Kgcoe msd concept Design Review I meeting Purpose

Materials Reviewed

CDR_Pre-read.doc (Rev. 02)

A
ttendees:

Professor Slack (EE / EE Advisor)

Emilien Barrault (ME / French Collaboration Lead)

Ryan Hellems (ME / P08002 member)

Jessica Stalker (ME / P08002 member)

Jeffery Ozbourne (ME / P08002 member)

Recorded by (names and roles of person recording meeting notes):

Art Ponikiewski / Matt Benedict / Phil Edwards / Reid Williamson (Team members)

Meeting Date:

01.18.08

2:00PM – 4:00PM

Mobil Conference Room

Previous Open Action Items Reviewed

N/A – First Review

Discussion (describe any relevant discussions not captured in actions / issues / decisions tables):

• 
  “What do You want to get out of this review?” (E.H.)
  

• 
  Long-term Outlook - Packaging Science Collaboration
  

• 
  Can they provide rudimentary recommendations?
  
• 
  Could table top drop test requirement spin off to be a packaging science project?
  
• 
  Scope of Performance (E.H.)
  

1. 
   Reliability / “It works”
   
2. 
   Rudimentary Controls from base
   
3. 
   Rudimentary Health Statements from MM
   
4. 
   Advanced Health Commands from MM
   
5. 
   Report Health wirelessly to user (not expected)
   

• 
  Functionality of Wireless
  
  • 
    Commands & Data
    
  • 
    802.11 has a lot of software overhead
    
  • 
    Zigby is not trivial
    
  • 
    Adaptability to increased signal traffic
    
  • 
    Wireless RS-232
    
    • 
      Individually addressable?
      
    • 
      Easier to develop
      
  • 
    Distribution Requirements (range)
    
    • 
      Function of visual operating range
      
• 
  Integrate subsystems (E.H.)
  
• 
  (Open Source or Open Architecture) ≠ COTS
  
• 
  Processor Type Screening Stage Matrix
  
  • 
    Microcontroller Only lacked a specified board design
    
• 
  What if the control commands are not from a human?
  
  • 
    Expandable to autonomous control…?
    
• 
  Be sensitive to wheel slip
  
• 
  Joystick = higher resolution while keyboard = lower resolution