Novel Decon System
WEEKLY REPORTS
WEEKLY REPORTS
Updates on the current design progress
Week 3
Picking a Client
9 / 13 / 2019
So far, we have reached out to Dr. Lawrence Tychsen, Dr. Zachary Vesoulis, Dr. Courtney Dunn, Edouard Trincal, Ian Berke, Dr. Devon Ackroyd, Dr. Wilman Ortega, and Dr. Brendan Watson. Of those who we have reached out to, we are still in contact with Ian Berke, Dr. Brendan Watson, Dr. Ortega and Dr. Ackroyd. On Wednesday we spoke with Ian Berke about devising a system to improve patient compliance with osteoporosis medication. On Thursday, we met with Dr. Ortega, who has a need for an improved device to record lung sounds. Upon further consideration, we are unlikely to pursue Dr. Ortega’s project as it is a continuation of a previous group’s design. In speaking with Dr. Watson on Friday, we were provided with more information on the current decontamination system at the Barnes Jewish Trauma Center and how this could potentially be improved. Currently, we have yet to speak with Dr. Ackroyd but are scheduled to meet on 9/16. We plan to commit to a client after this meeting. Based on our overall interest and skill set, Dr. Watson’s project seems most promising and best suited for senior design.
Week 4
Meeting the client
9 / 20 / 2019
This week, we committed to working with Dr. Watson on developing an improved mass casualty decontamination system. Our group outlined the scope of this project, which included a need statement and design specifications. In order to get a better idea of size constraints, we decided it would be beneficial to see the area in the Emergency Department where the system will be set up and stored. We then scheduled a follow up meeting with Dr. Watson at Barnes Jewish Hospital. Where we were able to see their current mass decontamination system (PVC pipes with several holes drilled into them) as well as talk to Dr. Watson about more design specifications. Most importantly, we reevaluated the choice in water source for our system. Because the water supplied from a fire hydrant would be cold, our design would need to heat the water before it reached the patient. As a heating component would increase both cost and patient decontamination time, we concluded that the tepid water provided by Barnes Jewish would be a better choice. We also decided that while it is important to consider our system’s usability during the winter months as well as its potential production of contaminated run-off, adequately addressing these concerns may overcomplicate the project. And current guidelines say that run off is a secondary concern to decontamination.
During the meeting, Dr. Watson informed us that he is planning to apply to the Foundation for Barnes Jewish Hospital grant. As the grant application must be submitted by November 1st, we will need to provide our design and materials list to his department a week prior to that deadline in order to write the grant. If we are able to provide a well thought out design and a clearly defined budget, there might be up to $5000 available in funds for materials. Therefore, it is important that we start thinking about designs as soon as possible.
Week 5
Research and
Development
9 / 27 / 2019
At the beginning of the week, we met with Dr. Klaesner to discuss revisions to our project scope; specifically, he helped us more clearly outline our project’s population, problem and outcome. The problem is the need to quickly and efficiently remove contaminants in a mass casualty event, while the outcome is reaching safe levels of contamination. The population includes both the contaminated patients and first responders/doctors. Dr. Klaesner explained that our scope had made it unclear as to whether or not the project was simply devising a new protocol or creating an actual device, which we will need to make clear in our preliminary report. As for the target population, we recognized that we must consider both mass casualty victims as well as first responders in our design. The device will be easy to assemble (first responders/doctors as the target population) and effective at removing contaminants from victims while keeping their comfort in mind (patients as the target population). It was also suggested that we categorize our design specifications by creating separate tables for each category.
We also met on Monday to set up a weekly meeting on Friday mornings, with an available alternative time on Tuesday and Thursday mornings in order to accommodate any changes in schedules throughout the semester. We also talked about what research needed to be accomplished for or preliminary report. Making sure that we found current guidelines for decontamination that will be specifications for our product, as well as current methods used both in the field and at hospitals. At the end of the meeting we created a calendar with project deadlines and started planning what we will be working on in October.
Week 6
Development of Preliminary Report
10 / 08 / 2019
As a group, we met on Saturday to discuss upcoming assignments and to plan on a timeline for finishing the preliminary report. The meeting began by adjusting our need statement in order to get approval from Dr. Kleasner on Monday after class. We decided to focus on the victims of mass casualty events as our primary population, because the considerations for the first receivers, such as quick assembly, would also be beneficial to the victims. We also decided to revisit the project scope and specifications portion of the report after we had finished our research. We divided the background information and existing solution research as well as tasks such as creation of the Gantt Chart. The need statement got approval by Dr. Kleasner on Monday, and during the Wednesday class period, more information about the presentation was presented.
Throughout the week, we completed research and updated lab archives to begin writing the report. We met again on Thursday to work on the preliminary report and to discuss who would be doing each presentation. We also discussed the information we had researched. During the Thursday meeting we responded to Dr. Watson’s email from the previous day, deciding that Caroline and Madelyn would meet with Dr. Watson to discuss where we are in the project and to partake in a conference call with the National Guard to learn more about current practices and ask more questions about our solution ideas and parameters. We met again on Friday morning to complete and edit the preliminary report. Two copies were printed and submitted to Dr. Kleasner’s box and a soft copy was turned in online.
Week 7
Brainstorming
10 / 11 / 2019
On October 7th, Madelyn gave a presentation on our preliminary report, which the entire team worked together to create the previous Saturday. On October 8, our team met to discuss and prepare initial designs and potential questions in preparation for a meeting at Barnes Jewish the following day. On October 9, we sat in on a meeting with Dr. Watson, Dr. Liang, and the Missouri National Guard to discuss potential improvements to the Barnes Jewish mass decontamination protocol. It was suggested by the Guard that soapy water be used for the system rather than just water alone, as soap can cut through oil-based biological and chemical contaminants. We will need to research further on how to achieve this, but one suggestion is to use an injector, which will inject soap into a water source as it passes through the device. Overall, our design should output around 50 gallons of water per minute. We confirmed that we will be using tepid water (rather than fire hydrant water) for the input to our system, as the fire hydrant is largely inaccessible to the hospital. The Guard also briefly discussed their decontamination capabilities in terms of equipment and technology they have available. These capabilities included a decontamination tent system, trailer, and contaminant detection equipment. Our meeting with the Guard concluded with surveying the ambulance bay and its limitations in the event of a major mass casualty decontamination event. Concerns discussed included contamination runoff, closure of Kingshighway, and location of water sources.
This week we also began the design brainstorming process. Our meeting at Barnes Jewish on October 9 concluded with reviewing our initial designs with Dr. Watson and discussing changes that would improve their efficiency and effectiveness. Dr. Watson expressed interest in our first design for non-ambulatory victims and our third design for ambulatory victims. The first design resembles a cage consisting of multiple arches that would deliver sprays of water over the casualty. There is space between the arches to allow for the turning of the casualty who is supported by a backboard. At present, the design has the water flowing in series to each of the arches. Dr. Watson recommended that we alter the design so that the water flows in parallel to provide equivalent pressure across the “cage”. He also brought up changing the angle of the water spray so as to create overlap between each water source for full coverage of the casualty. The ambulatory design consists of multiple nesting archways that would pivot around a shared axis and lock in place to also create a “cage” of water. Dr. Watson mentioned that it is unnecessary to spray casualties below the knee. He also suggested that only one of the archways be able to rotate in order to have an entrance and exit. It might be useful for the rotation of the archways to be limited to 300 degrees instead of 360. The water source would attach to the top of the “cage” and also need to have parallel flow. Concerning the lesser issue of privacy, Dr. Watson approved of our proposed screens on wheels. His only remark was that the material of the screens must be durable and sturdy enough to withstand strong winds. Drainage and contamination runoff is not of considerable concern for the design.
Plans to meet with the Guard on October 16 at Lambert Airport to view the employment of their decontamination tents and trailers is pending as of October 10th.
Week 8
Generating Initial Designs and Budget
10 / 18 / 2019
This week was condensed due to Fall Break, which limited the amount of work that was done between Friday and Tuesday. On Wednesday the 16th we met to discuss changes to the design that we wanted to implement and to start to think about the materials that will be used in the design. The team met again on Thursday October 17 to start working on a CAD file that would allow us to see the design in 3D. As well as use the images in the grant application to Barnes. During this Thursday night meeting we were also able to continue our discussions on the budget and materials required for the design. On Friday October 18 we will be meeting with the MO National Guard at Lambert International Airport to see employment of their emergency mass decontamination trailers and tents.
Week 9
Meeting the National Guard and Creating an Initial Budget
10 / 24 / 2019
This past week, we had a meeting with the MO National Guard at St. Louis Lambert International Airport on October 18th. The main purpose of this meeting was to view the National Guard’s decontamination equipment as well as get expertise from their mass decontamination expert, Staff Sergeant Michael Smith. During our visit, we were able to examine their non-ambulatory and ambulatory decontamination tents, decontamination trailer, personal protective equipment (PPE), and contaminant-detection devices. The National Guard's system is designed for the decontamination of 400 people; given that we’re designing our device to decontaminate 15-20 people, we will need to scale their system down. During our visit, we were also able to see how their system accounts for the different needs of both ambulatory and non-ambulatory patients. Additionally, we were able to see the organization of the hot, warm, and cold zones. Sergeant Smith also provided us with a fluorescent substance that measures levels of contaminants, which we hope to use to measure the success of our final prototype.
After the meeting, we researched possible building materials for our project. We also finished designing our website and updated the information. In AutoCAD, we modeled our initial ambulatory and non-ambulatory systems to be included in our grant proposal. On Sunday, October 20th, we met to put together a preliminary budget and list of materials. We then forwarded this budget -- in addition to our initial designs -- to our client.
While working on the initial design and materials list, one of the problems we encountered was finding the exact parts that we want. One of our concerns was whether we have the ability to build custom parts, such as bending pipe to a specific angle or building a 5-way connection, and who we would need to contact to get help on this.
Week 10
Updating Lab Archives and submitting the Grant
This week we had a team meeting on Wednesday, October 30th. Dr. Watson has informed us that he plans to apply for a grant from Barnes Jewish Hospital on Friday, November 1st. During our meeting, we discussed next steps while we wait for Dr. Watson to finish submitting the grant application. We also utilized this time to update our files in LabArchives. At our team meeting on Friday, November 1st, we explored additional solutions for our project.
11 / 1 / 2019
Week 11
Beginning the Progress REport
11 / 8 / 2019
This week we reconnected with Dr. Watson to talk about funding for our project. He told us that he should be able to obtain funding by January, which works well because we do not need to start prototyping and building until the second semester. We also met this week to discuss additional potential solutions in order to reach a final design that we can use moving forward. We hope to finish our designs by Friday so that we can begin working on the Pugh chart at our weekly meeting. We also plan to discuss which elements of our design are most important in our comparison. This week we continued to update LabArchives and the website.
Week 12
Evaluating alternative solutions
11 / 15 / 2019
This week we met on 11/11/19 to work on the first part of the progress report, which included any changes that we wanted to make to the components of the preliminary report. We decided not to make any changes to the need statement and project scope. However, we worked on revising our design specifications to include costs, more specific descriptions, additives such as detergent, and important physical considerations such as water volume and flow rate. We also devised a more concrete design schedule, set deadlines for completing portions of the progress report, and updated our team responsibilities. Throughout the week, each team member has worked on drawing up design alternatives and writing descriptions of each. We plan on compiling these alternatives and conducting analysis of each to determine the best solution for both ambulatory and non-ambulatory patients.
Week 13
Creating the pugh Chart
11 / 22 / 2019
This week we primarily focused on developing the Pugh chart and narrowing down the best solutions from the options we currently have. On November 15th, we met to discuss which design specifications we wanted to include in our Pugh chart. At our meetings on the 18th and 19th, we worked on filling out the chart which included discussions about the relative importance of each of our specifications and then worked thought how well each design would meet those specifications. We also developed a secondary Pugh chart to compare alternative materials that we would use in all of the designs. During the week we worked on writing up an analysis for the benefits and drawbacks of each potential solution. On November 22nd, we met to continue to work on the write up for the progress report.
