children with an age between 1 and 8 years old. At this age, a child is able to move by itself but is not able to stay at home alone. The smart house keeps the child away from dangerous situations or objects. For example, when the house detects the child near a sink with hot water, it shuts off the hot water so the child cannot burn himself/herself. But also checking the water level in sink and shutting off the water when it gets to a level where the child could drown.
Objectives
The main objective is to research a system that will detect whether there is a child in the room or an adult. Because, if there is an adult in the room, the child is much less at risk. This SMART home system has implementations all over the house that it can use to enhance the safety of the child.
Further objectives are to investigate what potential dangers there are for a child in a house. The most important factor in this system is ‘danger recognition’, other functions the system can use are for example closing/locking doors, shutting off the water or locking drawers. The communication between different devices that the home uses has to be smooth. Also the possibility of removing and implementing the system easily is an important objective. Because the intended audience for this system are children between 1 and 8 years old, the system has a specific task that gets reduced every year.
In this project, the impact from the USE perspective is analysed, a concept design will be made and will be evaluated from different perspectives, for example cost and benefit.
Users
The primary users are the parents of the child. They are buying a system that gets installed in their house to protect their child. They have to be sure that the child will be kept save, the child self will barely know the system is there. A system that satisfies the parents needs is automatically a good system for the child. But still the system has to be child safe, and the child itself is also a user. When the parents already have an older child or a nanny visits several times a week, they can be seen as primary users too. Secondary users are the maintenance people that install the system, and during its life cycle conduct maintenance.
Approach
First we are going to study the contemplated subject. We will set goals, make assumptions and discuss what we want to have in the end with the respect to the USE perspective. We are going to focus on an average environment and will extend from there. At the start we are going to do research on the projects about similar subjects that already exist and look at what is possible in this project with the current technology. Also we want to know the basics about children in their home, frequent accidents and injuries that occur and preferences of parents in general. With this knowledge and the set goals we will design a concept for a ‘safety smart-home’ and elaborate on the features, possibilities and extensions.
Project planning
For a project it is important to have a good project planning. Below the planning for this project is given. The week planning and a role distribution is made to keep track of the progress and provide a guideline while working on this project. The planning follows the process and sets several milestones that are important to achieve. The planning is made at the begin of the project and has some room for adjustments, if necessary. The first two weeks are dedicated mainly to doing research and problem defining. In the third week a start should be made with the first concept design. The weeks to follow are dedicated to finishing the first concept design and making the complete final design of the SMART home. In these weeks the process, decisions and problems should be checked and be described. In week seven the last two milestones should be achieved: finish the concept design and evaluate it. During every week, the wiki should be updated with the progress made up until that point. The last week is dedicated to preparing for the final presentation and finalizing the wiki.
The general approach of this project consists of the following milestones:
- Research background, state of the art and similar existing systems
- Conceptualizing the subject with respect to the knowledge gathered
- Make a global design for a single room
- Extend and finalize the concept design
- Evaluate the design concept and work out possible extensions and cost/benefit-analysis
Weekplanning
Week 1
- Determine the subject
- Formulate the problem
- Create idea’s for a concept
- Objectives
- Involved users
- Research about background, state of the art and similar existing systems
- Create planning and presentation
Week 2
- Finish the research (Milestone 1)
- Children and accidents
- Existing SMART Homes and its collaboration with safety measures
- Typical house environments for children
- State of the art technology that could be implemented or used.
- Existing systems made for safety of children
- User benefit
- Determine important and critical points of interest
- Look into the subject from a USE perspective and determine relevant USE aspects
Week 3
- Conceptualize the subject with the knowledge gathered (Milestone 2)
- Composition of the room
- Components (technological) which can be used
- Elaboration of the design requirements
- Start of the global design for a single room
- Search for essential information
- Determine which room considering several factors that are of importance
- Determine the software for the design
- Decide the degree of detail that the design should have
Week 4
- Finish the global design for a single room (Milestone 3)
- Elaboration of the global design:
- Process, decisions, result and problems on the wiki
- List of possible extensions
- Approximate cost and risk prevention for this design
Week 5
- Adjust and/or extend the conceptualization definition if necessary
- Start of the global design for a home
- Search for essential information
- Decide the degree of detail that the design should have
- Decide which implementations are optional
Week 6
- Extend and refine the design for a home
- Continue working on the design
- Refining the design and implementations for specific rooms
Week 7
- Finish the SMART Home design (Milestone 4)
- Elaboration of the process, decisions, result and problems
- List of possible extensions
- Evaluate the SMART Home design (Milestone 5)
- The design
- Optional implementations/extensions
- Impact and shortcomings
- Cost and benefit analysis
- Create presentation
Week 8
- Finish, prepare and give the presentation
- Finish the wiki
- Reorganize if necessary
- Check the progress
- Complete the final wiki page
Role distribution
Task name | Start | End | Duration (days) | Role distribution |
---|---|---|---|---|
Determine the subject | 24-4-2017 | 25-4-2017 | 1 | Everyone |
Create the planning | 24-4-2017 | 1-5-2017 | 7 | Dennis, Roy |
Background and state of the art research | 24-4-2017 | 8-5-2017 | 14 | Sjoerd, Andrei |
USE perspective and aspects | 24-4-2017 | 8-5-2017 | 14 | Stijn, Dennis, Roy |
Composition of the room | 8-5-2017 | 11-5-2017 | 3 | Sjoerd, Roy |
Design requirements | 8-5-2017 | 11-5-2017 | 3 | Dennis, Stijn |
Global design for a single room | 11-5-2017 | 22-5-2017 | 11 | Andrei, Roy, Dennis |
Elaborate the design | 22-5-2017 | 25-5-2017 | 3 | Sjoerd, Stijn |
Possible extensions | 22-5-2017 | 25-5-2017 | 3 | Sjoerd, Dennis |
Global design for a home | 25-5-2017 | 7-6-2017 | 13 | Roy, Stijn, Andrei |
Evaluate the single room design | 7-6-2017 | 12-6-2017 | 5 | Dennis, Roy |
Evaluate the home design | 7-6-2017 | 12-6-2017 | 5 | Sjoerd, Andrei, Stijn |
Gantt Chart
Research outcomes
Some information gathered from the first research that is done. Not really processed in detail so it is still raw information to read.
