Sunday, 26 August 2012

System Life-Cycle



We all have one, in fact these days most of us have two! Our kids have one and generally know how to use it far better than we do... it’s a generational thing... although having said that they now make some whose bits are big enough for even Grandpa to use! You see them everywhere.... at work, at home, on the bus, in the car.....although hopefully not in the hands of the driver! They are banned at school... and concerts....if you can find them, because some of them are so small you often can’t find them at all?! Or may even forget they are in your pocket....
Big, small, fancy, loud, vibrating, pimped out or disposable, mobile phones are the modern day gadget in everyone’s lives. The question is, where did they come from... and where do they go when their short but colourful existence is over? What is the Life Cycle of this humble transportable device?

Let’s explore....

Concept to detailed design:

The initial design of the phone affects each stage of its life cycle and will have an influence on materials and components used and the longevity of styles incorporated. The average consumer life of a mobile phone is between 18 and 24 months, mostly because they are often considered a visible extension of our personalities and are consistently upgraded and changed according to the latest fashion trend.  Therefore in today’s competitive market of portable communication technology, having a phone with the most beeps, whistles and do-dads is possibly more important to the consumer than durability, performance and aptitude of the product. Phone design is a symptom of peer pressure and like sheep, the largest consumerist market of 15 to 30 yr olds flock to secure the latest market release in fear of being the only person who would dare to whip out their I-phone 1 as opposed to the 4... Oh the shame! 

Errors that can occur at the design stage include failure to ensure user-friendly features such as keypads that are not too sensitive, applications that are  uncomplicated or battery covers that are easy to remove; let’s not forget about various phone chargers... who doesn’t have a drawer full of chargers that no longer match your current phone?! Other issues relate to phones that are too big, too small, too convoluted, lack technical features, insufficient memory or inadequate battery life. As there are currently several thousand designs available, new variations are generally just a ‘tweaking’ of previous models. Durability is a common design concern as phones are regularly dropped, kicked, sat on and washed. Ensuring that mobile phone components are recyclable and/or disposable is another concern as it is currently estimated that over 150, 000 phones are disposed of each year!  




Construction:
Mobile phones are constructed from a variety of materials, some are hazardous including Mercury, lead, lithium metallic oxide and nickel-cadmium, many of which are extracted during mining processes. The circuit boards also include copper, gold, silver, lead and zinc. Issues here include the fact that some of these materials are known as ‘persistent toxins’ (Wirefly 2009) and can remain in the environment for many years after disposal.
The manufacturing method includes delicate, intricate processes with the potential for mechanical error as they are churned out on the assembly line of up to 50,000 a day. From the following u-tube video you can see that although most of this is done robotically, there is still a need for human assistance which can increase likelihood of error.

Commissioning:

The initial design and advertising of a mobile phone will later affect its commissioning. The mobile phone market is hugely competitive and failures to understand the market, adequately advertise, ensure availability and offer competitive service, warranties and upgrades can compromise this phase of the life cycle.

Operating/Maintaining:

The part I tend to over-look about purchasing high-tech devices is the mismatch between the ‘high-tech’ gadgetry and my ‘low-tech’ brain! For example, I only discovered how to activate the wi-fi hotspot while away at Residential school last week on a phone I have owned for 18 mths! (which by current standards makes it obsolete and ready for renewal). After a particular function disappeared from my home screen I thought I was rather clever in re-finding it in the ‘ap market’ and dragging it back to whence it came, only when I clicked on it, it failed to perform appropriately. My teenage son later informed me that it was because I had failed to make it into a ‘widget’.... a whatthe??!

I gave up trying to find the ‘aeroplane mode’ in a hurry to board a flight once and not having my password on hand in order to shut the phone down, I stuffed it into the bottom of my backpack and prayed I did not receive a call which would cause the plane to fall out of the sky to the accusing stares of my fellow passengers! Our Lecturer Geoff has now fortunately eased this particular concern... 
 

Decommissioning:

Mobile phones have a rather short life span and often end up as technological landfill (Wirefly 2009), producing an estimated 65,000 tonnes of waste!!  Although there are several avenues of recycling available to consumers this is often not advertised sufficiently and the generated waste is rapidly becoming a universal environmental concern.
Mobile phone designers, manufactures and retailers have a global obligation to find and encourage solutions to this emergent issue, so that the end-user can continue to enjoy the vast array of new and exciting products still to come.
The following u-tube video explains further....


And finally, another clever and fascinating video on the life cycle of the mobile phone...

References

Wirefly, 2009. The Life Cycle of a Cell Phone. [Online]
Available at: http://www.wirefly.com/learn/wireless_news/the-life-cycle-of-a-cell-phone/
[Accessed 23 August 2012].

Friday, 3 August 2012

2012.... Rise of the Machines...


This term when we were asked to consider a human-machine system along with potential Human Factor issues and mismatches, the one that immediately sprung to mind was the dreaded self-serve checkout. Admittedly I enthusiastically awaited the arrival of these new devices at my local supermarket.... short queues, no dreaded small talk from uninterested operators asking “How are you” without really caring for your response, and simple processing; I mean come on, I am an educated adult studying a dual Bachelor degree.. How hard can it be?

What the supermarkets had failed to advertise was that ‘HAL’ (the computer from ‘2001 A Space Odessy’) had in fact survived and had integrated himself into the electronic personalities of their self-checking systems, along with his twisted sense of humour and penchant for evil antics!

Self-serve checkouts are equipped with several seemingly obvious components designed to perform various functions, money in, money out, eftpos capabilities and print receipt slots. Individually each element of the arrangement makes sense, each a necessary piece of puzzle, a system designed to simplify the shopping process by rewarding the user with efficient service, a sense of achievement and a basket of groceries! 
However, when all these bells and whistles are combined the innocent operator finds themselves faced with a blipping, beeping, flashing malevolent machine and having to look in several different places at once, (up, down, across and under) all whilst the evil robot, imbibed with an impatient attitude, issues repetitive and annoying commands like ‘insert coins first and then cash’ (Why? The Anarchist in me wants to try.. just once, to put the cash in first....) “Look up item”, “insert item in bagging area” (can’t imagine where else I was going to put it....) “remove item from bagging area” (I just put it there!) “Unexpected item in bagging area” (I have noticed this mostly happens with confectionery...) then “do you want a receipt?” (Well as tempting as it is by this point to politely advise the machine what it can do with this particular offer, I am worried that if I don’t have evidence that I have paid for my purchase, when I “remove bags from bagging area” alarms will sound, lights will start flashing and a voice will start screaming “Thief encountered in bagging area one!”

In summary this human-machine interface consists of:

      A self-serve check-out with varying components to aid the operator in performing the function of scanning, weighing and paying for individual grocery items  

     An innocent shopper whose demeanor rapidly diminishes from patiently confident to confused, harassed and highly stressed.. 

        An equally tense, hassled and impatient shopping attendant whose function it is to placate the demands of the malicious hardware and beleaguered customers.... 

    Smirking check-out operators overlooking the entire process from beneath their plastic smiles and smoothly running registers!

I suspect the system goal probably differs in expectation between the consumer and the warped humour of the designers....

The Human Factor issues become even more apparent when just as you think you have mastered the idiosyncrasies and various portals of the machine, you change supermarkets only to find that the ‘money in’ slot has been switched with the ‘money out’ and the receipt window has disappeared altogether?!

Potential relationship mismatches would be that there are far too many things happening at once, the system would need consistent calibration to ensure that bagging weights are identified, all controls and voice guidance are in English (even though the responses are mostly in French...) and each supermarket chain has decided in its wisdom to make sure no two components are in the same place, size, shape or configuration as their competitor?!

The moral of this critique is that humans, in trying to be clever, have once again been outsmarted by a machine. As Hal would explain it I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do... and “It can only be attributable to human error....”

He may be right.....



Monday, 30 July 2012

It's a wrap!



For the past five years I have been studying a Bachelor of Occupational Health and Safety; as I came to the final stage of my degree and the requirement to complete six co-plan subjects I found myself at an impasse. The choices ranged from Management; I am no leader and prefer to follow quietly in the flock (which is really to say I prefer to have others think for me!)... Health Promotion (which apparently does not include the walk to McDonald's after clubbing at 3am).... and Environmental subjects. Now as a budding Safety Professional I am well aware that the E in HSE requires workplaces to consider the detrimental effects that its industry has on the surrounding environment; that water is becoming a scarce commodity, and that we are slowly suffocating in a carbon induced vapour cloud, but only if we can keep our heads above the tides as the rising oceans, meted out by the melting ice-caps, as a result of greenhouse gasses, threaten to overwhelm humanity! However.... the idea of tree-hugging sessions in mangrove swamps and testing atmospheres to ensure the removal of impurities that rate lower than my teenage sons’ bedrooms, sadly does not inspire me the way it should. By the grace of good fortune 2012 opened the door to a new pathway, a trail blazoned with the brilliance of common sense, a missing piece of the OHS puzzle so appropriate that I wonder how it was ever over-looked?!

Generally, students of safety have been taught to recognise risk by rote, to follow a checklist mentality, and to control identified hazards with a set of prescribed and textbook treatments. However, a new phenomenon has occurred, a course designed to drag the robotic mind of the safety practitioner out from under the protected shell of regulatory requirement, fire up a few neurons and climb out of the carefully constructed boxes that ensure they function is a similar manner to worker ants on a picnic. Students of the new Accident Forensics course have been obliged to go where few have dared  tread before; they have been encouraged, nay required, to do something that is both foreign and uncomfortable, that flies in the face of traditional learning principles... Students of this new degree have been asked, to THINK! 

 

Actually it gets worse, students have been requested to think about thinking?! They have been taught to observe and face up to their own perceptions, beliefs and convictions and to confront their contextual reality. They have been challenged to broaden their focus both inwards and outwards simultaneously, a veritable game of mental twister! We have been asked to use a word that is often disciplined or discouraged from our psyches before we are old enough to start school; a word generally frowned upon in academic halls, a word so foreign and so uncomfortable that it took several practice attempts to utter its syllable. A small word, but one with the power to change the mindset of intellectually hardened adults, with the authority to open doors into a world of possibility that until now had been blanketed in mystery, and to challenge the acuity of everything we thought we knew until now; the word is “WHY”....

