Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Last week
  2. Earlier
  3. Defence Technologies

    until
    Soldiers participating in the 2017 Contested Urban Environment Strategic Challenge (CUE17), an activity led by Defence Science and Technology to investigate new and emerging technologies that can improve the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities of soldiers when operating in cities during conflict so there is less risk to them and the civilian population. Picture curtesy © Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Defence. Title: Defence Next Generation Technologies: Driving Innovation in Defence Presenter: Dr Alex Zelinsky AO, Chief Defence Scientist, Department of Defence Description: This presentation outlines the operation of The Next Generation Technologies Fund managed by the Defence Science and Technology (DST) Group. It will show how industry and universities can get involved in delivering emerging technologies for the future Defence force. Introduced with the Defence Industry Policy Statement in 2016, the Next Generation Technologies Fund is an investment of $730 million over ten years supporting forward-looking research and development. Together with the Defence Innovation Hub and the Centre for Defence Industry Capability, these three form the integrated Defence Innovation System. About the presenter: Dr Alex Zelinsky’s scientific career includes working as a computer scientist, a systems engineer and a roboticist. His career spans innovation, science and technology, research and development, commercial start-ups and education. As the Chief Defence Scientist since March 2012, Dr Zelinsky leads the Defence Science and Technology program within the Department of Defence. Prior to joining Defence, Dr Zelinsky was Group Executive for Information Sciences at the CSIRO. Dr Zelinsky was Chief Executive Officer and co-founder of Seeing Machines, a high-technology company developing computer vision systems. He was also Professor of Systems Engineering at Australian National University in Canberra. In 2017, he was appointed an Officer in the Order of Australia (AO) in the 2017 Queen’s Birthday honours. He has been included in Engineers Australia’s list of the 100 most influential engineers since 2009 and in 2015, Engineers Australia awarded him the prestigious M A Sargent Medal. When: 12pm (NSW time) 3 July 2018. The presentation will last 30 minutes followed by 30 minutes question time. Where: The presentation by webinar Cost: This presentation is free to members of Engineers Australia (EA), the Australian Computer Society (ACS), the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) and IEEE. Just provide your membership number during registration for the event. The cost for non-members is $30. How to register: Please register on the Engineers Australia event system. Note, to register you need to have a free EA ID which you can get on the first screen of the registration page. Take note of your ID number for future events.
  4. Bulk webinar registration

    To make things easier for you we are now offering a bulk webinar registration service. Community members can now register for an entire year of webinars just once instead of having to register for each webinar individually. To subscribe (free for EA members) just: Email iotengineering@engineersaustralia.org.au with your name and membership number You will receive an email with the webinar link a few days before each IoT event. You can unsubscribe at any time by emailing the same address After one year we will invite you to resubscribe. I you don't respond you will drop of the list. Note: Non members can purchase a subscription at EA Books. Please share this with non-members, or better still, suggest they join Engineers Australia.
  5. Incarceration with IoT