Week 16
Planning and Logistics
1 / 17 / 2020
This week we primarily focused on planning. At the beginning of the week on January 13th, we outlined everything that we needed to accomplish in the following months. On the morning of January 16th we had two meetings scheduled: one with Dr. Watson and another with Dr. Klaesner. During the meeting with Dr. Watson, we first discussed the budget for our project, which was approved by Barnes Jewish Hospital. Dr. Watson informed us that for ease of reimbursement, he will order the materials we need. Before the supplies are ordered, however, he must confirm the flow rate of the hospital’s tepid water source and the hose connection diameter size. Dr. Watson believes he can accomplish this within the next week or so. Dr. Watson also approved the use of PVC as the material for the structure as long as all of the seals are secure. Moving forward, Dr. Watson’s schedule opens up from February to mid-March; during this time he will be more available to help with construction and validation. We also decided that due to the large scale of our project, it would be ideal to build and test it at WashU campus before transporting it to Barnes Jewish. Final testing can occur in the ambulance bay at Barnes Jewish to work out any last-minute problems.
On January 16th we also met with Dr. Klaesner. We informed him that the grant was approved through Barnes Jewish and that we do not need money for our project from the BME department. One of the main topics of discussion was finding a location for construction and storage on Danforth campus. Dr. Klaesner said that he would consult with Dr. Widder and let us know if any space is available. He also mentioned that we might be able to test our project on campus using the hoses near the loading docks. We discussed the tools available to us for construction (such as a PVC pipe cutter) as well as possible ways to display our project during the final class presentation and on BME day. Because we cannot have a live demonstration of our project, it’s important that we at least have a video of it functioning properly. Depending on the weather, we may be able to set up our project outside in the courtyard behind Whitaker. It would also be beneficial to have a scaled down model of our prototype to show the class and to have in front of our poster on BME day.
Week 17
Awaiting confirmation
1 / 24 / 2020
Before we can start ordering supplies and building our first prototype, we need confirmation on a suitable space for construction, availability of resources, the flow rate of the hospital’s tepid water source, and the hose connection diameter size. Due to the inclement weather this past week, Dr. Watson has not had the opportunity to check flow rate of water source in ambulance bay. We expect to hear from him some time next week. As we are waiting on these developments, we decided to discuss revisions to the budget and how we are going to test our prototype.
Week 18
Budget and Parts Finalization
1 / 31 / 2020
We met on Monday (1/27) and reorganized our budget by parts for ambulatory vs. non-ambulatory. We also made sure our quantities for parts were correct for the non-ambulatory units. We met again on Wednesday (1/29) and continued to re-confirm quantities of parts for both the ambulatory and non-ambulatory units. We secured the use of ROTC facilities at North Campus to construct our prototype. We will be able to both build and store all components of our project in the garage at North Campus. We will have access to the secure building space on Fridays between the hours of 0900-1600. We had a final meeting for the week on 1/31 where we verified the dimensions of both of our designs; we accomplished this by using painter’s tape on a blank wall to visualize a full-scale outline of each design.
Week 19
Planning for the rest of the semester
This week, we met on 2/7 to finalize the budget. We then provided a copy of the final budget to Dr. Watson so that he can begin ordering the supplies for our project. We’re still waiting to hear back from Dr. Watson on confirmation of flow rate from hospital water source. In the meantime, we are beginning to plan for the verification and validation report. This includes researching FDA regulations for hospital decontamination, as well as starting to develop a verification plan and validation testing plan.
2 / 7 / 2020
Week 20
Consulting with Client and Regulation
Research
This week, we consulted with Brendan about project design. One of the things we discussed is hose length. Brendan suggested using a shorter hose (25ft instead of 50ft) with a wider diameter (1in instead of 3/4in) to conserve water flow rate. For the same reason, we also decided to use 1in PVC pipe instead of 3in pipe. The budget was then altered to reflect these changes. With the budget finalized, we plan to work with Brendan to start purchasing materials next week. We also started working on the V&V report. Currently, we’re looking into FDA regulations for hospital mass decontamination procedures, as well as outlining our validation and verification testing plans.
