Subsystem Build & Test
Table of Contents
Team Vision for Subsystem Level Build & Test Phase
The MS Body Cooling team worked on heat sealing of PCM samples for the wicking and insulative fabric materials test. The goal was to find a reliable sealing method in order to seal PCM samples just for the testing stage while the Industrial Design team worked on a more robust sealing technique for use in future prototypes. The testing of wicking and insulative materials and PCM's was completed successfully during this stage and the data analysis of this DOE was started. Data analysis will continue into the next stage and ideal materials will be identified and ordered at the beginnings of the next stage. Testing Phase II, consisting of the PCM properties test, was started and will continue throughout the beginning of the next stage. This must be completed before a decision regarding a PCM for the prototype can be made and is currently at the top of the priority list. The team also updated their risk management and problem tracking lists during this stage, as well as the testing schedule for the rest of the semester. The team made a new connection with the Effective Access Technology Lab on campus and acquired space to do human testing during Testing Phase IV. The team has also submitted a proposal to exhibit at Imagine RIT and plans to submit a proposal to participate in Dr. Destler's Access and Inclusion Technology Challenge at Imagine RIT on May 7th.
Test Results SummaryThe results of the DOE initially indicate that based on our sample size of 12, there is not a statistically significant difference between which fabric or insulation is chosen. The p-values for the insulation terms were well above the significance level chosen of 0.10 in the presence of the insulation response and likewise the fabric terms were insignificant in the presence of the fabric response. This is shown below in the "Insulation Results" and "Fabric Results" images. If time permits, the team can further analyze the data to try and gather conclusive evidence. The team also needs to determine a way to accurately capture a response in order to analyze which PCM is best. The ideal way, by looking at the length of the PCM curve plateau, is tougher than anticipated because it is hard to pick out a defined point for the start and end of the plateau. Once a response method is determined, the data can be analyzed to see if there is a statistical difference between PCMs. In a perfect world, the team would have time to do numerous replications to more accurately capture the effects of each fabric, insulation, and PCM.
Our DOE Test Data documents are here. These include the data collected from the sensors as well as plots of the data.
The "Avg. Insulation" value was obtained by subtracting the data retrieved by the sensor on the top/outside of the fabric (exposed to the environment) from the data retrieved by the sensor just below the insulation and on top of the PCM. The "Avg. Fabric Deviation" value was obtained by subtracting the data retrieved by the sensor just beneath the PCM and on top of the fabric from the data retrieved by the sensor on the bottom, below the fabric and exposed to the heat source (hotplate). The units for both are in degrees Celsius.
IRB for Human Testing
The following are links to the IRB proposal for human testing and the consent form and survey questions that will be given to volunteers prior to testing.
Risk and Problem Tracking
Functional Demo MaterialsYou can find the notes from this design review here.
Plans for next phase
For the full updated timeline document, click here.
Below is an overview of the project timeline and Gantt chart for MSDII. Click the picture to view it larger and the zoom in and out tools will allow movement around the document for a closer look at specific phases.
The following are the team's individual 3-week plans for the next phase as well as the activities accomplished during the past phase: