P17012: Torque Assisting Knee Brace. Team Members: Benjamin Boseck, David Gooden, Linzey Miller, Farrukh Mohiuddin, Emily Sanseverino, Andrew Tock

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "P17012: Torque Assisting Knee Brace. Team Members: Benjamin Boseck, David Gooden, Linzey Miller, Farrukh Mohiuddin, Emily Sanseverino, Andrew Tock"

Dora Wade
6 years ago
Views:

1 P17012: Torque Assisting Knee Brace Team Members: Benjamin Boseck, David Gooden, Linzey Miller, Farrukh Mohiuddin, Emily Sanseverino, Andrew Tock

2 Overview Background Review Project Changes Hinge Subsystem Hardware/Software Test Plan Test Rig Risk Analysis Feasibility Next Steps

3 Background Goal: inexpensive knee brace that assists with Torque Current common knee braces only stabilize the knee Spring Loaded Technology, Expensive Multiple fittings by an Orthotist $100 Wear for extended periods of time Flexible in terms of wearing over or under clothing Data Acquisition

4 Project Changes Shock Absorption Torque Assist Product Benchmarking (Levitation) Talked to our Customer

5 Use Case Scenario

6 Functional Decomposition

7 Concept Development

Display Data PC / Android Absorb Shock Spring Mechanism Supply Power to Microcontroller

8 Selected Concept Function Concept Secure Knee / Secure to Leg Elastic/Velcro Measure Knee Angle Rotary Encoder Measure Force on Knee Rotary Encoder Measure Motion Rotary Encoder Display Data PC / Android Absorb Shock Spring Mechanism Supply Power to Microcontroller Battery Transmit Data Bluetooth Charge Device No solution Provide Comfort Use existing knee compression sleeve

9 Hinge Subsystem: Extended

10 Hinge Subsystem: Flexed

11 Hinge Feasibility: Springs and Cord

12 Draft Assembly Drawing

13 Hinge Feasibility: Cord Concept

14 Electronic Hardware Microcontroller Bluetooth Module Potentiometric Sensor Battery Voltage Regulation

15 Electronic Software PC data collection application Android mobile application API (Application Programming Interface) Instantaneous Position Force Dissipated (Spring force equations) Derived Steps Taken

16 Electronic BOM - Prototype Prototype Design Subsystem Electronic Component Model(s) Potentiometer COM COM Bluetooth Module Microcontroller Unit Cost Quantity Total Cost Source Adjusted Cost $ CE Lab $0.95 Manager $0 RN42 $ $18.95 Customer $0 NetDuino +2 $ $59.95 Customer $0 $79.85 $0 Subsystem Cost:

17 Electronic BOM - Manufacturing Scale 30,000 scale manufacturing Design Subsystem Electronic Component Model(s) Potentiometer COM COM Bluetooth Module RN42 Microcontroller Unit Cost Quantity Total Cost $ $ $ $ MSP430 $ $ PCB N/A $ $ Battery CR2032 $ $ Voltage Regulator LD1117V33 $ $ Capacitors Various $ $ Resistors Various $ $ Electronic Unit Cost: 1 $15.48 Electronic Cost: $464,468.40

18 Electronics Feasibility Issues: Low Low Low Low Power mw (worst case) ~ 600 hour life Cost - $16 / unit at scale, Pain Point: Bluetooth Profile - ½ inch x ½ inch PCB Mechanical Risk - Prototyping Required Function Concept Secure Knee / Secure to Leg Elastic/Velcro Measure Knee Angle Rotary Encoder Measure Force on Knee Rotary Encoder Measure Motion Rotary Encoder Display Data PC / Android Absorb Shock Spring Mechanism Supply Power to Microcontroller Battery Transmit Data Bluetooth Charge Device No solution Provide Comfort Use existing knee compression sleeve

19 Test Plan - Human Subjects Test Plan Criteria Initial Comfort Walking Test Climbing Test Final Comfort Variations Loaded Different module set ups (1 vs 2 modules)

20 Test Rig Material Motor 2x4 wood PVC pipe (larger) PVC Pipe (smaller) plywood (wheel) metal rod (0.5in dia) Amount 1 38in Rod locks 13 24in 24in 1 ft Dia 36in

21 Risk Analysis

22 IP Standards

23 Waterproofing Electronic Potting Used for resisting (electric) shock & exclusion of moisture Thermo-setting plastics or silicone rubber

24 Waterproofing Parylene Coating Thin, vacuum deposited layer of a parylene dimer, in the form of a transparent polymer film Deposition in gas form to allow for deep penetration

25 Waterproofing - Feasibility Electronic Potting Pros Cons Parylene Coating Pros Cons Largest & most powerful barrier Obscures the look of the device No residue & no difference in appearance of the device Almost impossible to remove 2-step process faster & cheaper: ~$30 Difficult to modify components of the device Process is involved, but results in an extremely thin and protective layer Only professionally done; expensive: ~$250 per lb. Can be personally done Impossible to remove Biocompatible Water resistant; not waterproof

26 Plans for Next Phase

27 Questions?

RAT PACK RAT TREADMILL COLIN BURKHALTER, STU SATER, STEPHEN SCHOONEN, MITCHELL WILLIAMS

RAT PACK RAT TREADMILL COLIN BURKHALTER, STU SATER, STEPHEN SCHOONEN, MITCHELL WILLIAMS INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND Project Objective: To redesign and fabricate an improved neonatal rat research treadmill