    Introduction Replacing prisons with high tech systems capable of detaining prisoners in their own homes and the use of artificial intelligence to predict and prevent imminent offenses may sound the stuff of science fiction, but rapid advances in technology surrounding IoT makes such a vision a possibility worth discussing. A system that effectively turns prisoners into internet nodes using IoT wearables with the ability to deliver electric shocks would have significant social impact. These ramifications need to be taken into account along with engineering design and legal considerations. This application of IoT falls at the intersection of engineering, technology and law, and as such, needs an interdisciplinary approach. The case for technological incarceration Big data, IoT, and AI can be useful in reforming and improving certain aspects of the legal system. One candidate is the prison system, which has remained largely unchanged for hundreds of years. In Australia and many other Western countries, the rate of incarceration is increasing as governments respond to voter pressure to be tough on crime. This comes at a high social and financial cost. In the US, the cost of running prisons is tens of billions of dollars per year. In Australia the annual cost is in the billions. It would actually be cheaper (although not practical) to assign an individual police officer to each prisoner. For prisoners, incarceration causes effects following release including diminished life expectancy, prolonged unemployment and reduced income. This leads to further costs to the public purse. In addition, a disproportionate number of underprivileged and minority groups are imprisoned, including Indigenous Australians and African Americans. One of the main arguments for incarceration is to deter people from committing crimes. Research has shown that a more effective deterrent than fear of prison is the belief by a potential criminal that their crime is likely to be detected, and that prisoners with a harsh sentence reoffend at a marginally higher rate than those dealt with leniently. Protection of the community through incarceration of violent criminals is also limited to the length of sentences. How could technological incarceration work? Technological incarceration has the potential to punish criminals and keep the community safe while reducing the financial and social costs of traditional incarceration. One proposal is to implement a variant of home detention which uses electronic bracelets or anklets along with an IoT system to achieve: real-time tracking of offenders’ locations constant surveillance of offenders’ actions immediate immobilisation of offenders who are committing a crime or escaping Challenges One challenge of technological incarceration is that GPS tracking with wearables is not an adequate substitute for prison because it cannot prevent offenders from harming others in their location or if they escape. To solve this issues, the wearables need to be able to report to a central location in real-time. For constant surveillance, and prevention of harm to the public, the cost of corrections officers viewing CCTV for every offender is too expensive. Therefore a computer-monitoring solution needs to be found. The final challenge is how to immobilise offenders who are reoffending or escaping. This could be achieved by incorporating a device such as a taser into the offender’s anklet, which could be remotely activated if incapacitation was required. Technological incarceration could be perceived as “soft” by the community, and education might be needed to convince the public that deprivation of liberty is a harsh punishment in itself. Conversely, some may see it as too harsh, due to complete loss of privacy and the risks of tasering. It could be argued that these concerns are not as great as the current ramifications of traditional incarceration. Technological incarceration would also place a burden on families, be vulnerable to technological failure, and present privacy concerns to family members and engineers and technicians involved in maintenance of the incarceration equipment. An important question is the number of technology triggered taser-related deaths, or failures of tasers leading to public danger that society is willing to tolerate, similar to the issues of driverless vehicle-caused fatalities and casualties. This needs to be put in context with current issues including deaths and violent attacks in prisons, and crimes committed by offenders on bail. Another question is whether technological incarceration would be made available to every offender, or only those who are not violent or dangerous. As the offenders would be imprisoned in their own homes, provisions would also have to be made for accommodation for homeless offenders. Technology The electronic anklet is existing technology. There are two forms: one uses RF tracking capability and the other GPS. The GPS version has the capability to accurately track offenders to within around 10 centimeters. They are fitted with an alarm for tampering, and cost around a sixth to a tenth of traditional imprisonment. In existing devices, fibre optic technology is used to provide tamper-proofing: a beam is interrupted when offenders try to remove their device. However, this technology is only used currently for offenders on parole or with a non-custodial sentence. To solve the more complex problem of monitoring and incapacitating offenders in real time if they are posing a danger to others, proponents of technological incarceration have proposed the use of sensor vests in conjunction with computer-based monitoring with technologies such as machine vision. Rather than installing fixed sensors (infrared temperature sensors (IRT), audio sensors and cameras) in offenders’ homes, these sensors could be installed in modified police vests. This has already been trialled with cameras in vests to provide police accountability. Machine vision has the potential to detect suspicious movements such as fast hand and leg movement, or picking up implements.There is also a lot of promise in using sensors and machine vision interpretation with convolutional neural networks (ConvNets or CNNs) which have proven effective in image recognition and classification in driverless cars and robot vision. One issue is the transmission of sensor data (particularly high definition video) in real time for analysis. This could be resolved by analysing the data locally on the vest, and transmitting interpretations, however, it is yet to be determined if available interpretation technology is small enough to be mobile. Another area for further investigation is how integrated audio, visual and other sensor data can be used to gain a picture of the offender's activities than high definition video alone. Biosensors (which are used in the monitoring of athlete’s condition) could also be used to monitor offenders’ emotional state. Stable communications are also necessary for the transmission of real time data and triggering of tasers. This would require a reliable 4G, or preferably signal in the offender’s home. If the data connection is lost, police officers would need to be called in. This is another argument for only using technological incarceration for lower risk offenders. Low battery charge levels on the tasering device would also trigger a police visit. Facial recognition technology also has the potential to allow monitoring of the gradual reintegration of offenders into society after their sentence has been served. Progress Technological incarceration using IoT systems is feasible, but its implementation is limited by social and legal concerns and challenges. Once these challenges and concerns have been addressed, it might be possible to trial technological incarceration on less dangerous offenders (elderly, female and white collar) in controlled conditions. If society does go down the path of technological incarceration, it is unlikely that people would be completely removed from offender management. In the case of a suspicious movement, an alarm could alert corrections officers and provide them with a visual feed to make a decision on the appropriate response. Once the technology has been proven, it might be possible to hand over more control of the response to the AI system, in a similar way that we are now allowing driverless cars to make judgement calls on the road. The manufacturing and supply of devices that could be used in technological incarceration is primarily based in the US at the moment, but there is potential for it to expand to Australia and other nations if society accepts its implementation. Sources: The content on this page was primarily derived from the following: Webinar titled “The Internet of Incarceration” by Professor Dan Hunter, Dean, Swinburne Law School
  6. The death of Building Management Systems as we know them

    Hey Tim good discussion topic. It certainly would be an interesting financial analysis comparing the cost of cloud based service versus a well delivered and managed BMS system and or the wired vs wireless solution. The issues we see appear to be predominantly caused by poorly engineered and commissioned systems coupled with maintenance contracts that do not add value. Using wireless sensors and other low cost sensing technologies technologies helps with initial capital cost but does not address the poor engineering and commissioning practices. Whilst I agree the sensing costs have dropped dramatically the financial model needs to take into account the fact that a wired point can last 30 plus years. Looking forward to the webinar Vince
  7. Australian Smart cities and infrastructure

