conceptual design review (cdr) written report:wireless...

Conceptual Design Review (CDR) Written Report:Wireless Immersive Training Vest Monitoring System

Prepared by SYSENG 368 group 5:Chris Blanchard – [email protected] Caunt – [email protected]

Michael Donnerstein – [email protected] Neuman – [email protected] Ramachandran – [email protected]

Submitted: September 26, 2012

mailto:[email protected]





BackgroundA current reality of the US military is that there are numerous operational arenas around the world in which its soldiers are put into action. In each military action, soldiers will have to relate with non-combatant foreign nationals as well as work with their squads in near or full combat situations. One certainty for the military is that they will constantly be training new troops for deployment into the field. The problem facing commanding officers is that “new soldiers make errors in-country that cost lives and Intel opportunities.”

The solution to minimize these mistakes is more intensive training for new troops. A system needs to be designed that will allow a skilled trainer to monitor up to eight soldiers in training missions and to provide timely feedback to the soldiers should a combat situation or social faux pas occur. This ‘control center’ for the trainer must also be able to receive and monitor the vital health statistics for each soldier so that immediate care can be dispatched if needed.

The system to be developed will receive data from the legacy ITV vest, biotelemetry, and gesture recognition systems through the Mote system. Data received will be processed and displayed to the trainer for near-live monitoring and feedback as well as recorded for future debriefing of training sessions.

IntroductionThis paper is provided as supplementary justification to the group 5 CDR presentation that was given to the customer on September 20, 2012. The material in the CDR presentation and this report was assembled by SYSENG 368 group 5 and is intended to satisfy the need statement given below.

This project is to design a means to record/relay to a trainer the movements and reactions of soldiers in a given training environment, allowing for the evaluation or their ability to interact culturally with non-combatant foreign nationals. The scenario this will be used in will be an Afghanistan village, although the system must be flexible enough to be applied to other training scenarios. The information provided to the system will be through a set of legacy equipment as specified by the Integrated Training Vest (ITV) system. This information is relayed to a trainer in a control room monitoring a group of up to eight soldiers using the ITV system so that the trainer can evaluate whether a social faux pas has been committed. The system must be capable of monitoring, recording, and conveying sufficient information to evaluate the soldiers’ performance within the simulation as well as the health of the soldiers during training. The overall budget for the development of the system is not to exceed $5000. The system design must be available by December 11 of 2012, and a prototype must be available for integration into the Missouri Mote system by May 5 of 2013.

The remainder of this paper deals with specific elements of the system as presented in the CDR.

Team 5 CDR report Page 1

An OV-1 for the Immersive Training System, is depicted in Figure 1 above. The ITS is envisioned as a system of systems. Data is relayed to a central control center where trainers can monitor numerous soldiers engaged in combat and cultural situations. Systems shall monitor biometrics of all the soldiers to alert of any health concerns. Motion trackers will be used to track soldiers positioning and motions in the field and in relation to his squad members and non-combatants or hostiles in the training arena. Data relayed to the central control center will be filtered and will alert the trainer when a cultural or combat faux pas occurs. Vital signs shall also be constantly monitored by the trainer. The system shall be capable of allowing the trainer to send feedback to the soldiers based on a cultural faux pas, combat faux pas, or health conditions that the system detects. Finally, the system shall store data in a way that debriefing is streamlined and immediate post-training feedback can be given to the soldier.


Figure 1: Customer Provided OV-1

System Level Requirements (Tier 0)After reviewing the OV1 and the statement of need, Team 5 developed a list of requirements. These requirements were confirmed with our customer Colonel Pape. Col Pape agreed the prioritization of the requirements as listed below. The requirements list is from 1 which is the highest priority through to 22 being the lowest priority.

