Futurevision Vision Aid

A Theoretical Future Product to Aid the Visually Impaired

This was a project for a class in which we had to design a forward looking product utilizing technology that is not necessarily available now, but would be within 5 years time. Effectively the class was looking to replicate the type of forward thinking and risk management that would be needed to develop a product that would be state of the art upon its release. In addition, to replicate the limitations of working in an established firm, each group member was given an emerging technology paradigm that had to be included in the final product. For my group these paradigms were smart cities, 3D printing, big data, and implanted devices.

We started the project by each researching our respective technology before brainstorming some possible applications incorporating all of them. With some applications in mind we were able to do some feasibility analysis and quickly came to the conclusion that the best application of our technology was vision related. With this direction established we were able to do some stakeholder interviews. I was able to get in contact with a local school for the blind, who allowed me to come visit and observe issues that many visually impaired individuals experience, interview some of their resident doctors, and get a sense of devices currently on the market. Other members of the group were able to get additional useful information contacting researchers at the University of Pittsburgh as well as some of the leading ocular doctors.

After analyzing the data obtained from our stakeholder interviews, we came up with a few concepts which we eventually narrowed down to our final product idea: a series of sensors which convey visual information as physical sensations on the skin. The function of the system is similar to that of the proximity sensors on a car, where the physical proximity of obstacles is conveyed via beeping. However, in this case, the physical distance of an obstacle is conveyed via vibrations of patches worn on the skin. The patches are able to convey distance via intensity of vibration, and location based on the patches location on the skin (see PowerPoint slide 15 for more information). The patches utilize new 3D printable and externally implantable technology that is able to produce the feeling of vibration with little power use and without any mechanical parts. In addition, we designed the system to be compatible with many of the sensors cities are putting in place for better management, and to utilize the big data generated by such sensors to aid the blind in their everyday life.

Following the completion of this initial design the group split in two to tackle technology feasibility and to conduct a second round of stakeholder interviews, I was the leader of the second group. I got back in touch with the school for the blind as well as some of our other contacts to get their opinion on our design. The feedback was very positive. The experts thought that the device did a great job addressing the needs of the visually impaired and offered considerable advantages over existing products. The few pieces of negative feedback, such as concern with the intensity of physical feedback, were addressed in the final iteration of the product. The team in charge of the technology feasibility analysis were able to show that under the current tech trajectories the technologies that would be needed to make the product a reality should be available in 5 years, in time for the launch date.

More information as well as the final iteration of the product, and some documents from our process can be seen in the PowerPoint linked above. The PowerPoint was the final deliverable of the project, a physical prototype was not made as we had neither the time, nor the technology to make a working one at this time. The goal of the project was to essentially make a pitch similar to that of a project or R&D manager to get the development of a new product greenlit.

I largely functioned as the team leader and product manager, keeping the team on track and directing the vision of the product. I predominantly lead the team meetings, scheduling them and establishing goals for each meeting. The team split up work largely based on which technology we were assigned, thus I also functioned as the resident expert on trends within smart cities technologies.

The team was 4 people in total, the majority of whom were engineers, though one of the team members was an industrial design major. Due to the nature of the project I had to work closely with everyone on the team for it to be successful, no individual knew enough about another's technology to do their work. As a result I had to carefully manage each team members strength and weakness and get the group to work as a cohesive team. There were times in which this was challenging, especially early on where peoples competing vision for the project caused some tension. Thankfully, I was able to diffuse this situation through a mixture of additional research and compromise.

In the end the project was mainly a success. The stakeholders, professor, and other students liked our product and we got an A on the project. However, it was not perfect. There were some engineering safety concerns that were brought during the final project review. These were missed by our team due to the limit of our own knowledge, and the fact that we had consulted no other engineers during our interviewing process, enabling them to slip through to our final version. While the presence of these concerns was a bit disappointing, it taught a valuable lesson, always triple check all aspects of the design before submitting it as finished.