Independence Core- wheelchair mounted computer system (York ...

Matthew Osterloo

Abstract

Our computer system was developed as the second part in a complex system designed to allow limited mobility users to manipulate full computer access. The first system component was submitted to the 2011 RESNA SDC under the title of ?Inter-Oral Touch pad?. The objective of our this system is to integrate all of the computer components required for optimal system use into one hardware casing that permits out of box, any-time video communications and computations while in transit and on the go. The system was designed for limited mobility users, but due to the breadth of the design, the designer believes the system is a feasible machine for any wheelchair bound user, whether in school, professional employment or in a care facility. The system has a Windows 7 Operating System (or Mac OSx), independent battery system (4-8 hours battery life.) and multiple input methods including; touch screen, single fingertip cursor control, miniaturized Blue-tooth keypad & is switch enabled, etc.

The system comes equipped with a communications bundle encompassing Blue-tooth, anywhere Telecom Wi-Fi internet and GPS tracking. The result is that users can ensure communication and streaming of media from one device and interface, while in transit or at rest. The merging of multiple devices (phone, TV, music, and computer) ; integration of modern Blue-tooth components (headphones, microphones, adaptable keyboards, Blue-tooth tv, smart phone etc), and patient tracking for high need individuals (GPS) stands our device out from all other available existing hardware. Our portable and durable design permits component expansion & individualized modifications, while integrated web cam supports Skype to Skype calling for professional and social obligations as well as social media platforms as diverse as Chatroulette.com and clinical and home monitoring options. The system is housed in a water and shock resistant limited inncasing that is designed for rough individuals and provides longevity.

?

Background/Statement of Problem or Research Question

The objective of the system was to develop a computer that could be used by limited mobility users in transit; that can compete with existing market technology and could be done at a reduced cost when clinical time was considered. Designs such as Mayer-Johnson Vmax systems and Apple IPads were judged to be insufficient for technological integration due to concerns ranging from OS standardization and battery size, physical size, hardware integration and available USB ports. Our system was designed to be a viable pool device for large organizations, and capable of integrating emerging hardware to permit long-term versatility and retrofitting.

Many existing computer systems we felt were limited in that they were designed for full bodied users and consequently timely and costly to adapt. This makes many systems prohibitive to individuals in socially, economically and geographically isolated areas. Tablet and laptop users still require mounting options such as trays and arms, additional hardware for internet connectivity, Blue-tooth, GPS, head tracking etc. Software, variable operating system editions and macros can be time-intensive customizations for users, and thus too costly for some and to time consuming for many do-it-yourself (DYI) individuals. These devices also retract from the ergonomic desires of the original system and often make devices more prone to physical damage such as collision impacts when front mounted or USB port wear and tear from exposed components. Lastly, we felt very few computer designs were designed for wheelchair bound, bed bound or handicapped users, as such they can only ever be partially functional at best. This was our targeted niche market.

Our research question was simple; can we design and build a better system for distribution to users and organizations that have not benefited from generic tablets and PC?s. Our goal: a system that could integrate all of the functionalism of a Smart phone, tablet and PC with subsequent benefits to the end user, and would be durable and cheap enough to encourage long term savings and infrastructure expansion. We believe we have achieved this series of expectations.

?

Methods/Approach/Solutions Considered

Our method of approach was to analyze the failure in systems from a hands on perspective, integrate prior RESNA contributions regarding focus group results from wheelchair bound computer users, and the integration of modern technology with the desire to achieve video-communication capacity for individuals with limited mobility. We did not take a strict empirical approach to this question but rather drew on first hand experience and bolstered our design with some academic literature. From hands-on experiences, we determined that primary issues for existing systems were: lack of hardware customization options and integrations, and lack of access for limited mobility users. Few computers seems to have bridged the field between telecommunications and portable computational systems (tablets vary depending on brand and configurations). Furthermore, few tablets have merged in telephonic options and technicians back-up and data transference options. What do we mean by this? Few tablets make calls and fewer permit easy data swapping between machines. Instead many devices rely on cloud computing, syncing software to external devices and portable media options (thumb drives, DVDs, SD cards). An example would be the IPad which does not offer the phone feature of the IPhone and can only be backed up via another computer after downloading ITunes. Most Android and Windows tablets share similar drawbacks. Secondly, almost all market available devices have form fitted casings that prevent technicians from physically integrating new technology within the body of the device without extensive customization. What this entails is that tablets without integrated Wi-Fi sticks can not be retrofitted without exposing USB ports to harm, and most tablets have limited quantities of USB ports limiting their device integration. At the root is that these systems (tablets, laptops & PC?s) were designed to be mass market commodities to be used by the general public and then discarded when more advanced models become available. As such they serve a designer focus and not as much of a utilitarian objective.

