PRE2024 3 Group18

Members

Name	Student Number	Division
Bas Gerrits	1747371	B
Jada van der Heijden	1756710	BPT
Dylan Jansen	1485423	B
Elena Jansen	1803654	B
Sem Janssen	1747290	B

Approach, milestones and deliverables

Project Planning

Week	Milestones
Week 1	Project orientation, brainstorming, defining deliverables and limitations, SotA research
Week 2	Deepened SotA research Identifying and determining specifications (hardware, software, design (MoSCoW Prioritization)), UX Design: User research Create bill of materials
Week 3	Prototyping cycle: building and mock-ups Order needed items UX Design: User Research Wiki: Specifications, Functionalities (sensors/motors used)
Week 4	Prototyping cycle Finish balancing
Week 5	Evaluating and refining final design
Week 6	Demo/scenario testing, fine-tuning Wiki: Testing results
Week 7	Presentation/demo preperations Wiki: Finalize and improve (ex. Conclusion, Future work, Discussion)

Project Roles

Name	Responsibilities
Bas Gerrits	Arduino control
Jada van der Heijden	Administration, UX design, Wiki
Dylan Jansen	(Opties) Code, Electronics ,CAD model, Construction, Control documentation
Elena Jansen	Designing
Sem Janssen	Hardware

Problem statement and objectives

Problem Statement

When encountering an environment as ever-changing and unpredictable as traffic, it is important for every traffic participant to have the widest range of information about the situation available to them, for safety reasons. Most roads are already covered in guiding materials: traffic lights, cross walks and level crossings have visual, tactile and auditory signals that are able to relay as much information to users of traffic as possible. Unfortunately, some user groups are more dependent on certain type of signals than others, for example due to disabilities. Not every crossing or road has all of these sensory cues, therefore it is important to find a solution for those user groups that struggle with this lack of information and therefore feel less safe in traffic. In specific, we are looking at visually impaired people, and creating a system/robot/design that will aid them in most traffic situations to cross roads, even with the lack of external sensory cues.

Main objectives:

• The design should be able to aid the user in crossing a road, regardless of external sensory cues already put in place

• The design must have audible, or otherwise noticeable, alerts for the user, that are easily understood by said user

• The design must have a reliable detection system
• The design must be 'hidden': it should not disrupt the user's QoL and could be barely noticeable as technology
  • Ex. hidden in the user's clothing

An extended list of all features can be found at MoScoW part.

User Experience Design Research

For this project, we will employ a process similar to UX design:

• We will contact the stakeholders or target group, which is in this case visually impaired people, to understand what they need and what our design could do for them
• Based on their insight and literature user research, we will further specify our requirements list from the USE side
• Combined with requirements formed via SotA research, a finished list will emerge with everything needed to start the design process
• From then we build, prototype and iterate until needs are met

Below are the USE related steps to this process.

USEr research

Target Group

Primary Users:

• People with affected vision that would have sizeable trouble navigating traffic independently: ranging from visually impaired to fully blind

Secondary Users:

• Road users: any moving being or thing on the road will be in contact with the system.
• Fellow pedestrians: the system must consider other people when moving. This is a separate user category, as the system may have to interact with these users in a different way than, for example, oncoming traffic.

Users

What Do They Require?

!!From user research we will probably find that most blind people are elderly. We can conclude somewhere here then that we will focus on elderly people, and that that will have implications for the USEr aspects of the design as elderly people are notorious for interacting and responding differently to technology.!!

Society

How is the user group situated in society? How would society benifit from our design?

Enterprise

What businesses and companies are connected to this issue?

Stakeholder Analysis

To come in closer contact with our target groups, we reached out to multiple associations via mail. The following questions were asked (in Dutch), as a ways to gather preliminary information:

• Wat voor hulpmiddelen worden het vaakst gebruikt door slechtziende/blinde mensen?
  • Welke aspecten van uw hulpmiddel vind u fijn, en wat vind u hinderen?
  • Zijn er dingen waarvan u het gevoel heeft dat u die mist, en mogelijk extra assistentie van zou willen hebben (bijv. via een fysiek hulpmiddel?)

• Hoe navigeert u normaal het verkeer?
  • Wat voor stappen neemt u als het gaat om de weg oversteken? Denk vooral aan of er verschil is in aanpak bij verschillende soorten oversteekplaatsen?
    • Bijv. oversteekplaatsen met stoplicht en geluid, zebrapad, of een willekeurige weg zonder haptische of auditorische aspecten

• Hoe ervaart u het verkeer nu, zijn er dingen die u wat makkelijker afgaan, of dingen waar u vaak moeite mee heeft?
• Als het gaat om hulpmiddelen, legt u meer waarde aan haptische middelen (iets wat je vast kan houden, bijv. blindegeleidestok) of auditorische middelen (stemgeluid, piepjes) bij het verkeer?

Following these questions, we got answers from multiple associations that were able to give us additional information.

From this, we were able to setup interviews via x,y,z.

Additionally, via personal contacts, we were also able to visit an art workshop at StudioXplo on the 7th of February meant for the visually impaired. We were able to conduct some interviews with the intended users on site.

Prototypes/Design

Here we will put some different versions of a design of what we think will be a solution. We can pick one to work on.

Evaluation

Sem

Appendix

Timesheets

Week	Names	Breakdown	Total hrs
Week 1	Bas Gerrits	Meeting & brainstorming (3h), SotA research (4h), working out concepts (1h), sub-problem solutions (2h)	10
	Jada van der Heijden	Meeting & brainstorming (3h), planning creation (2h), wiki cleanup (2h), SotA research (3h)	10
	Dylan Jansen	Meeting & brainstorming (3h), SotA research (3h), working out concepts (2h), looking for reference material (2h)	10
	Elena Jansen	Meeting & brainstorming (3h)
	Sem Janssen	Meeting & brainstorming (3h)
Week 2	Bas Gerrits	Meeting (2h)
	Jada van der Heijden	Meeting (2h), Editing wiki to reflect subject change (2h), Contacting institutions for user research (1h), Setting up user research (interview questions) (1h), User research (2h)	7
	Dylan Jansen	Meeting (2h)
	Elena Jansen	Meeting (2h)
	Sem Janssen	Meeting (2h)
Week 3	Bas Gerrits
	Jada van der Heijden
	Dylan Jansen
	Elena Jansen
	Sem Janssen
Week 4	Bas Gerrits
	Jada van der Heijden
	Dylan Jansen
	Elena Jansen
	Sem Janssen
Week 5	Bas Gerrits
	Jada van der Heijden
	Dylan Jansen
	Elena Jansen
	Sem Janssen
Week 6	Bas Gerrits
	Jada van der Heijden
	Dylan Jansen
	Elena Jansen
	Sem Janssen
Week 7	Bas Gerrits
	Jada van der Heijden
	Dylan Jansen
	Elena Jansen
	Sem Janssen

140 pp, 700 total, ~20 hrs a week

Backlog

What our robot should have, and what we want it to be able to do

1. The robot should be capable of holding/handling a small package
2. The robot should be able to balance itself on two wheels
3. The robot should be able to deliver packages by being able to move in different directions
   1. Specify:
4. Robot is well built (stable)
5. The robot uses sensors and motors in a meaningful way
6. The robot has a clear USEr link
   1. Specify: The robot should be of use to the user group and interact with the world and that user group in a meaningful way