BME100 f2013:W1200 Group10 L3

From OpenWetWare
Jump to: navigation, search
Owwnotebook icon.png BME 100 Fall 2013 Home
People
Lab Write-Up 1 | Lab Write-Up 2 | Lab Write-Up 3
Lab Write-Up 4 | Lab Write-Up 5 | Lab Write-Up 6
Course Logistics For Instructors
Photos
Wiki Editing Help
BME494 Asu logo.png


OUR TEAM

Name: Robert Childers
Role(s)
Name: Akshara Malla
Role(s)
Name: Daniel Palmer
Project lead
Name: Ryan Hearn
Role(s)
Name: Jordan Jones
Role(s)
Name: student
Role(s)

LAB 3A WRITE-UP

Descriptive Statistics

The Descrptive Statistics for the data set include two separate groups: the oral thermometer and the sensor groups. When looking at the sensor group,the average was 96.14 degrees Fahrenheit, which had a standard deviation of 1.64. Also, the standard error was 0.132 and the median of the data set was 96.3 degrees Fahrenheit. Now with the oral thermometer readings, the average was 97.57 degrees Fahrenheit, which had a standard deviation of 1.03. In addition, the standard error was 0.0830 and the median of the recordings is 97.6 degrees Fahrenheit.




Results

3a results:


3a ave.PNG

3a r value.PNG

Analysis

Based on the data, the t-test indicates that the sensor failed to create temperature readings similar to the oral thermometer. A p-value of 1.919E-16, which is well below .05, indicates that with 95 percent confidence, researchers can claim that a difference exists between the sensor and oral thermometer. A successful sensor thermometer would register similar if not the same temperatures as the oral thermometer. However, the t-test indicates that the sensor device is inaccurate in comparison to the oral thermometer. The regression analysis graph produced a value of .005, indicating that there is little correlation between the oral and sensor temperatures.




Summary/Discussion


The sensor thermometer statistically provides readings that are uncorrelated to the actual body temperature measured by the oral thermometer. Therefore It is summed that the product is inaccurate and unreliable. While many aspects of the product could be to blame, the main design flaw that was noticed in the experiment is the Bluetooth setup. There were many times in the whole experiment that the Bluetooth was not connecting to the sensing device which caused an absence of data. Also, for the most part the actual sensor device was not producing results close enough to what was expected and desired. This could be due to the fact that the device records the external body temperature, and thus was influenced by the outside environment.

LAB 3B WRITE-UP

Target Population and Need

This product is targeted toward parents of sick children. Parents require an efficient temperature reading device that provides precise and accurate results. Young children are the most susceptible to contracting contagious illnesses. Therefore in times of sickness, parents are able to monitor their children's conditions regularly and provide care accordingly.




Device Design

Device model 3b.PNG

In the picture of the device, there are only a few main components that make up the headband thermometer. The device is suppose to go around your head and the sensor will be placed over the temporal artery to directly measure the person's body temperature. The temporal artery is known to be a reliable source of internal body temperature due to its connection as a main artery to the heart, and thus was chosen for accuracy and convenience of location. Then the wire is connected to a battery pack to power the bluetooth and send data to a cellular device capable of bluetooth communication, and then sent to an online data base so parents can keep track of the temperature being monitored from anywhere. This device was designed to potentially be built into a hat for concealment, sewn into the hat's band.

Inferential Statistics

The data for the product that we designed is as follows:
Oral Sensor:
Average: 98.21
Median: 98.15
Standard Deviation: .765
Number of Samples: 22
Standard Error: .163
Sensor on Headset:
Average: 98.22
Median: 98.205
Standard Deviation: .759
Number of Samples: 22
Standard Error: .162

The t test for this data gave us a value of .259 and the regression analysis gave us an r value of .9937
These numbers show us that there is a strong correlation between the temperature on the oral thermometer and the sensor connected to our headband so the sensor is successful.



Graph

3b results:


3b ave.PNG

3b r value.PNG