    Efficient buildings and public lighting; access to clean energy and water supplies; the ability to travel efficiently; a sense of safety and security - these are the prerequisites modern cities must fulfill to stay competitive and provide a decent quality of life for citizens. The 3rd Annual Australian Smart Cities and Infrastructure Summit delivers a programme that offers solutions to these challenges. Link to further details: http://elm.aventedge.com/iot-asci-home Contact Waleed Ahmed for registration: waleed.ahmed@aventedge.com
  8. The death of Building Management Systems as we know them

    Great question Heath, If you turn up to the webinar you can ask the question yourself. Otherwise i will ask it for you. Cheers Tim
  9. Yes, it is so often the case that the benefit of a capital purchase is not the presence of capital itself, but the impact of that capital if properly managed. In those cases it doesn't make sense for a customer to purchase something they have no relationship with. BMS customers don't want thermometers, they want efficient climate control. Smart Parking customers don't want an array of sensors, they want data. Farmers don't want to manage ultrasound sensors, they just want to know if their tank has run dry. If you sell a widget, then you're incentivised to sell more widgets, even if that's a non-optimal way to solve the problem. But if you sell a service then you're incentivised to make that as effective as possible. But it does require a bit of future thought from both the customer and the supplier - at least with a capex the customer can say I'm willing to risk $x dollars, hope to break even in y years and after that is a bonus. Where as deciding to sign up for a service means you have a future risk of that service degrading or increasing in price or requiring on-going negotiation. Similarly for the supplier - selling at a margin means you can start at one and grow from there. Selling a service means taking a hit on the first few years until (hopefully) the economies of scale start to work in your favour. I'm starting to think that given the onus on the supplier to maintain service levels, provide updates and continually chase the security rabbit, that offering a service scheme is the only responsible thing to do. And that building in succession clauses that protect the customer from unforeseen changes will begin to be expected. So my question is, how long are you willing to bankroll the customer's purchase to provide a competitive upfront price? And what is your incentive to stick with a non-proprietary solution?
  10. Why would you buy a building management system at a huge upfront cost when you can get one for free, in return for monthly service fees that actually drive down the total cost of ownership? Following is a preview of a webinar on building management systems being run by this community on 6 March. I would be interested in your comments and questions we might ask of the presenter. The Internet of Things (IoT) is disrupting virtually all industries but it is particularly effective in challenging conventional approaches to control systems. Building Management Systems (BMS) are archetypal control systems with multiple sensors driving actuators to optimally maintain a comfortable working environment. Historically, large commercial and industrial projects have looked to proprietary systems from large vendors, partly because they were initially the only options on the table, and perhaps with a bit of the “if you buy IBM you won’t get sacked mentality”. However, the IoT is changing all the assumptions which underpinned previous procurement decision making and in particular it is opening up the market to competition from a wide range of start-ups. These start-ups aim to not just innovate the technology, but challenge the entire business model. The first impact of IoT on the BMS industry has been the dramatic plunge in the cost in sensing, communication and installation. Traditional BMS systems typically have a price tag in the order of AU$5000 per sensor point plus ongoing maintenance, and budgets typically allowed for a small number of devices. One consequence is that a large percentage of BMS systems are just used for alarms. Moving away from proprietary systems, that price point is now closer the $150 mark per month including maintenance, allowing thousands of sensors to be deployed for the same price. This opens the possibility of not just a finer level of control in more locations but an increased ability to diagnose system wide issues. In addition, the advent of new communication technologies in the form of Low Power Wide Area Networks is facilitating cheap secure communication without the need for wiring. The cost of data wiring is prohibitively expensive and wireless connection with low power devices that can run on a battery for years has been a game changer. There are other benefits as well, including LPWAN’s superior performance in building penetration, inbuilt security protocols and much longer battery life. Large BMS vendors have been responding to the challenge with their own versions of the “Industrial Internet of Things”, opening up their devices to be more interoperable with other systems and trading off their brand recognition to maintain market share. However, the procurement process remains the same with all the associated issues around the lowest cost tendering process and the adversarial relationships arising from dealing with faults during the Defects Liability Period. With the coming of IoT and all the associated start-ups, the competitive landscape has been radically altered. These challengers are now looking to escalate the challenge by upending the entire business model of the BMS industry – by doing away with set price contracts and delivering BMS as a service. One such company is Blue IoT, a Melbourne-based company that is now offering building management systems as a service, or more precisely, Software Data Analytics as a service. Blue IoT will be delivering a webinar to the Engineers Australia Applied IoT Engineering Community on 6 March 2018. Under this startup’s new business model, the client pays no upfront fee for the sensors or whatever associated building services such as HVAC that are included as part of the contract (depending if it is a new install or a refurbishment). Rather, the costs are absorbed in monthly service fees that include all maintenance and optimisation of the system. Importantly the service includes a human layer where data coming back from the system is analysed by electrical, mechanical and controls engineers who specialise in determining root causes of issues and fixing the problem the first time. The crux of this new business model is a guarantee that the system will deliver specified savings (if the project is a refurbishment) or function at an agreed performance level. If the system does not there are associated penalties for the service provider. Another big change is that the client owns the data and, if it serves out the agreed contract span, it also take ownership of the sensor and actuator hardware which is all non-proprietary. This allows the owner to change service providers if they wish, but of course the service provider will be doing their level best to keep their business. At the heart of this model is a move away from the adversarial relationships that have plagued the building industry. In an upcoming webinar (see below), Blue IoT founder Bob Sharon will explain how tenders are typically awarded on the basis of lowest price there is typically no margin for error – either in the delivery of the product or in the original specification. What results in buck passing from the lead contractor right down to the smallest suppliers and back to the client if they dare to ask for the smallest change to the original spec. With a service model, the building services integrator is completely incentivised to deal with all the problems and get the system performing at the highest level. There are a number of beneficial side effects arising from this change in responsibility for system performance. Typically, facility managers would see alerts relating to a particular part of the system, say a pump, and call the relevant contractor to fix it. However, the root cause of the problem may be elsewhere in the system and facilities mangers are not typically experts in diagnosing problems in what are increasingly complicated systems. However, service providers have the benefit of being able to collate data across the hundreds or thousands of different building management systems and sensors they manage and develop expertise not only in diagnosis but in preventative maintenance. A key game changer in service based IoT solutions is that all data is typically uploaded to the cloud where big data analytics can be usefully deployed to pro-actively monitor and optimise smart buildings and cities. Over time, machine learning will play an increasing a role in analytics, delivering a step change in performance. It is these kinds of IoT technologies that give service providers the confidence to offer performance guarantees. This paradigm shift of turning products into a service is at the heart of the IoT revolution. We see it over and over again in the most successful IoT startups. Swimming pool filtration systems are now being delivered free in return for a service contract guaranteeing crystal clear water quality. Garbage bins can be delivered free to Councils in return for a service contract guaranteeing they will be emptied just before they reach capacity. Success is rooted not just in technological innovation but in the reimagining of business models. Dr Tim Kannegieter is the Knowledge Manager at Engineers Australia charged with sharing knowledge around emerging technologies.
  11. Newcastle IoT Pioneers is a free, rapidly growing meetup group established way back in 2016, for anyone operating in the Greater Newcastle region looking to derive some value from the Internet of Things. We meet monthly and last year we had a full calendar of presentations from the likes of Meshed, Thinxtra, Newcastle City Council and Schneider Electric, as well as IoT superstars Stuart Waite and David Goad. Today I'm putting the call out early to try to book in some presenters for the year's events. I know there's interesting stories from the trenches to be told but I don't know how to find them! If you or someone you know would like to share your experiences with a friendly bunch of movers and shakers in Newcastle, please get in touch. We meet on the first Thursday of every month at a pub in Newcastle. Regards, Heath Raftery
  12. The Internet of Incarceration