1. The system shall alert the trainer to a medical emergency within 15 seconds2. The system shall provide sufficient information for a suitably skilled trainer to monitor

the health of the soldiers during training3. The system shall gauge the criticality of the data being received4. The system shall prioritize according to the criticality of the data5. The system shall receive data the prioritized data.6. The system budget shall be $10,000 or less7. The system shall interface through the existing legacy equipment specified by the ITV8. The system shall relay data from the ITV to a control room with a maximum latency of

500 ms from sensor input to display9. The system shall monitor data from the equipment in the ITV system available on

project start date in real time10. Any additions to the ITV must mimic real life mass distributions11. The system shall record data from ITV12. The system shall be designed so a trainer can monitor a minimum of eight (8) soldiers13. The system shall be able to relay sufficient data for the trainer to evaluate whether a

social faux pas has occurred14. The system shall relay sufficient data to the trainer to evaluate for whether a ‘Patrol

Tactic/Combat’ faux pas has occurred15. The system shall alert a suitably skilled trainer to a faux pas within 15 seconds16. The system reliability over 8 hours shall be 99%17. The batteries used by the system shall be recycled.18. The system design must be available by 12-11-201219. The system shall have a prototype available by 05-05-1320. The system shall be operable in an area of 120 sq. ft. to ¼ mile.21. The system design shall be compatible to the Missouri Mote system available on the

project start date22. The system shall be adaptable to multiple scenarios

These requirements were analyzed to determine if a solution was feasible within the technical, schedule and cost constraints. As a result of that analysis, Team 5 firmly believes that a solution is feasible and there are options available to either increase capability or reduce cost. Some of these were examined during the development of the Conceptual Design Review. The preferred solution is a combination of the existing items available for the IVT, commercially available hardware and software, and Matlab developed code to cover any deficiencies present in the existing code.

The following is a list of the assumption on which our solution is predicated:

1. Existing mote is integrated with the biotelemetry system


2. Existing mote is integrated with the gesture tracking system3. Existing mote, biotelemetry system and the gesture tracking system do not impact soldier

safety.4. Existing mote, biotelemetry system and the gesture tracking system do not alter the weight or

weight distribution for the soldier more than is acceptable to the customer. This facilitates realistic loading on the soldier during the training exercise.

5. Existing mote, biotelemetry system and the gesture tracking system have their own support and disposal mechanisms that will not adversely impact our design.

6. Matlab software development is at no cost to Team 5.7. MST Matlab licenses are suitable for the any development that is required.8. Other assumptions not yet listed.

Feasibility Analysis OverviewAfter reviewing the customer’s Statement of Need, a group of requirements were developed which are listed below in Table 1. The scope of the project was further subdivided into four Tier 1 sub-systems. These consisted of a means of relaying data to the motes to the control room, a system to record separate data streams for each of the monitored soldiers in the control room, an interface to display the data received in a meaningful way for the trainer in the control room and a system to allow the trainer to send feedback to the soldiers using the existing mote network. Criteria that were considered to be equal among the different options were not included in the initial trade study. As further analysis is performed, they may be considered as required.

By choosing COTS products, the producibility and disposability aspects of the design are delegated to the COTS vendors. Electronic waste recycling programs which accept electronics are in place and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. COTS also address the majority of the supportability aspects of the design should the solution be installed within the United States. Transportation back to base may be required should the system be installed in a foreign location. The level of user servicing would be limited to replacement of failed components and configuring the replacement.

The usability of the system will be heavily influenced by the development of the analysis software. Usability for maintenance staff of the other components will be dependent on their installation in the training environment. COTS vendors are responsible for the intrinsic safety of their supplies. Installed locations of components will impact overall safety. Suitable documentation would need to be provided to ensure that safe use and maintenance can take place.

To determine a more accurate life-cycle cost of the system, the final selection of elements will be required. Various logistical models can then be used to predict spares requirements. This study does not offer a complete life-cycle costing.

The key performance parameters considered were:


The number of trainees the system could accommodate. The customer requested at least 8 trainees in the scenario. The customer’s preference was for more. No maximum number of trainees was stated; however the size of the training area would limit the number of trainees based on combat faux pas rules. No analysis has been done to determine the maximum number of trainees in a 120 sq ft area.

Time to alert. This parameter was flexible with the customer providing guidance for the various different alert scenarios. Medical emergencies required a response in less than 20 seconds and training errors in less than 60 seconds. Further refinement led to a common timing of 15 seconds.