We designed this system to be utilitarian and to permit cost reduction, modification to individual users and durability. This system is designed to be retrofitted or pooled to meet multiple objectives such as quick replacement, cheap repair and longevity. This approach was undertaken through various design features and we feel they radically diverge this device from other existing devices.

Two of our primary consideration for this system was durability and longevity. Durability and longevity in our view was achieved through solid casing and solid component integration, while reducing gross system weight. Furthermore, durability comes from having a low component damage outcome from in transit use and from collision impacts. As our system is wheelchair or hospital bed mounted, so gross weigh was permitted to be heavier than tablets but we wanted to be less weighty than mid-size ATX PC cases (about 10 lbs or 4.5 kg). We settled on a plastic housing that was larger than required to permit additional structural reinforcement in the future when required as well as hardware expansion. Durability and longevity also entailed making the system a dual-component design.

A tablet and a separate logic controller design was applied. Reasoning was simple, if users damage the tablet interface, through moving within proximity to fixed obstacles, liquids or spasms for example, then it would be unreasonable to include the logic retaining components that holds the data and time-intensive modification within the tablet housing. Our modification would be to fix the logic controllers elsewhere on the chair where they can be safe-guarded. As such, the tablet can be manoeuvred about the chair or bed as desired or when being transferred, and the logic components can be fitted to the back of the chair or undercarriage where it will be safest and out of harm. Where is the logic in fixing the device to the back of the chair? Experience has shown most individual tend to drive forwards and thus most impacts will occur in the front of the chair. By mounting our system in the back of the chair, less time is proportionally spent navigating obstacles towards the device, thus we can infer that less objects will come into contact with the posterior of the chair. We reasoned that impact energy is derived from mass and speed of the chair so that back was safest. Originally a sling was considered for housing the device to the back of the chair, but practicality ensued, and it was more reasonable to replace the sling with a backpack. This permits carting goods as many wheelchair bound individual already outfit wheelchair with backpacks for daily living. Especially important was the water resistance and shock resistance of the device in case food or beverages spilled on the unit, or other carted good impact the system.

?

With a dual component design, the design permits many additional features including but not limited to reducing mounting costs when exchanging systems, components, or replacing defective devices. If a custom mounting option for the tablet had to be tailored to an individual users chair, then replacing the logic controllers will not include modifying mounting options, only the the backpack or its contents. As well, if the user is not located near a clinician, the system in the backpack can easily be unhooked by an untrained assistant or family member (one USB cable generally) and replaced with a new system within moments. This permits easier replacement of devices through the postal service and reduced costs as technicians can be located abroad or in a centralized location. Furthermore, it entails that when hardware upgrades become available or clients progress to a new device style with additional options or a retrofit package, only the back-end of the device must be shipped and replaced. This whole design feature makes this a time and financially beneficial option to all parties involved. As for the software and data retained on the computer system, we have included multiple means of transferring the software remotely for clients that will permit proficient and timely data transfers. As for operation system crashes and hard drive failures, we have designed the system to have redundancy components that permit timely data transfers by clinicians, technician at a centralized location or remotely in other cases.