    Hi Tim and Robert, Thank you for the webinar. As an engineer that works on the design of prisons, I have a couple of important questions: 1. Have you completed an estimate of number of corrections officers per offender? 2. Another risk I can see, is how would you protect the overall system from external penetration/hacking? Thanks again. Maciej
  13. Tim having difficulty with no log email?  Robert Relf   0408 999768

  14. The Internet of Incarceration

    Type your questions for today's webinar in the comments to this post. The webinar is on "The Internet of Incarceration" by Dan Hunter. During the webinar, you might like to comment on any of the presenter's points, or share your own experiences managing IoT Projects.
  15. Building Management Systems and IoT

    until
    Title: The death of Building Management Systems as we know them Presenter: Bob Sharon, Chief Innovation Officer, Blue IoT Description: Building Management Systems as a Service is a concept that is threating to change the building industry as the internet of things continues to disrupt virtually every industry and traditional engineering approaches. Cheaper internet connected sensors can now be used to saturate a building providing far more data points connected to advanced cloud based analytical systems that deliver superior performance. In a prime example of the “democratisation of data”, this presentation looks at how building owners are being empowered to own their data while allowing service providers to help them optimise the efficiency and sustainability of their facilities. This approach also facilitates auditing of the actual performance of building management systems during the critical Defects Liability Period. Security is managed through protocols that minimise the risk of devices being hijacked, hacked or used as channels to get to corporate networked computers and servers. About the presenter: Bob Sharon is a passionate “disruptor” and supporter of the blue economy, being deeply involved in how buildings can help shape a more sustainable environment while further reducing costs and risks. He sees IoT as a critical enabler and disruptor that will drive better business outcomes in a sustainable way. His focus is on efficient and innovative data centres in APAC, he is a NABERS accredited assessor who conducted the world’s first NABERS rating on a data centre (which was back in 2013) and he is a member of the executive council of the IoT Alliance Australia. Prior to founding Blue IoT in June 2016, Bob has held a number of roles in the smart buildings and data centre spaces. He is also currently Chief Innovation Officer for iHome Energy, Founder, CEO of Entrepreneur’s Angels and Non Executive Director of The Stardust Foundation. When: 12pm (NSW, Australia time) 6 March 2018. The presentation will last 30 minutes followed by 30 minutes question time. Where: The presentation by webinar Cost: This presentation is free to members of Engineers Australia (EA), the Australian Computer Society (ACS), the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) and IEEE. Just provide your membership number during registration for the event. The cost for non-members is $30. How to register: Please register on the Engineers Australia event system by clicking the register button above.
  16. Telstra switches on NB-IoT

    I have customers queueing up to get Things onto NB1 - anxiously awaiting availability of cost-effective data plan SIMs, and Telstra-certified Cat NB1 modules. It is fiendishly difficult getting reliable information on this. Does anyone have any insights they can share?
  17. Telstra switches on NB-IoT

    So odd they never name the technology. Like they're keeping their options open or something. Interesting that at the same time Verizon and AT&T in the states are doing the opposite, focusing on Cat-M1 and snubbing NB-IoT in favour of unlicensed technologies instead: https://medium.com/@patburns/verizon-and-at-t-are-taking-a-pass-on-nb-iot-69edae3a053c
  18. At that scale you'd need a sensor network to monitor your sensor network.
  19. Will this be the way of the future for major roads and infrastructure projects? More than 100,000 individual sensors stud the 1400-kilometer waterway, see link: https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/telecom/internet/a-massive-iot-sensor-network-keeps-watch-over-a-1400kilometer-canal
  20. Telstra switches on NB-IoT

    https://www.telstra.com.au/aboutus/media/media-releases/Telstra-adds-narrowband-capability-to-Australias-leading-IoT-network This refers to Cat NB1 (presumably).
  21. Asset Tracking with the IoT

    until
    Recording: This webinar has now passed. Members of Engineers Australia can view the recording for free on MyPortal. Logon and navigate to Functions > Tracking. Others can purchase the recording on EABooks. The list of all recordings can be viewed here. Presenter: Tony Lotzof, CEO and Founder of Leash It Description: Asset tracking is enjoying a resurgence as a complement to the asset management suite of tools due to the dramatically falling costs facilitated by the IoT. It is now possible to track tens of thousands of devices cheaply and deliver analytics that support applications around compliance, productivity and security. For example, mission critical assets, such as an ECG unit that must not be removed from an emergency room, can be monitored and alerts sent if required. Similarly, commonplace items such as