2 / 14 / 2020
Week 21
V&V Report
Regulation And Verification
Research
2 / 21 / 2020
This week we worked on our V&V report and consulted with our client to do some initial testing of the water source. We researched current FDA approval for similar devices in order to try and proceed through the 510(k) process. However, we found that most decontamination showers are not FDA approved and instead are certified through OSHA and ANSI guidelines. We also discussed and researched methods for testing the device to meet these guidelines, fulfill our design specifications, and show proof of concept. Finally, we discussed possible changes to the design and the initial flow rate from the water source with our client. Dr. Watson informed us that the hospital’s 90ft hose with a 3/4’’ diameter has a flow rate of 6.1 L/min. Therefore, since we are planning to use a 25ft hose with a 1’’ diameter, we should be able to achieve a greater flow rate. This afternoon we are planning on going to Lowe’s to obtain product specifications for the PVC piping we are using in the design.
Week 22
Submitting V&V Report And and Client Meeting
2 / 28 / 2020
This week we met with Dr. Watson (2/27) to begin the process of ordering materials. Because Dr. Watson is not yet in possession of the purchasing card from Barnes Jewish, we used our meeting time to consolidate a list of materials that we intend to order. We were able to set up a meeting time on Tuesday afternoon of next week to go to Lowes and acquire the bulk of our materials. The rest of the materials will be ordered online and should arrive after spring break. We made one final change to our hoses, switching from one 25ft hose to two 15ft hoses in order to put the detergent injector closer to the system to conserve flow rate and water pressure. We also eliminated several nozzles from the non-amubulatory system as they were deemed unnecessary because they would decrease flow through the other nozzles in the system. Throughout this week we also worked on the verification and validation report and presentation. The report was turned in on Friday, February 28th and the presentation will be given Monday, March 2nd.
Week 23
V&V Presentation
and Beginning the Building Process
3 / 6 / 2020
On Sunday (3/1), we reconfirmed the budget by going through item by item and organizing it by vendor to prepare for our meeting with Dr. Watson on Tuesday. We also created a 3D model of our designs using CAD in order to have a better visual representation of the design to discuss with our client. The designs in CAD were created in assembly after creating each individual part and then connecting them.
On Tuesday (3/3), we met Dr. Watson at Lowe’s and purchased some of the materials needed to begin construction of our prototypes. We were not able to acquire everything on our budget during this trip, but we can start prototype construction with the materials that we currently have.While at Lowe’s we discussed our plans to make the device collapsible. We intended to obtain socket to threaded adaptors that would allow the legs of the system to come off in order to store the device. However, Dr. Watson said that we could use more space in the storage closets which might allow for the whole system to fit in fully constructed, which would mean that the devices might not need to be deconstructed when stored. We also discussed changes to the pipe diameter of the system. We concluded that increasing the diameter to 1.5’’ will provide greater structural stability.
On Wednesday (3/4), Katherine delivered our Verification and Validation presentation, and we met later that day to map out our plans for the rest of the project. This included scheduling team meetings, deadlines, and identifying specific tasks that need to be done as well as concerns that need to be brought up with our client.
On Thursday (3/5), Katherine and Caroline met at N. Campus and began construction. The parts for the ambulatory unit were assembled as well as some of the components for the non-ambulatory unit. Construction will resume after Spring Break and is scheduled to be completed within the following two weeks (by 3/30). We will then begin implementing our verification plan, testing our prototype for adequate water flow and pressure.
Week 25
3 / 20 / 2020
On 3/16 we scheduled a conference call with Dr. Watson to discuss the future of our project and concerns about the impact of COVID-19. After our discussion, we met later that day at Lowe's to purchase more materials. Later that week, materials we had ordered arrived at Dr. Watson's house, and Caroline picked them up on 3/18. Caroline met with Dr. Watson at Home Depot on 3/20 to purchase more materials. Katherine and Caroline met later that day to continue construction.
Spring break
Week 26
Adjusting for Covid-19 and conSTRUCTING The Prototypes
3 / 27 / 2020
On 3/23, we met as a team to briefly to discuss how our group plans to accomplish the class project requirements amidst the developing COVID-19 situation.