Many styles of logic component were considered, but in the end it was reasoned that there should be as few moving parts as possible within the system. To achieve this, any sub-component with moving parts that has a possibility of failure due to shocks in transit was dismissed until the only remaining moving components were fans. This ensures that few components will be damaged during impact and secondly it ensures that moving parts are not affected while the chair/bed is in movement. We found out early on in testing and manufacturing that DVD and Blueray ROMs could not be integrated due to the nature of the motors. By removing the moving parts we ensure users all the functionality of the device while in movement and encountering turbulence, and we also do not risk damaging the optical disc. This design feature increases the durability and longevity of systems as a whole and individual components, and strengthens the overall characteristics of the device. It then permits another feature often unavailable to users of tray mounted laptops; utilization of the device while on the go or in transit. This is especially prominent to users that use tray mounted laptops as prescribed by clinicians. As laptops have the computations power required to run complex program as compared to present tablets, often trays are required to hold the device and input method (head mouse etc.) and must be retracted in transit or while waiting between activities. We have removed the requirement for trays, and secondly for assistants to position and retract trays.

As for our input methods, the system supports any USB or blue-tooth device, and some serial devices / components. This ensures that our system is backwards compatible with existing AAC technology already prescribed to users, which is often time intensive and customized, and often requires serial ports access.

We tested and include three input device; touch monitor, miniaturized QWERTY keypad with track-pad and a fingertip cursor. The touch interface works reasonably well and is very precise, the only obstacles include fixed 640?480 pixel screen resolution making some icons small and making access to some tabs difficult. Secondly, since the monitor is USB, it does not show BIOS options while booting up and must pass the Windows commencement screen prior to displaying an image (these problems can be bypassed in the future using various alternate component designs). This entails that at present the system does not show an image for about 45 seconds between boot and Windows commencement. Secondly, a miniaturized keyboard and track-pad was tested and proved to be versatile and can be any style and size available. This proved best when using blue-tooth devices which did not drain USB power or bandwidth. These wireless or wired Blue-tooth devices are also easy to mount due to size and style. It also means that users can select more appropriate devices to fit their individual circumstances and also permits a broad range of Blue-tooth hardware integrations such as pen input or Fadult miniaturized trackpads. Lastly, a fingertip cursor was used and proved to be ideal for limited mobility users such as acute spinal cord injury survivors as well as CP, ALS and stroke patients. By using only the limited use of the tip on one finger, users can navigate the entire operating system and they do not have to worry about manoeuvring their hand about the tablet to different areas to facilitate input with on-screen keyboards. The tip of the finger can be moved over a small 1 centimetre circle and depressing it acts as a click. Multiple click options and dragging options area available within an area the size of one square inch. The cursor is small and light weight, permitting integrations within many circumstances and ideal for integration into custom locations. This cursor is commercially available and very useful for individuals with some spasms or cramped digits as it is a ring styled device. It should be noted that our system was originally designed to work with the Madentec head mouse and other head tracking and eye tracking hardware that will permit users with only head movement to navigate the whole computer regardless of their locations and situation.

One of our primary desires for our system was to permit stable speech output in loud environments and other communication options by users that are non-verbal regardless of time and place. We feel that we have also met this challenge by integrating extremely loud portable speakers that dwarf standard laptop speakers capacities and the integration of inexpensive 3^rd party text to speech software and the application of multiple SAPI5 voices entails customization by users. This also makes our device more comfortable for multimedia applications and realistic group chat options and clinical applications as well as supervision options.

Lastly; we have conceptual designs for our website, VPN, software bundle and graphic user interface that is as broad and robust as the hardware. As we have focused on the hardware to this point, we set a standard to which social media, accessible software and developing communication applications will run proficiently and simultaneously. To expand the satisfactions of our users, overall system usefulness and the long-term system integration into existing organizations and infrastructure, our system must develop a software bundle encompassing these tools. We are presently building the website and configuring our VPN server, and we are looking forward to commercializing our devices soon and having a one-stop web-interface for users that will make the internet accessible to single fingertip users or head and eye traking users. Our website may be integrated into Scadding Court Community Centre?s (Toronto), Centre of Excellence program catering to adult living with disabilities, and they are willing to host weekly group video chat sessions for individuals using this systems.

?