laptops or fire extinguishers can be tracked to ensure they are not stolen. Nurses spend up to 30 minutes per shift looking for equipment and RTLS (Real Time Location Services) asset tracking can provide an app that allows them to go straight to what they need. Conversely, asset tracking can also be used to track the movement of people. One application is induction processes in construction, where alerts are raised if a new employee goes into an area they have not been inducted into or are not authorised to do so, reducing OH&S risks. A particular focus of this webinar is asset tracking inside large multi-story buildings, where current communication solutions can find it difficult to pinpoint the exact location of an object on a floor plan. This webinar looks at a particular solution to this challenge that makes use of low energy Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, multiple gateways and software to constantly map the location of assets within the infrastructure. Sensors for heat, humidity and accelerometer can be added to the suite as well. About the presenter: Tony founded Leash It in late 2014 after his bike was stolen from outside a café, while enjoying a coffee with friends. He wanted better way to secure his bike, quickly and easily, without carrying a chain. From this idea Cycle Leash was born and quickly morphed in to many more verticals and the company has had over 35,000 downloads of their App and is now available internationally. Leash It has evolved from a consumer product into commercial asset tracking and soon a smart cities solution. Prior to founding Leash It, Tony held IT roles in a number of businesses. When: 12pm (NSW time) 20 February 2018. The presentation will last 30 minutes followed by 30 minutes question time. Where: The presentation by webinar Cost: This presentation is free to members of Engineers Australia (EA), the Australian Computer Society (ACS), the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) and IEEE. Just provide your membership number during registration for the event. The cost for non-members is $30.
  22. until
    Predictive Maintenance Webinar Presented by Microsoft and Happiest Minds LIVE WEBINAR:1/11/2018 AT 10:00 AM PST DURATION:60 MINUTES ABSTRACT: Join us as we discuss Predictive Maintenance for Equipment Manufacturers. During the webinar we will show you how AI and IoT, connected and smart ecosystem can ensure equipment uptime and maintenance schedules using historical data. Register now for the upcoming 60 minute webinar! Learn and Apply: Prevent costly equipment failures. Avoid unscheduled downtime by analyzing streaming data to assess conditions, recognize warning signs, and service your equipment—before it fails. Learn from machine behavior to improve products. Capture and analyze data with machine-learning algorithms and use it to fine-tune processes and make modifications that improve product quality and increase customer satisfaction. Maximize uptime. Increase the efficiency of your fleet and factories by using machine learning to proactively and strategically schedule maintenance when assets aren’t in use. Register Today: http://bit.ly/ IoTinAction-Webinar About Speakers: Sudhama Vemuri Director Business Development, Partnerships & Alliances, HappiestMinds Sudhama is a business development leader in the Internet of Things (IoT) domain. With more than 17 years of experience in sales, new market development, account management in product engineering, smart energy and IoT, Sudhama has varied experience across large organizations like Wipro and NEC as well as IoT start-ups like Altiux Innovations and Cupola. He currently heads the partnerships and alliances for the IoT ecosystem at Happiest Minds. Neal Meldrum Sr. Industry Manager for Manufacturing & Resources Industry, Microsoft Neal is currently working as a Senior Industry Solutions Manager with the WW Discrete Manufacturing Group where he is responsible for Remote Monitoring and Predictive Maintenance scale solutions and industry Pod community management. He brings with him 20 years of experience in the Industrial Automation industry focusing on product development, application engineering, program management and cloud-based remote connectivity solutions. Neal enjoys the hands-on experience of developing and deploying IoT solutions using a variety of Microsoft technologies. Tom O’Reilly General Manager OEM Embedded, Microsoft Tom O’Reilly is a General Manager of the IoT Device Experience team globally at Microsoft. Tom leads the global field marketing and breadth sales teams that work with our IoT ecosystem to help OEM’s, ISV’s, SI’s, Distributors and Aggregators learn about and build devices, services and implement cloud solutions on the Azure platform. His management responsibilities include business development, sales, channels and alliances. Tom has extensive experience in the information technology industry. Prior to joining Microsoft, Tom held a variety of global and regional senior executive positions including sales, marketing, business operations, business transformation and application development within multinational companies such as Amazon Web Services, Dell and Lenovo. Originally from Sydney Australia, Tom has lived and worked in China, Singapore and the US for more than 15 years. CONTACT https://onlinexperiences.com/scripts/Server.nxp?LASCmd=AI:4;F:QS!10100&ShowKey=46586&LangLocaleID=1033&AffiliateData=HMMarketing
  23. Heritage of IoT

