Element I: TESTING AND DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Testing Results 

Test Analysis

The team's data helped make the final design more compact and easier to read as it concluded that making the braille dots bigger would accomplish this task and that it could safely shift the magnets into the device without it breaking. During test trials, the team gave the device to a testing participant and told them to perform a task with it and then ask them a series of questions on the usability of the device from one to five. The scores they gave were higher than expected because scores speculated would sit around a 3 or 4 however most people rated most components either a 4 or 5. This either means that this device was performing better than expected or that the test subjects we pulled at a preliminary bias toward giving a higher score. Moreover, the team did not provide a solid reference point for the students to compare the device to meaning that their feedback was free floating and is probably a point of failure that should be addressed in future studies of this product if it were to go forward. Before this test, there were a lot of rounds of preliminary testing in which testing the durability of the device by breaking off its fingers in an effort to understand qualitatively the strength of the device. These results revealed the need to make a conscious effort to improve the strength of 3D-printed parts. This concluded that printing it horizontally would improve the strength of the fingers however this had the downside of reducing the strength of the braille on the device which when combined with a lower layer height led to infusion strength in the braille dots leading to them shearing off. In what was supposed to be the final design the braille dots were too large and would just tear through the money meaning that revision was needed. 

While testing, most of the devices had problems with the 1 or 100 denomination. Either 1 would go all the way through the bill or the 100 would fail to stamp the braille properly. As a result, prototype 4 was the best model for stamping braille. The one denomination on prototype 4 still needs revision but the rest of the dots brailled semi-well which is probably due to the way it was printed. The five-dollar denomination printed slightly differently and would have the habit of going through the money. Naturally, there are refinements that can be made but the team is happy with what and how it was tested and how it achieved a good analysis of results to guide the path forward.

Stakeholder Feedback

The team sent a survey that detailed the testing procedures for this part of the project. The stakeholders will then examine the test results and come to the conclusion that it was helpful or not. 

https://forms.gle/uCjMSa9TZS2Q3zTd6