Difference between revisions of "Team:Manchester/Model/Costing"
Mtdavies1995 (Talk | contribs) m |
Mtdavies1995 (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
<tr> | <tr> | ||
<td>Minimum expression amount</td> | <td>Minimum expression amount</td> | ||
| − | <td>Expression needs to be high enough that the result can be seen</td> | + | <td>Expression needs to be high enough that the result can be seen since the device it designed to be portable and used 'roadside' where lighting conditions may not be ideal</td> |
<td>Experimental observation</td> | <td>Experimental observation</td> | ||
</tr> | </tr> | ||
Revision as of 20:02, 16 October 2016
Cost Analysis
Overview and Motivation
During our human practices discussion with the Police it was brought to our attention that not all officers carry a breathalyser device and they are rather bulky: our patch could be an alternative, compact solution that all officers could carry provided it was suitable.
This obviously introduces constraints to the device if is to be suitable for this purpose.
| Constraint Summary | Constraint | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum expression time | The AlcoPatch would need to equally as fast as current methods, if not faster. This would increase the likelihood of uptake as it is an improvement on the current portable methods of blood alcohol detection | Requirement suggested during the discussion |
| Minimum expression amount | Expression needs to be high enough that the result can be seen since the device it designed to be portable and used 'roadside' where lighting conditions may not be ideal | Experimental observation |