Previously I believed this small, three letter word would elicit a reasonably simple response, certainly from my own parenting memories the word “why” was generally responded with “because”.... quid pro quo. What I have learnt is that there are many ways to employ this word and apply its request when faced with a problematic situation. As investigators we are predominantly working backwards, post apocalyptic event, to discover the precursors leading up to and inflaming the situation; the chicken crossed the road, “why”... to get to the other side “why”... what?! Isn’t that the end? Root cause defined, problem solved, and job well done? Apparently not. It appears if we want to prevent any more adventurous chickens from crossing bustling highways and avoid wheels disease, it is imperative to ascertain the reasons behind the treacherous journey to being with... I know right?! The question WHY is asked until it is clear that the origin has been defined (after several Whys it was established that Charlie Chicken had crossed the road to digest the grain, that had been spilled beside the neighbours old farm shed, through a rusty hole in the wheelbarrow that was being used to transport it to the fields for ploughing.... and that Charlie had missed breakfast).

Now I know I mentioned that despite Steve Irwin being my hero I am in no hurry to run naked through a pine forest, singing Kumbaya and cuddling drop bears, however disaster met environment when our lateral thinking threw down roots, grew branches and blossomed into Event trees. Once again it was revealed that every aspect of an incident was a branch forking from the tree containing multiple trajectories of possibility and insight. Admittedly my foliage was a little sparse but with hard work and a bit of fertilizer I predict a rainforest of expanding ideas and new concepts will be cultivated.

For the visually creative, (and students who have not yet progressed past join the dots) the Accimap was introduced. All of the factors that had been carefully teased out with persistent questioning (not unlike nagging) and/or cultured into plantations of manicured vegetation, were now categorised into various elements and levels in neat little boxes.... which was then systematically annihilated by linking arrows which criss-crossed between levels and within their own parameters, providing evidence of the Swiss-cheese effect; for one element to contribute to the outcome it is generally preceded by another. The result although worthy of Picasso, can get complicated as it is often too easy to get carried away with linkages; however it assisted in establishing the previously unconsidered connections between root cause and outcome. The next trick was to ascertain if the evidence clearly dictated the conclusion.

Argument and Reasoning do not usually compliment the other, however the role of the investigator is to deduce from the evidence whether the hypothesis is sound. Admittedly whilst I am never short of an argument, I found my ability to apply Inductive reasoning more challenging than expected. Learning the concept of strong and weak, valid and invalid arguments has afforded me the opportunity to rewind and replay previous conversations and explore old evidence with new insight; until now I was pretty sure all my arguments (I prefer advisories) were both strong and valid! One particularly confrontational task involved conducting a web-site investigation to establish content validity; this was a confronting and difficult journey as I struggled to accept that my personal tutor, Mr Google, would have ever considered leading me astray. The theory of Deductive reasoning taught me to dissect the information provided to establish if the premise matched the conclusion, and has me wondering if I should have followed the advice of my 6 year old self who realised at a remarkably young age that all boys are yukky!

As with all courses I began the term seeking answers; the difference with Accident Forensics is that in order to find the answers you must first learn to ask the right questions, however it doesn’t stop there...... The answers must then be broken down, dissected, queried, expanded, joined, validated or discarded. Like a well drawn Accimap each new concept this term has linked to the other and a picture is beginning to form in my mind. Some of the lines are a little hazy still, and like the newly created synapses of my brain, some associations have not yet been accomplished. What I have established is that my feet are planted firmly on this journey of enlightenment and I have become engrossed in connecting the dots and fitting the pieces to form an image of the completed puzzle that is slowly revealing itself before me (“upside down Miss Jane!” ).

To conclude on a serious note....
Throughout the term I have experienced a range of emotions within the stories of Challenger, Titanic, Bhopal and Texas City; from sadness, to disappointment, then anger and finally resolve; to take away from these tragedies key findings, to be used in future to prevent similar catastrophes.
I have always been a bit rebellious, often looking for opportunities to upset the status quo and I am rarely challenged intellectually in a way that excites me and piques my insatiable hunger for knowledge. Accident Forensics has afforded me the opportunity to renew my enthusiasm for learning and experiment with innovative approaches to problem solving. A large part of my role as a Safety Professional is to investigate work related incidents and until this term my manner and reasoning has been one-dimensional. I have already had the opportunity to apply some of the  concepts learned this term, and just last week, whilst completing an investigation and facing the frustration of differing versions of events by two parties, the theory ‘Triangulation of Evidence’ came to mind; seeking out a third witness to the incident immediately simplified and clarified the opposing statements.

My role in Safety is to protect workers from incidents that could result in harm and prevent reoccurrences of dangerous situations; there is no doubt in my mind that this course will provide me with the necessary skills to conclusively establish the causation factors so that appropriate treatments can be applied. I believe the skills required to succeed in this degree are ones that require the maturity to face our pre-conceived realities with an open mind and an ability to colour outside the lines.