Size of operational area. The customer requested an area of 120 sq ft to ¼ sq mile. Trainee equipment weight. The customer need was for the trainees equipment weight not to vary

noticeably from a normal combat patrol weight. The IVT will be used in place of the soldier body armour.

System Cost. The total cost of the system is limited to $10k for procurement and have through life costing based on 8 hours training per day, 5 days a week, with 45 weeks a year. The annual cost of operations including batteries and disposal of expended equipment not exceed $50k.

System Reliability. The reliability of the system should be 99% over an 8 hour training mission. The customer also indicated that the system should have a minimum of 1 year life of type.

Faux Pas detection. The customer requested that the system detect at least 2 but no more than 30 faux pas. This includes both cultural and combat faux pas. Further analysis is required to determine a suitable list of the faux pas detected. This would need to be worked with the customer and subject matter experts.

Our solution does not limit the number of soldiers in the training scenario directly. We have a risk that states the bandwidth available to communicate the trainee action to the control room is the limiting factor. As stated above, further analysis would be need to done to determine the maximum number of trainees in the training area that can be accommodated allowing them to move around the area and not commit a combat faux pas.

Our solution does not add any equipment onto the soldier at this stage. This entirely addresses the trainee equipment weight not varying.

The first pass of the feasibility analysis proved that there were several options that met the customer’s needs. The selection of our preferred solution was done by further analysis of the options which were close against the key performance parameters. The sensitivity of the close options to changes in scoring against these was also assessed. The preferred solution is highlighted below in green. No analysis has been completed on synergies between the different components of the solution. Further research is required to obtain relevant information to assess the value of using hardware and software from related vendors.

Feasibility Analysis and Trade Study

Relaying System (Motes to the Control Room)


Cisco 1552s outdoor access point : http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/wireless/ps5679/ps11451/ps12440/data_sheet_aironet_1552s.pdf

Trendnet High power wireless outdoor router http://www.trendnet.com/products/proddetail.asp?prod=140_TEW-455APBO&cat=124

National Instruments Wireless Sensor Networks www.ni.com/wsn

Microstrain gateways and wireless sensors http://www.microstrain.com/wireless/systems

Missouri Mote system


http://www.microstrain.com/wireless/systems

http://www.trendnet.com/products/proddetail.asp?prod=140_TEW-455APBO&cat=124

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/wireless/ps5679/ps11451/ps12440/data_sheet_aironet_1552s.pdf

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/wireless/ps5679/ps11451/ps12440/data_sheet_aironet_1552s.pdf

Table 1 Relay Data

Criteria Weighting Wei

ghte

d S

core

Wei

ghte

d S

core

Wei

ghte

d S

core

Wei

ghte

d S

core

Cost 50 1 0.5 9 4.5 1 0.5 3 1.5Power Consumption 15 9 1.35 3 0.45 9 1.35 3 0.45Range 15 9 1.35 3 0.45 3 0.45 3 0.45Data Transfer Rate 20 9 1.8 3 0.6 9 1.8 3 0.6

5.00 6.00 4.10 3.00

Alte

rnat

e 1:

Cis

co 1

552S

Alte

rnat

e 2:

Tren

dnet

Alte

rnat

e 3:

Nat

iona

l ins

trum

ents

Alte

rnat

e 4:

Mic

rost

rain

Cost

Power Consumption

Range

Data Transfer Rate

Relay Data Attribute Assessment

Alternate 1: Cisco 1552SAlternate 2:TrendnetAlternate 3:National in-strumentsAlternate 4:MicrostrainAlternate 5:Missouri Mote

Figure 2 Relay Data Kiviat Chart


Recording System

Military Grade Storage Drives Flash Storage Cloud Storage Consumer Hard Drives

Table 2 Data Storage


ghte

d S

core

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

Wei

ghte

d S

core

Cost 25 1 0.25 3 0.75 3 0.75 9 2.25Power Consumption 10 1 0.1 3 0.3 9 0.9 3 0.3Security 15 9 1.35 9 1.35 1 0.15 9 1.35Portability 10 3 0.3 9 0.9 9 0.9 3 0.3Component Life 10 9 0.9 1 0.1 3 0.3 3 0.3Storage Capacity 20 9 1.8 1 0.2 3 0.6 9 1.8Data Write Rate 10 9 0.9 3 0.3 1 0.1 9 0.9