    ddfgd
  24. Newcastle IoT Pioneers

    until
    December: The Rise of Things - Opportunities and Risks Our December event is on, usual time, usual place: 6:30pm, Thursday, December 7th, 2017. Stag & Hunter Hotel, Mayfield. Upstairs function room - look for the staircase in the middle of the pub. This month I'm honoured to welcome David Goad, Fellow at the University of Sydney, IoT Strategy Consultant and author of "The Internet of Things from a Directors Perspective". David has kindly offered to lend us a little of his extensive experience advising entrepreneurs and enterprises on their IoT strategy. David will talk about the potential changes in business strategy, business models and organisational resources that the IoT will bring and the issues that business leaders would need to consider when developing their IoT strategy. As usual, outside the main event there will be a news recap, plus plenty of opportunity to talk business and tech with like-minded folk from the local area. Feel free to bring up a drink from the bar downstairs or even order a meal from the restaurant, plus there'll be free finger food after the talks. All are welcome, but please RSVP so we can get the catering right.
  25. Project Management for IoT

    Introduction Management of an IoT project is likely to pose challenges for those used to stand-alone product development, as it combines detailed product and technology development and application with systems engineering. While recognising and overcoming technical risks is necessary for all projects, it can be particularly critical for project management of IoT applications because of the complexity of the technology used, which may include a broad range of technologies involving several layers of the IoT architecture. This can lead to project teams needing to seek assistance from suppliers, systems engineers, and expert consultants to understand unfamiliar technologies, their risks, how to specify technical requirements, and the best technologies for the solution being developed. Other important considerations are: identifying legal and regulatory requirements and how to comply with them determining what team skills and competencies are required reducing complexity by implementing a staged approach to development. Reducing complexity IoT projects can be complex compared with other engineering projects due to the range of technologies and architectural levels they encompass. Dividing the development project into discrete stages reduces the complexity of each of those stages, and allows for review points between the stages. The following development stages can help to reduce the complexity of IoT projects: Conceptualisation: What are we trying to do? What does the user want? Specification, planning, estimating: What is the scope, duration, cost? Design and development hardware: produce schematics and circuit boards, or integrate third-party modules firmware, software: connectivity, functionality Verification and validation: verification determines if the integrated hardware and software performs to specification, and validation tests whether the specification meets user requirements. In some cases, the specification may need to be changed to more accurately reflect requirements and the design, development, verification and validation repeated Regulatory compliance testing, certification: electromagnetic compatibility, electrical safety and product safety requirements as for other engineering projects and products, and specifically radio communications compliance Production engineering: determine if product is feasible to manufacture and test Manufacturing, deployment and maintenance. Technical specification, planning and estimating Specifying and documenting the user’s technical requirements in a technical specification needs to be completed before embarking on the the design stage of IoT projects, as if a product or system is developed without a well-documented and agreed technical specification, project cost and time can increase, and the relationship with the user can be adversely affected. A technical specification defines what the system needs to do in terms of high-level user requirements and functional requirements. There is often a difference between what the user asks for and what they actually need. IoT engineers need to interpret the user's non-technical requests and convert them into a meaningful technical specification that can be implemented in the project. The specification should include the following system characteristics: Function Performance Environmental: eg. is a waterproof enclosure required for an outdoor installation? Reliability: how long does the system need to operate, what maintenance is required, what downtime is allowable? Power and energy requirements: battery-life required to meet reliability and performance requirements for battery-powered systems. Also budget constraints, how power will be supplied, and the duty cycle. Once the required system characteristics are defined, the constraints directly affecting development, and their technical solutions should be specified. Key areas to be addressed include physical constraints such as size and weight of systems and devices, the complexity for the end user, and whether the system will be plug and play, or have other deployment requirements. Budget, time, quality restraints and regulatory and legal compliance also need to be addressed and documented. Useful tools for documenting timelines are work breakdown structures (WBS) and Gantt charts, as shown below. Diagram courtesy of Geoff Sizer, Genesys Electronics Design The WBS needs to be taken to a level of granularity that allows reasonable estimating to be done. In some cases, that might be down to a person week's worth of work. Sometimes it might be to a person day or even finer granularity to give clarity on what needs to be done and the interactions of the task. Budget estimates should include costs of standards, safety and regulatory compliance and safety testing, which can be of comparable cost to the technological development. For startups without a good understanding of the costs and timelines in the IoT space, it is a good idea to seek help from more experienced practitioners, or specialist consultants to ensure that estimates are reasonable and don't underestimate project complexity. Design, development and documentation The first step in the design and development stage is to identify the key technology elements required. For example, sensors, actuation, micro-controllers and energy source (eg. rechargeable/alkaline batteries, solar cells or mains power). The intelligence of the platform needs to be determined: for example, a complex or simple micro-controller. The next step is to determine what communication technologies will be used to connect to the IoT, perform data collection and data analytics, and select user interfaces, and data presentation for the user, which could include interactive analytics tools. Finally, deployment, commissioning, fault detection and maintenance need to be designed. All design decisions need to be documented in detail, to ensure that all aspects of the project are considered and nothing is missed. For example, at the conceptual phase, a project plan and a functional requirements specification might be produced, and during development, manuals might be developed for both hardware and software/firmware to document how the functional specification will be implemented. Through the life of the project, those documents evolve and have detail added to them, and ultimately become a design description for what's being developed or deployed. Other documentation could