MSD Project Risk Assessment

ID / Risk Item / Cause / Effect / Likelihood / Severity / Importance / Action to Minimize Risk / Owner
1 / Micro controller burns out / Power mismanagement, stalled motors, shorted wires / Device will not be operational / 3 / 2 / 6 / Sockets, good wiring / BJ
2 / Software for testing detection system does not identify objects / Poor software planning and algorithm development, bad software design / The haptic feedback does not respond properly, poor response time / 2 / 3 / 6 / Create a good software building plan, test plan and look into different algorithms and methods / BJ
3 / Haptic handle and testing detection system fail to integrate / Poor design, miscalculation / Poor/no communication between systems resulting in improper/no haptic guidance / 2 / 3 / 6 / Check and double check all calculations and perform more than sufficient research on analog and digital communication circuitry / Aaron
4 / Not meeting customer expectations / Not enough communication with customer. Too many specs. Ineffective project planning / Customer is not able to use prototype for future projects. Impacts MSD evaluation grade. / 2 / 3 / 6 / Keep in contact with customer. Follow and continually reevaluate project plan and risk assessment. Focus on the most important specs. / Jake
5 / Not able to meet with customers this week (10/7 – 10/11) / Schedule conflicts, don’t respond to emails / Not able to make concept selection, can’t finalize requirements (detection system) / 2 / 3 / 6 / Follow-up daily (email, phone, office hours) / Lauren
6 / Parts ordered not obtained in time / Lack of planning during MSD I for POS, shipping issues, supplier complications / Behind on building, order different parts or rush order, over budget, prevent from testing other parts / 2 / 2 / 4 / Stay ahead of schedule, identify the critical path, have purchase orders ready for DDR / Jess
7 / Battery malfunction / Too much current being pulled, heat generated is not being removed affectively, batteries themselves / Loss of power supply, damage components / 2 / 2 / 4 / Functioning power management, removal of heat, sealed off from dirt / BJ
8 / Over budget / Not enough budgeted to begin with, overspending in procurement of materials in determination of concept selection, poor budget of materials, poor initial design lacking all components, misuse and breaking of parts during assembly and fabrication / Displeased Customer and Guide / 2 / 2 / 4 / Make a very detailed budget of materials, design the product without missing a single component, ask for more money from the customer when the draft bill of materials is made and considerably under-budget, limit spending on concept selection, use existing safe fabrication techniques and consult experienced professionals prior to manufacturing and assembly / Aaron
9 / 5 volunteers for user test are not established in time / Communication issues, volunteer backs out / Contact and relationship not built with volunteers for test / 2 / 2 / 4 / Communicate with customer and ABVI / Lauren
10 / Cane does not stay together, durability failure / Parts are not secured onto cane, user misuse, shock absorbent / Parts could disconnect from the cane, structure of cane can break, loose wiring will break apart / 1 / 3 / 3 / Housing for components, all components are assembled inside of handle to withstand stress and fatigue
11 / Not completing software component / Poor time management, problems with software / Electrical components won’t work, user won’t receive feedback / 1 / 3 / 3 / Start early, ask for help if needed, learn program ahead of time / Lauren
12 / User cannot detect in which direction rollers are moving in / Miscalculations, poor design, fail to test / Misguided user, don’t meet customer requirements / 1 / 3 / 3 / Create a user test to establish height of rollers and area in hand that provides best directional feedback / Jess
13 / Integration between hardware and software fails / Poor hardware/software choice / User won’t receive haptic feedback / 1 / 3 / 3 / Have electrical schematics reviewed by SMEs, create bread board / BJ
14 / Detection is ineffective / Poor design, sensors do not detect certain mediums, sensors were not calibrated, / Not fast enough, does not detect the correct things / 1 / 3 / 3 / Make sure the sensors used can detect all objects, research multiple algorithm development methods, and develop a feature to calibrate sensors. / BJ
15 / Team Member leaves team / Expulsion/financial issues/choice/family emergency / Risk of losing expertise the team member may have. Heavier workload on team members. / 1 / 3 / 3 / Communicate with team. Share and decentralize expertise. Document all work and systems. Allow for buffer time in project plan to accommodate possible higher workloads. / Jake
16 / Cane gets dropped repeatedly on the ground / Accidental/Falls / Damage or loss of parts, cane no longer works, insufficent durability analysis / 1 / 3 / 3 / Fatigue analysis done on all components, casing for any components on outside of handle or cane, analysis done on handle material / Lauren
17 / Excessive tapping / User cane technique, learning curve with our cane, / Damage or loss of parts, cane no longer works / 1 / 3 / 3 / Make sure components are secure within their housings. / BJ
18 / Group can’t agree on concept / Stubborn, set on the person’s own concept / Behind on critical path, won’t meet deliverables for DDR, conflicts in group / 0 / 3 / 0 / Consensus, reflect back to team values, consider compromises / Jess
19 / Material covering handle tears with consistent wear and produce excessive friction / Insufficient selection and analysis of handle material / Handle components are left uncovered and exposed, material is uncomfortable to hold on to for long periods of time / 1 / 3 / 3 / Appropriate analysis of material, Acquiring material early in process for testing purposes / Lauren
20 / Selected power and components produce excessive heat / Insufficient selection and analysis of handle components / Handle will be uncomfortable for user / 1 / 2 / 2 / Analysis on heat produced by components, include a fan in the design of the handle / Jake
21 / Necessary facilities and personnel are not available when needed for building and testing / Requesting facilities too late, contacting personnel too late / Behind schedule on necessary building/ testing / 1 / 2 / 2 / Establish early on what facilities are needed and what personnel are necessary to speak to / Jess
22 / Uncoordinated team schedules / Busy workload for other classes / Deliverables not reviewed with team when needed, late deliverables / 2 / 1 / 2 / Coordiateappropiately with team's schedules, plan schedule time for MSDII by the end of MSDI / Jess
23 / Handle is too heavy for desired weight (1 lb) / Not properly calculating weight / Do not meet customer requirements / 1 / 1 / 1 / Make sure that everything is the desired weight / Lauren
24 / Stress applied on roller breaks components / Stress and fatigue analysis
25 / Assembly between handle and cane fails to hold the two together / Insufficient analysis and design / Handle and cane become two separate pieces, components inside of handle are exposed
Likelihood scale / Severity scale
1 - This cause is unlikely to happen / 1 - The impact on the project is very minor. We will still meet deliverables on time and within budget, but it will cause extra work
2 - This cause could conceivably happen / 2 - The impact on the project is noticeable. We will deliver reduced functionality, go over budget, or fail to meet some of our Engineering Specifications.
3 - This cause is very likely to happen / 3 - The impact on the project is severe. We will not be able to deliver, or what we deliver will not meet the customer's needs.
“Importance Score” (Likelihood x Severity) – use this to guide your preference for a risk management strategy
Prevent / Action will be taken to prevent the cause(s) from occurring in the first place.
Reduce / Action will be taken to reduce the likelihood of the cause and/or the severity of the effect on the project, should the cause occur
Transfer / Action will be taken to transfer the risk to something else. Insurance is an example of this. You purchase an insurance policy that contractually binds an insurance company to pay for your loss in the event of accident. This transfers the financial consequences of the accident to someone else. Your car is still a wreck, of course.
Accept / Low importance risks may not justify any action at all. If they happen, you simply accept the consequences.