5.60 3.90 3.70 7.20

Alte

rnat

e 1:

M

ilita

ry D

rives

Alte

rnat

e 2:

Flas

h St

orag

e

Alte

rnat

e 3:

Cl

oud

Stor

age

Alte

rnat

e 4:

Co

nsum

er H

ard-

Driv

e


Cost

Power Consumption

Security

PortabilityComponent Life

Storage Capacity

Data Write Rate

Data Storage Attribute Assessment

Alternate 1: Military DrivesAlternate 2: Flash StorageAlternate 3: Cloud StorageAlternate 4: Consumer Hard-Drive

Figure 3 Data Storage Kiviat Chart


Data Analysis

LABView Excel/Access Google Charts/Fusion Bespoke code

Table 3 Data Analysis


ghte

d S

core

Wei

ghte

d S

core

Wei

ghte

d S

core

Wei

ghte

d S

core

Cost 20 9 1.8 9 1.8 9 1.8 9 1.8 9Complexity (code) 20 3 0.6 9 1.8 9 1.8 3 0.6 1Maintainabilty 20 9 1.8 9 1.8 9 1.8 3 0.6 3Training 10 9 0.9 3 0.3 9 0.9 3 0.3 1Portability 10 3 0.3 3 0.3 3 0.3 9 0.9 9Flexibility 10 9 0.9 9 0.9 3 0.3 3 0.3 9Supportability 10 9 0.9 9 0.9 9 0.9 3 0.3 9

7.20 7.80 7.80 4.80 5.40

Alte

rnat

e 1:

LAB

view

Alte

rnat

ive

2:

M

atLA

B /

Sim

ulin

k

Alte

rnat

e3:

Exc

el/A

cces

s

Alte

rnat

e 4:

G

oogl

e C

harts

/Fus

ion

Alte

rnat

e 5:

Bes

poke

Cod

e

Cost

Complexity (code)

Maintainabilty

TrainingPortability

Flexibility

Supportability

Data Analysis Attribute Assessment

Alternate 1:LABviewAlternative 2: MatLAB / SimulinkAlternate3:Excel/AccessAlternate 4: Google Charts/Fusion

Figure 4 Data Analysis Kiviat Chart


Feedback Relay to Soldiers

Verbal Feedback through Radio System Tactile Feedback through existing Tactor system

Table 4 Feedback Relay


ghte

d S

core

Wei

ghte

d S

core

Response Time 30 3 0.9 9 2.7Accuracy 20 9 1.8 3 0.6Two-way 15 9 1.35 1 0.15Recordibility 35 3 1.05 9 3.15

5.10 6.60Al

tern

ate

1:

Ve

rbal

Alte

rnat

e 2:

Tact

ileResponse Time

Accuracy

Two-way

Recordibility

Feedback Relay to soldiers Attribute Assessment

Alternate 1: Verbal

Alternate 2: Tactile

Figure 5 Feedback Relay Kiviat Chart


1.0Receive Data from ITV

2.0Store Data

4.0

Relay Data

3.0

Process Data

5.0

Receive Instruction from Trainer

Functional Analysis and Decomposition

A functional decomposition was generated based satisfying the tier 0 requirements. From these requirements, it was identified that the system must receive data from the ITV, process and prioritize the received data, store the data, relay the data to the trainer, then receive inputs from the trainer and activate the ITV to alert soldiers of identified events.

The functional breakdown shown in Figure below gives the design as it was presented to the customer at the CDR. This design shows a linear path that data flows once it is received until it is passed to the trainer. Comments by the customer brought to light a concern that this design implies a system where all data is recorded, even if that data is not needed for a successful system. The functional breakdown was therefore modified to the design seen in Figure . This design depicts a system where data is first processed and prioritized prior to relaying to the trainer and storing to the recording device.