include: communications protocol specification, electromagnetic compatibility compliance plans, certification plans, test plans, and also deployment plans, and manufacturing documentation suites. It is good practice to recognise the documentation requirements upfront, and build them into the project plan. Then ensure that project team participants produce the documentation as they go along, to avoid issues with incomplete definition and a rush to produce documentation at project completion. Staying in control To maintain control during the course of the development project and the transition into manufacture and deployment into the field, it's important to establish configuration control. Software repository tools can be used to keep control of software releases and make sure that you have a firm definition of the software that you are testing and deploying. Document release and engineering change notification (ECN) procedures also need to be established for the initial documentation release and updates to maintain version control. This avoids problems such as providing out of date documentation to manufacturers. Issue tracking is also essential during the course of development, release and pilot trials, and through the manufacturing process. Several issue tracking systems are available, to track problems such as software bugs and suggested product improvements. Issue tracking systems should not be used as a substitute for properly updating the system specifications when changes are made. Effective and regular communication between team members is essential, and online, cloud-based collaboration tools are available to facilitate this, although they are only as good as the team who use them. Finally, a well-defined team leader is needed for the project, to make judgements and decisions about how the project proceeds. For the engineering team, this may be the lead engineer, who both project manages and is a technical participant in the project. Technical risks and standards In an IoT project, there are risks arising from the broad range of complex technologies used. Electrical safety, in particular shipping lithium ion batteries by air is an issue, as they can be barred from aeroplanes. Imported products may not meet local regulatory requirements, particularly in the case of electromagnetic and radio communications compliance. For instance they may not cover local frequency bands. As there are severe legal penalties for deploying non-compliant systems, this is an area which needs to be covered in the risk assessment. Resource capability is another risk. Does the project team have the depth and breadth of skills to do the job? Or are there some of the technology elements that are stretching team capability? Intellectual copyright and design security are particular concerns, and regulatory compliance requirements and licensing needs need to be identified. These areas are discussed in detail on the legal considerations for IoT page. One recommendation is to make sure that there is a copyright claim at the top of every file of your source code, along with any necessary the comments and descriptions. During the risk assessment, engineers are responsible for identifying and complying with the relevant standards for the specific project to ensure product safety. If the engineers need assistance with identifying relevant standards, specialist organisations (eg. OzTest and EMC Technologies) can provide consulting services to assist with this process. Quality management standards, including the general commercial standard ISO 9001, and specific quality management standards for product areas with more stringent quality requirements (such as ISO 13485 for medical devices) can be used as a tool to put in place consistent and effective project management methodology as described on this page. Team skills and competencies, when to seek expert advice IoT projects, like all others, require sound project management and team leadership is a given. A well-defined leader and project manager needs to be appointed and recognised by the team as being in control. Systems engineering expertise is also important. Because of the complexity of IoT projects, it requires skills beyond electronics and firmware. Electronics hardware design requirements can range from simple to quite complex, as can the software and software engineering skills required for individual projects. Other specialist knowledge required includes, but is not limited to: communications protocols, antenna design, wireless communications, embedded firmware, cloud-based server software and data analysis and processing, and App development for user interfaces. Security is also a major concern. Compliance testing, laboratory services, manufacturing services, deployment and logistics may also be outsourced if the skills and capacity are not available in-house. Most teams will be stretched in mustering all the skills in-house to be able to deal with everything they need to do. It is important to recognise these limitations upfront, and then supplement the project team with the required specialist consultants to do tasks outside of team expertise quickly and efficiently. If a company is involved in IoT technology development on an ongoing basis, the required skills should be brought into the team over time. There should also be team members with the responsibility of keeping abreast of developments in the rapidly evolving IoT technology space. The relationship between expert consultants and in-house project teams will vary depending on the knowledge and experience that the team has in the IoT area. If knowledge and experience is low, an expert consultant would guide and manage the staged project as described in the previous sections. Where knowledge levels are higher, the in-house team might do the high-level project management and control. Areas where there are skill gaps would be delegated to consultants. This is best done by delegating work packages (eg. for electronics hardware) and communicating regularly to make sure that consultants are keeping on track with overall system development. Ideally, an integrated and collaborative approach should be taken to avoid an “us-and-them” situation. Being an informed purchaser Given the complexity of IoT technology, it is difficult for clients adopting IoT to acquire the requisite knowledge to keep control of the project, and not just delegate the full ownership of the project to a sub-contractor. Seeking knowledge from online communities such as this one, or engaging an independent consultant or consulting engineer can be helpful in becoming an informed purchaser. The IoT Alliance Australia is another group which brings together companies in the IoT space and seeks to help them gain understanding of technologies. Project management and collaboration tools While tools should not be used as “crutches”, they can make project management and associated processes more efficient when used in conjunction with good practice. Gantt charts can be prepared in Microsoft Project, or a project management tool suite that has the capabilities needed to manage the project. Some available products are cloud-based. Software repositories for configuration control include Version and Github. Collaboration tools include Confluence and OurTeam for PC. JIRA is a cloud-based issue tracking and development tool which has been used in some IoT projects to record and deal with bugs and product improvements. Sources: Content on this page was primarily sourced from: Webinar titled ‘Project Management for the Internet of Things’ by Geoff Sizer, CEO Genesys Electronics Design
  26. Project Management for IoT