On 3/24, Katherine and Caroline met to continue building the prototypes. They also assembled the soap injector with the recently purchased adapters and tried to test it with just water coming out of Caroline's apartment source. The apartment source was only 5GPM, which created too low of a pressure for the Venturi injector to work. They believe that fine mesh strainer at the end of the injector tube is impeding the flow too much. They were able to finish cutting all of the pipe for the first half of the non-ambulatory unit. More supplies are needed to build the second half. They were able to assemble the non-ambulatory pieces to get a rough visualization of what the final prototype will look like. Everything still needs to be glued and sealed before running water through it. There was also some concern of stability. It might be worthwhile to consider adding 90 degree elbows at the base of the four legs of the non-ambulatory and adding capped cross bars at the bottom that are filled with a heavy material such as sand.
We informed Dr. Watson of our progress as well as our concerns with the injector. Caroline drove the assembled injector, two hoses, and a 5 gallon bucket over to Dr. Watson's house so that he could test it with his home's source. He shared with us that his home has an output of 12 L/min which is about 3.5 gpm. However, he was able to get the injector to work, which means that his house source was able to create a large enough pressure differential. He tried it with 25% soap solution, and the injector was able to empty 16 oz. in under a minute. He proposed that we attempt a trial run of one half of the non-ambulatory system at his house before taking it to Barnes to test. We informed him that we plan on having the first half of the non-ambulatory sealed by the end of Friday.
Week 27
Continuing Construction
4 / 3 / 2020
On 3/27, we had a virtual team meeting and began to plan out everything that needs to be done by the end of the semester. Katherine and Caroline met on 3/28 to glue together the components of the ambulatory unit. On 3/29, Katherine and Caroline met again to continue building. They were able to conduct initial testing of the ambulatory unit. The nozzles worked as planned, but there was some periodic sound of turbulent flow within the pipes. There seemed to be adequate flow and pressure coming out, however, it will be interesting to see how much greater the flow and pressure will be with a source that has a much higher output. There was some concern with stability. Due to the lack of reliably flat ground and discrepancies between how much each of the legs was able to be pushed into the elbows, it was hard to distinguish whether or not the measurements of the legs were off. Trimming one of the legs seemed to provide more stability.
We had discussed two different options with Dr. Watson for improving stability. The first option is to have the legs filled with sand and capped at the ends. Assembly would just require that the 6 legs be inserted. The downside to this is ensuring that the legs get inserted the same length would be difficult. If any one of the legs is not inserted to the right depth, then the unit will not be stable. Additionally, it would be nice to have the legs glued in place to cut down on assembly time, but it must be ensured that there is an adequate angle to get the system through the door of the storage locker. The second option is to have sand-filled pipes connecting the ends of the legs along the two sides of the entry and exit. We plan on discussing these two options in the near future.
On 3/31, Katherine and Caroline met to test the assembled (but not glued) first non-ambulatory unit. As it wasn't glued, it was difficult to know if we really had any water flow problems or not. They decided to get everything glued and then test it later. They were able to accomplish gluing the top angled portion of the non-ambulatory. Construction continued from 3/1 to 3/3. During this time, pieces of the first non-ambulatory unit were glued together, the first non-ambulatory unit was tested, and a full parts list was made for each of the units. On 4/2, we had a full team meeting to discuss upcoming deadlines, plans for the rest of the semester, and what Madelyn will can be working remotely while construction and testing occur in St. Louis. Madelyn will take lead on the DesignSafe analysis, the Venturewell DEBUT competition application, and the final report.
Week 28
Finalizing Prototypes and Preparing for the Final Report
4 / 10 / 2020
This week Caroline and Katherine built the second non-ambulatory system and finished all that they could given logistical limitations. They transferred both systems to Barnes Jewish Hospital and completed construction there on April 8. Initial testing with the hospital water source and detergent injector was conducted on April 9 to ensure that water flowed through the system and that the system was stable. More thorough final test will be conducted next week to acquire measurements such as assembly time, water flow rate, and potentially water pressure.
Katherine created the CAD parts and assembled them for all the systems. We will then work on making the mechanical drawings from these files for the final report and manual. Madelyn was able to download the Design Safe Software so that we can then run the program. Madelyn was also able to start consolidating information for the overview section of the final report as well as the parts list. Katherine and Caroline went through the design specifications and scope in order to see what was met and see if there is more information that we will be able to gather. The team met together over FaceTime on Friday morning in order to review what had been done, talk about what we wanted to put in the conclusion of the final report, and plan what needs to be completed next for the final report and video.