Figure 6: Functional Decomposition at CDR

Figure 7: Post-CDR Functional Decomposition

1.0Receive Data from ITV

2.0Store Data

4.0

Relay Data3.0

Process Data

5.0

Receive Instruction from Trainer

6.0

Alert Soldier to Instruction

The five functions depicted in Figure represent a top level decomposition of the system. These functions encapsulate a majority of the prioritized identified requirements. Below, level one, two, and three requirements are allocated to top level functions.

0.0 Unallocated Requirements0.1 The system reliability over 8 hours shall be 99% 0.2 The batteries used by the system shall be recycled.0.3 The system design must be available by 12-11-20120.4 The system shall have a prototype available by 05-05-130.5 The system shall be disposable using electronic waste recycling programs.

1.0 Receive Data1.1 Data received shall be from the ITV1.2 The system shall interface through the existing legacy equipment specified by the ITV

1.2.1 The system shall interface with the Missouri Mote1.2.1.1 The system shall support a 802.15.4 interface

1.2.2 The system shall support existing ITV data formats1.3 The system shall support the data formats sent by the ITV

2.0 Store Data2.1 The system shall record data from ITV

2.1.1 The system shall utilize off the shelf (COTS) hard drive2.1.2 The system shall contain sufficient storage to record an eight hour exercise

2.1.2.1 Data shall be recorded using a First In First Out (FIFO) approach2.2 System data shall be treated as unclassified (U)

3.0 Process Data3.1 The system shall gauge the criticality of the data being received3.2 The system shall prioritize according to the criticality of the data

3.2.1 The system shall prioritize geospatial data3.2.2 The system shall prioritize soldier health data using biotelemetry strap

3.2.2.1 The system shall process soldier breathing rate3.2.2.2 The system shall process soldier heart rate3.2.2.3 The system shall process soldier temperature

3.2.3 The system shall prioritize soldier movement data3.2.3.1 The system shall process hand motions3.2.3.2 The system shall process head motions3.2.3.3 The system shall process body movements3.2.3.4 The system shall process arm movements

3.3 The prioritized data shall be sufficient for the trainer to evaluate whether a social faux pas has occurred

3.3.1 The prioritized data should be sufficient to identify if a weapon has been brandished toward a civilian

3.4 The prioritized data shall be sufficient for the trainer to identify a medical emergency3.5 The prioritized data algorithm shall be able to support additional data types as required


3.6 The system shall use the existing Missouri Mote Buffer for prioritized data if the connection is lost

4.0 Relay Data4.1 The system shall alert the trainer to a medical emergency within 15 seconds4.2 The system shall alert a suitably skilled trainer to a faux pas within 15 seconds4.3 The system shall be operable in an area of 120 sq. ft. to ¼ mile.4.4 The system shall relay data from the ITV to a control room with an average latency of

500 ms from sensor input to display 5.0 Receive data from trainer

5.1 The system interface with the existing ITV feedback systems5.1.1 The system shall utilize the tactor system in the vest

6.0 Alert Soldier to Instruction6.1 The system shall have the capability to provide real-time feedback to the soldier, when

commanded6.2 The system shall have the capability to provide delayed feedback to the soldier, when

commanded

Cost Estimate

One of the most critical criteria which the developed system must meet is to be within budget. Our initial design’s cost is broken down into nine separate high level line items. These items are listed below in Error: Reference source not found:

Table 5 High Level Costs

Line Item Spending Fraction of Total Spending

Hardware $3,817 44.2%

Software Suite $200 2.3%

Labor / Programming $1,000 11.6%

Product Testing $500 5.8%

Training $500 5.8%

Maintenance $425 4.9%

Disposal $150 1.7%


Miscellaneous Peripherals

$1,250 14.5%

Contingency (10%) $784 9.1%

Total $8,626

Because we are in the early design stages, a relatively large contingency of 10% was also included in the project cost. This should allow for us to remain within budget even if some minor modifications to the system must be made.

In developing the high level costs, a few assumptions have been made. Both of these revolve around the development of the code to process and analyze the raw data.

First, we assume that our development software MATLAB, chosen during the feasibility analysis, will be available to us at nominal cost. This assumption is based on the licensing agreements that Missouri Science and Technology has in place already. We believe that we will be able to use existing licenses rather than purchasing stand-alone versions of the software.