    To answer Steve's question on project management tools. We have assessed and just committed to a 24 month license for http://cammsproject.com/,for integrated project management across the company, with an integrated timesheet system which they are modifying to tuit our needs (for a fee). It provides some collaboration facilities. I will let the community know how it goes down the track. On JIRA, we use it is a number of ways. I would commend it to others - especially good as it it Australian-developed, wo we can support local industry. For software development, we have an inward-facing setup on our server for the developers ot track iissues and bugs. For software support, we have an outward-looking cloud based setup for each project, whicht he customer can access. We also use Jirafor ittue tracking for our ISO 13485 (medical) Quality Management System (like ISO9001 on sterouids). This has a customised work flow to magane issue trackingiun accrodance with ISO13485, including steps for risk managemt. We use this JIRA setup for Corrective and preventative Action management. The same work flowcan be used generally by omitting the medical product specific steps. We use Subversion for software configuration control, on the basis that it is the "least worst" - have looked at more modern systems but nothing much out there impresses. IMO best tool for all of these things is a sharp human brain. Without this, the tools generallty make things worse than doing nothing!
  27. Project Management for IoT

    Not a question. For reference, we also use JIRA for issue tracking and development. And Atlassian Confluence to control all our project documentation. Also we use Altium for pcb design.
  1. Load more activity
×