Types of accidents
The most severe injuries are associated with heat-related accidents and falls from a height.[1]
Younger children have a higher percentage of burns and scalds as well as poisoning and ingestion accidents.[1]
The largest number of accidents happen in the living/dining room. However, the most serious accidents happen in the kitchen and on the stairs.[1]
It is difficult to give a true cost of treating children's accidents as outpatients and inpatients but in the past it has been estimated at more than £275 million a year.[1]
Safety and child development [see 1 – corresponding section]
Accidents:
Around 10 children die as a result of falls each year[1]
Domestic fires pose one of the greatest risks to children. Children playing with matches and lighters frequently start house fires.[1]
Children can also suffer burns after contact with open fires, a cooker, irons, curling tongs and hair straighteners, cigarettes, matches, cigarette lighters and many other hot surfaces.[1]
Every year children die following an accident with architectural glass. Many children are also injured when glass tumblers and bottles break.[1]
Suffocating and choking - Babies and small children are most at risk from choking because they examine things around them by putting them in their mouths. [1]
Drowning - Children can drown in less than 3cm of water. They should be under constant supervision when in or near any water.[1]
List of types of accidents: Burns, Poisoning, Drowning, Falls, Choking, strangulation, and suffocation[2]
Most of the accidents take place at home. [2]
References:
[1]http://www.rospa.com/home-safety/advice/child-safety/accidents-to-children/
Stats and state of the art
On average, 12,175 children 0 to 19 years of age died each year in the United States from an
unintentional injury.
For children less than 1 year of age, two–thirds of injury deaths were due to suffocation. Drowning
was the leading cause injury death for those 1 to 4 years of age. For children 5 to 19 years of age, the
most injury deaths were due to being an occupant in a motor vehicle traffic crash.[3]
An estimated 9.2 million children annually had an initial emergency department visit for an
unintentional injury.
Each year, approximately 2.8 million children had an initial emergency department visit for injuries
from a fall. For children less than 1 year of age, falls accounted for over 50% of nonfatal injuries.
Falls was the leading cause of nonfatal injury for all age groups less than 15.
For children ages 0 to 9, the next two leading causes were being stuck by or against an object and
animal bites or insect stings.
Nonfatal suffocation rates were highest for those less than 1 year of age. Rates for fires or burns,
and drowning were highest for children 4 years and younger. Children 1 to 4 years of age had the
highest rates of nonfatal falls and poisoning. [3]
Between the ages of 1 and 4 and for all five-year age groups between the ages of 10 and 34,
accidents were the single most common cause of death. [4]
For children aged 1–4, the most common causes of death are external factors (22 % in 2011). In
particular, 20 % of deaths in children aged 1–4 occurred due to accidents (transport accidents, falls,
drowning and submersion, poisoning and other external causes). [5]
Neoplasm is the main cause of death among children aged 5–9 (accounting for 28 % of total causes
for this age group in 2011), followed by external causes of death (25 %). [5]
Opening door mechanics:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sliding_door_operator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing-door_operator
Door locking method: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_lock
Robot localisation:
- Robotic Room-Level Localization Using Multiple Sets of Sonar Measurements by Huaping Liu,
Fuchun Sun, Bin Fang, and Xinyu Zhang, January 2017.
- Simultaneous people tracking and robot localization in dynamic social spaces by
Dylan F. Glas, Yoichi Morales, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro and Norihiro Hagita, January
2015.
- Wireless and Pyroelectric Sensory Fusion System for Indoor Human/Robot Localization and
Monitoring by Ren C. Luo, Fellow, IEEE, and Ogst Chen, June 2013.
References:
[3] https://www.cdc.gov/safechild/child_injury_data.html
[4] http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Accidents_and_injuries_statistics