Secondly, we assume that we will also be able to use some of our in-team programming expertise to assemble the modules and program the code at a relatively low cost compared to contracting this work out to independent computer programmers. Should this assumption prove to be false, there is significant risk to the project due to cost overruns.

Both of these risks are discussed in more detail in the risk section which follows.

The largest single line-item, hardware, is further analyzed below in Error: Reference source not found.

Table 6 Detailed Hardware Costs


Laptop $1,499 39.3%

Trendnet Router TEW-455APBO – 3 Units

$1,035 27.1%

Router Omni-Directional Antenna

TEW-AO120 – 3 Units

$288 7.5%

8 Hour Back-up Battery – 2 Units $850 22.3%

1 TB – Ruggedized External Hard-Drive

(for Raw Data Storage)

$145 3.8%


Hardware Subtotal $3,817

Detailed specification sheets on the router and laptop follow the report in Appendix A. These two items account for nearly 30% of total project spending anticipated at this stage.

Three outdoor Trendnet routers will be installed in an equilateral triangular pattern and fitted with omni-directional antennas. This configuration will allow the total range of the routers to cover up to ¼ of a mile radius. There will be overlap in the wireless coverage zones of the routers in the center of training field, which will give us some redundancy for capturing data in the area likely to be utilized most often.

We assume that all of the previously developed legacy devices worn by the trainee soldiers will be able to communicate to the Missouri Mote and then will be picked up by our routers. We do have some risk identified if any of the legacy devices do not communicate with the Mote. In this case we may have to add additional hardware, power supplies and programming to bring all data back to the trainer in the control room. These potential additions could cause cost overruns as well.

The second largest line item, peripherals, is examined in more detail below in Error: Reference source not found.

Table 7 Detailed Peripherals Breakdown


POE Switchbox $60 4.8%

POE Injector – 6 Units $126 10.1%

POE Cable – 2,700’ $664 53.1%

Installation $400 32.0%

Peripherals Subtotal

$1,250

Our routers are powered using Power Over Ethernet (POE) cable. In order to eliminate signal loss over long runs, POE injectors are installed approximately every 300’. These are essentially signal boosters. By powering the routers using hardwired Ethernet cables, we ensure the fastest possible data transfer speeds to the control room and least data loss.


Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

A high level work breakdown structure (WBS) that captures tasks from kickoff to deployment for the system is given below in Table 8.

Table 8 System Level Work Breakdown Structure

1.0 Needs/Requirements Analysis1.1 Procure Needs Statement1.2 Perform Requirements Analysis1.3 Feasibility Analysis1.4 Trade Studies1.5 System Planning

2.0 Conceptual Design Phase2.1 Relay System

2.1.1 Decide TPMs2.1.2 Evaluate Alternatives2.1.3 Perform Trade Studies2.1.4 Select Alternative

2.2 Recording System2.2.1 Decide TPMs2.2.2 Evaluate Alternatives2.2.3 Perform Trade Studies2.2.4 Select Alternative

2.3 Data Analysis2.3.1 Decide TPMs2.3.2 Evaluate Alternatives2.3.3 Perform Trade Studies2.3.4 Select Alternative

2.4 Feedback Relay to Soldiers2.4.1 Decide TPMs

3.0 Detail Design3.1 Evaluate Design Functionality

3.1.1 Component Interface3.1.2 Software Strategy Evaluation3.1.3 Maintenance Evaluation3.1.4 Design Mock Up Duty Cycle3.1.5 Model System Prototype3.1.6 Evaluate Prototype System

to Design Requirements

4.0 Verify Components4.1 Test Components 4.2 Evaluate Test Results to Customer

Requirements

5.0 Verification of Subsystems5.1 Test Subsystem5.2 Evaluate Test Results to Customer

Requirements

6.0 Full System Operation and Verification6.1 System Installation / Realization6.2 System Testing6.3 Evaluate Test Results to Customer

Requirements


2.4.2 Evaluate Alternatives2.4.3 Perform Trade Studies2.4.4 Select Alternative

6.4 System Dispatch to Customer6.5 Customer Training6.6 System Support / Maintenance

Key Performance Parameters

Data Transfer Accuracy

Data Recording

Storage CapacityTrainer Interface

Feedback Accuracy

Measure for Architecture

Figure 6 Measure of Effectiveness Kiviat Chart

Table 9 Measure of Effectiveness

In order to satisfy the Customer’s needs and requirements the following key system attributes and properties have been defined for our system:


1. Data Transfer Accuracy: The data relayed to and from the MOTE to the Control Centre.a. Data received shall be from the ITV or a MOTEb. The system shall interface through the existing legacy equipment specified by the ITV

2. Data Recording : Record the relayed data at the Control Centre.a. The system shall utilize off the shelf (COTS) hard drive b. The system shall record data from ITV

3. Data Storage Capacity: Repository to store the received data.a. The system shall contain sufficient storage to record an eight hour exercise

4. Trainer Interface: Analyze the received data, and interpret it.a. The system shall be designed so a trainer can monitor a minimum of eight (8) soldiers.b. The system shall alert a suitably skilled trainer to a faux pas within 15 secondsc. The system shall alert the trainer to a medical emergency within 15 secondsd. The system shall be able to relay sufficient data for the trainer to evaluate whether a

social faux pas has occurrede. The system shall relay sufficient data to the trainer to evaluate for whether a ‘Patrol

Tactic/Combat’ faux pas has occurred5. Feedback Accuracy: Relay the information back to the soldiers, about training or a cultural faux

pas.a. The system interface with the existing ITV feedback systems

Measures of EffectivenessOur system value is measured by cost and effectiveness of the system. Having defined our key system attributes we can quantify the technical factors of our system based on the inputs from the Customer and our feasibility analysis. The economic factor of the system value pertains to material required, operation & support and R&D cost. Figure 1 demonstrates a design objective tree which shows our system value at the top level breaking in to economic factors and technical factors. Each of these is then broken down into our design criteria and MOEs at the conceptual design review stage.


Figure 7 Measures of effectiveness


System Measure

Economic Factors (System Life-cycle Cost)

R&D CostMaterial Cost

Operations Cost

Support Cost

Hardware CostSoftware Cost

Labor/Programming CostProduct Testing Cost

Training CostMaintenance Cost

DIsposal CostMiscellaneous Peripherals Cost

and Contingency Cost

Technical Factors

SurvivabilityReliabilityFlexibility

AffordabilityAdaptabilityRobustness

Number of simultaneous Trainees: =8

Number of cultural and combat Faux Pas detected= 8

Time to alert of a Faux Pas or Medical Emergency= 15 seconds

Size of operational area of the system= 120 sq. ft. to ¼ mile

Reliability of System= 8 hours >=99%

ITS Trainee Equipment Weight = No Change

System acquisition cost <= $10000 Annual operations cost of System (5

days, 45 weeks)= $425

ScheduleThe overall schedule for this phase of the project is shown in Figure 8. The end of this phase is just after the Preliminary Design Review. The completion of the project from just post Preliminary design review through to disposal of the system is shown in Figure 9. The schedule shows the team members working in parallel taking advantage of the system breakdown. Each team member will tackle a component and refer to the other team members regularly. Should one component finish early, that team member will assist others in completing their assigned activities.

Figure 8 Schedule for current phase of project


Figure 9 Schedule for subsequent phases of project

High Level Risk AssessmentThe risks shown in Figure 10 were identified by team 5. The risk were evaluated for consequences to the project against using the set of criteria shown in Figure 11. The likelihood of the risk occurring was assessed using the table provided in the lecture notes, duplicated below as Figure 12. The combination of likelihood and consequence was assessed using the chart shown in Figure 13.

Li

kelih

ood

Con

sequ

ence

Category

Item

Risk Description T e c h . Sched. Cost Priority Risk Mitigation

1 Team member unable to participate (illness, localised adverse events, ...)

2 4 X Moderate

Other team member(s) will work actions assigned to unavailable team member.

2 Mentors unavailable for review

1 4 X Low Two mentors available for comments, MST to provide alternate if either unavailable for lengthy period.

3 Mote and router don't integrate

2 5 X Moderate

Establish contact with Mote team to work through alternate solutions. Prototype as early as possible.