Results/Resolution/Discussion/Outcome/Performance & Cost/Implications

Our system is commencing the trial phase presently and little user feedback is available at this point in time. From discussions with clinicians at Toronto?s Holland Bloorview Kids Rehab, the system seems innovative and holds some potential.
The result of this line of technology development is that we now have three working models, including two for general testing and one as a platform for future development, including integration of additional systems such as food pumps and more intensive processors for power chair navigation and automation of environmental controls. We feel that we have developed not a PC for wheelchair; rather a platform that will permit integration of multiple diverse systems. Such infrastructure integrations include but is not limited to, telecommunications, environmental control, patient tracking, education and multiparty group chats to prevent social isolationism and supervisions in case of slip and falls. The integration of the Windows 7 Operating System and its subprograms facilitates a standardized operational system foundation to implement integration of the overall device into existing infrastructure, and standardizes the technology for users and clinicians.

In terms of commercialization, we presently include a monthly data plan which covers unlimited text messaging, email, internet surfing, streaming video and media, Twitter, Facebook, Skype video calling and Instant messaging, etc. within many metropolitan and geographical areas (Toronto was our test city) and can be expanded to support full calling and telephonic options (extra charges apply) which opens up the integration of this system into a full telecommunications system for limited mobility users and chair bound or bed bound individuals. Furthermore, these are all software accounts that can and should be automatically initiated for users of this device when acquired, to prevent users from having to undertake installation and configuration themselves. This process will immediately immerse users into the device on a deeper level than simply delivering a device and having other individual configure it. We believe in order for full and proper commercialization to occur, we must include a number of remote video-chat sessions in which the developers of the system are willing to configure the system as best possible remotely over a number of weekly sessions and to host a open chat channel through social media. The consequences of this line of logic is that users can be more immersed in the device and alternate revenue generating options will be developed such as commerce, advertising, media and institutional integration of subsequent hardware.

Whereas other device offer a very defined set of parameters eg. Text to speech, word processing, telephonic options, chair control, environmental controls, etc. and some even bridge multiple objectives such as the IPhone or IPad, the designer feels that there are few other platforms or devices that can offer the processing capacity, battery life, integration to existing infrastructure, modification capacity, and general outlook as this device offers at present; let alone after more rigorous development time and resources.

Our devices presently runs full versions Windows 7 OS with many of the accessibility options such as on-screen keyboard, text to speech, and speech recognition. Furthermore, we are able be configure our system to to run Mac OSX or Linux for customer satisfaction. Our first two models use Atom processors due to our budget, and are capped at 100gb hard drive and 1GB of RAM with a 4-8 hour battery life (depending on running applications), yet our development platform runs multiple operating systems, 4GB of ram, 350gb hard drive and dual battery options plus many more unspecified benefits for supervision and customization.

As for cost implications, the base production cost of our device is approximately one-thousand dollars ($1?000) with a Manfrotto mounting kit included. We are anticipating a sale price of about $3?500 CND plus an optional monthly data plan. More advanced models with additional features are more expensive, but we are aiming for a high end build of $1?000 that will be competitive with premium laptops from Apple and PC providers, and we have commenced patents procedures on the technology. Our device is more expensive than most tablets and some laptops initially, but when long term costs to users and medical infrastructure is correlated; technicians costs, clinical costs, component repair and replacement, long term usability of the device, changing patient conditions , user satisfaction from a multidisciplinary device and a backwards compatible device; then the long term costs seem beneficial. The desire of the developers is to eventually develop an inexpensive ?model with high-end specs for widespread?general chair integration.

Acknowledgements, References

The developers would like to thank all the parties involved in aiding development, including but not limited to: Scadding Court Community Centre, York University ITC and staff, Professor Shannon Bell, Holland Bloorview Kids Rehab, Contemporary Computers in Toronto, Sunnybrook Hospital, Little Lambs Elementary School in Chennai, India, and especially friends, and family and Adelyn O.

for their unwavering support. Without this joint effort, this device would not have be possible.

For more information please contact:

matthewosterloo@gmail.com

?

oklahoma city thunder act rajon rondo sunoco titanic ii babe ruth new jersey nets