4 Team communications issues

1 4 X Low Alternate communications channels have been distributed.

5 Availability and effectiveness of development tools.

1 3 X X Low MST hold several licenses for development software chosen. It is available in several computer laboratories.

6 Costs of development tools.

3 5 X High Each additional development licenses represents >10% of the overall budget.

7 Data rate from multiple motes exceeds available bandwidth

3 5 X High Limit total number of motes per scenario. Scale through multiple data relay paths.

8 Use of existing communications and power networks

3 4 X Moderate

Installation site survey required to locate networks. Use batteries and wireless communications as alternate where suitable.

9 End user security requirements

2 4 X X Moderate

Solution uses commercial grade encryption. If customer requires higher grade,


Like

lihoo

d

Con

sequ

ence

Category

Item

Risk Description T e c h . Sched. Cost Priority Risk Mitigation

additional design effort will be required.

Figure 10 Risks

Level

Description Generic Technical Schedule Cost

5

High Major crisis that could result in program termination if not mitigated

Major crisis; no alternatives exist.

Cannot achieve a key project milestone/event.

Requires an overall budget increase of greater than 10%.

4

Significant Significant damage to program viability if not mitigated

Major crisis, but workarounds available.

Project critical path affected.

Overall budget increase of between 5% and 10% required.

3

Moderate Major problems that could be tolerated

Major performance shortfall, but workarounds available.

Minor schedule slip. May miss a need date.

Overall budget increase of between 1% and 5% required.

2

Minor Minor problems that can easily be handled

Minor performance shortfall, same approach retained.

Additional activities required; able to meet key dates/events.

Overall budget increase of less than 1% required.

1 Low Little or no impact Little or no impact Little or no impact Little or no impact

Figure 11 Risk consequence assessment table

Level Description Detail

5High Speculative with no identified

mitigation plan

4

Significant Analytically demonstrated with possible mitigation plan identified

3

Moderate Partially demonstrated or somewhat mitigated by approved plan

2Minor Demonstrated or well mitigated

by approved plan

1Low Proven or completely mitigated

by an approved planFigure 12 Risk likelihood assessment table

Like

li 5 Low Moderate High High High


hood

4Low Moderate Moderate High High

3Low Low Moderate Moderate High

2Low Low Low Moderate Moderate

1Low Low Low Low Moderate

1 2 3 4 5

ConsequenceFigure 13 Combined risk assessment table

Mitigation actions were discussed and documented for all medium and high risk items. For the risk items deemed to be high from our assessment, plans were developed in an effort to lower them to acceptable levels. The team will continue to monitor the current risks and address any that may arise during the course of the project. Plans will be developed as necessary to mitigate any new risks and existing plans modified until the risks are removed or realized.

Mitigation of High Risk Items:

Costs of development tools.o Commercial developer licenses for Matlab represents >10% of the overall budget.o Use student version if legal.

Data rate from multiple motes exceeds available bandwidtho Limit total number of motes per scenario. Scale through multiple data relay paths.o Increase number of data relay pointo Reduce update rate from sensors.

Mitigation actions for the moderate risk items are shown in Figure 10.

Risk item 9 was being tracked as a medium risk item pending clarification from the customer. Subsequent to that clarification, the risk was deemed to be completely mitigated and will not be considered any further.

Technical Management Plan (TMP)Team 5 was provided with a template for a Technical Management Plan (TMP). Below is a tailoring of section headings for the TMP that would be further development of an ongoing project. Relevant subsections will be included as required and agreed with the customer.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

PROGRAM TASKS

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT


PROGRAM RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY

ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND SAFETY

PRODUCT TEAM CHARTERS – Not required for single team project

TEAM EXECUTION PLANS – Not required for single team project, incorporated in Program overview.

Sections already included in this document that would be drawn into the developed TMP include the WBS, Risks and Costs and schedule.

Support ConceptThe system will be deployed with both maintenance and troubleshooting instructions. Additionally, spare batteries will be provided with the intent of satisfying the 99% system reliability requirement.


Appendix A – Hardware Technical Specifications

Wireless Router


Laptop


conceptual design review (cdr) written report:wireless...

Documents