greenbay.usc.edu€¦ · Web viewGoogle Maps. MySQL. Android Studio. Market Trend. Google Maps is the most widely used mapping software and its accuracy in location finding is the

Feasibility Evidence Description (FED)

Tour Conductor

Team-05

Name RoleAnkush H Prasad System Architect, Project Manager,

Prototyper/Builder.Ajay Kumar G C Project Manager, Life Cycle Planner

Prototyper/Builder.Aadithya B Requirements Engineer,

Prototyper/Builder.Andrew Han IIV&V, Quality Focal Point,

Prototyper/Builder.Joseph Mouawad Operations Concept Engineer,

Prototyper/Builder.Manas Yadav Feasibility Analyst, Prototyper/Builder.Rohit Ravindra Life Cycle Planner, Prototyper/Builder.

10/18/2015

FED_FCP_F15a_T05_V2.1 i Version Date: 11/30/15

Feasibility Evidence Description (FED) Version 2.1

FED_FCP_F15a_T05_V2.1 ii Version Date: 11/30/15


Version HistoryDate Author Version Changes made Rationale

10/06/15 Manas Yadav 1.0 Added the NDI/NCS Evaluation

and Evidences, Cost estimation and ROI

To initiate the documentation of the NDI/NCS evaluation and results

This document is an important part of the Valuation Commitment Package

10/18/15 Manas Yadav 1.1 Added various changes suggested

by the TA after FCR/ARB review.

To make document consistent with the requirements of the course.

11/22/15 Manas Yadav 2.0 Updated the sections Made the changes suggested by

feedback from TA after grading

To improve the document and make it consistent with the requirements of the course.

11/30/15 Manas Yadav 2.1 Fixed the capability requirements Added more evolutionary

feasibility evidence

To improve the document by ensuring all the progress is tracked properly into it.

DC Package

FED_FCP_F15a_T05_V2.1 iii Version Date: 11/30/15


FED_FCP_F15a_T05_V2.1 iv Version Date: 11/30/15


Table of Contents Feasibility Evidence Description (FED).......................................................................................................................i

Version History.............................................................................................................................................................ii

Table of Contents.........................................................................................................................................................iii

Table of Tables.............................................................................................................................................................iv

Table of Figures.............................................................................................................................................................v

1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Purpose of the FED Document......................................................................................................................1

1.2 Status of the FED Document.........................................................................................................................1

2. Process Feasibility..................................................................................................................................................2

3. Risk Assessment.....................................................................................................................................................4

4. NDI/NCS Feasibility Analysis...............................................................................................................................5

4.1 Assessment Approach....................................................................................................................................5

4.2 Assessment Results.........................................................................................................................................5

4.3 Feasibility Evidence........................................................................................................................................8

5. Business Case Analysis........................................................................................................................................11

5.1 Market Trend and Product Line Analysis.................................................................................................12

5.2 Cost Analysis.................................................................................................................................................12

5.3 Benefit Analysis............................................................................................................................................13

5.4 ROI Analysis.................................................................................................................................................14

6. Conclusion and Recommendations....................................................................................................................15

FED_FCP_F15a_T05_V2.1 v Version Date: 11/30/15


Table of TablesTable : Rationales for Selecting NDI/NCS Model..........................................................................................................2

Table : Risk Assessment..................................................................................................................................................4

Table 3: NDI/NCS Products Listing...............................................................................................................................5

Table 4.1: Evaluation Criteria – Map API Attributes....................................................................................................5

Table 4.2: Evaluation Criteria – DBMS Attributes........................................................................................................6

Table 4.3: Evaluation Criteria – Web Servers Attributes..............................................................................................6

Table 4.4: Evaluation Criteria – Application Development Platform Attributes..........................................................6

Table 5.1: Evaluation Criteria – Mapping API features................................................................................................6

Table 6.1: Evaluation Results of Map API Attributes Screen Matrix............................................................................7

Table 6.2: Evaluation Results of DBMS Attributes Screen Matrix................................................................................7

Table 6.3: Evaluation Results of Web Servers Attributes Screen Matrix.......................................................................7

Table 6.4: Evaluation Results of Application Development Platform Attributes Screen Matrix...................................8

Table 7: Evaluation Results of Map API Screen Matrix................................................................................................8

Table 8: Level of Service Satisfiability Evidence

Table 9: Level of Service Implementation Strategy

Table 10: Capability Feasibility Evidence

Table 11: Evolutionary Feasibility Evidence

Table 12: Market Trend and Product Line Analysis

Table 13: Personnel Costs

Table 14: Hardware and Software Costs

Table 15: Benefits of Tour Conductor System

Table 16: ROI Analysis

FED_FCP_F15a_T05_V2.1 vi Version Date: 11/30/15


Table of FiguresFigure 1: ROI Analysis Graph.....................................................................................................................................14

FED_FCP_F15a_T05_V2.1 vii Version Date: 11/30/15


1. Introduction1.1 Purpose of the FED DocumentThe purpose of this document is to report the feasibility evidence of the Tour Conductor Project. Furthermore, the various risks of the project will be discussed and how to mitigate those risks. This document will also provide an analysis of the different NDI and NCS items that will be needed for this project and evaluate the risk if weather they are able to interoperate with the various other components of the project.

1.2 Status of the FED Document Updated the risk list and business case Revised the NDI/NCS Evaluation Redid the Cost and Benefits analysis Revised the LOS Feasibility

FED_FCP_F15a_T05_V2.1 1 Version Date: 11/30/15


2. Process FeasibilityTable 1: Rationales for Selecting NDI/NCS Model

Criteria Importance Project Status Rationales30 % of NDI/NCS features 3 3 The features such as the

Mapping and storing the data of locations require NDI and NCS.

Single NDI/NCS 1 1 We will be using more than one NDI/NCS for this project.

Unique/ inflexible business process

2 2 The business aspects of this project are somewhat flexible

Need control over upgrade / maintenance

3 3 The project will need to be upgraded and maintained by the owner afterwards

Rapid deployment 1 1 The current system is not aimed at deployment but all the bare minimum marketable features are being developed

Critical on compatibility 2 2 The System is only being built to work for android and not for iOS or Windows Phones.

Internet connection independence

1 1 The Project cannot run without an internet connection.

Need high level of services / performance

2 1 High level services are important for the project.

Need high security 3 1 High security is essential for the project.

Asynchronous communication

3 3 Android application functions on asynchronous communication with the server

Be accessed from anywhere

3 1 The system needs to be able to be accessed by tour taker from anywhere in the world

Critical on mass schedule constraints

2 2 The system is critical on mass schedule.

Lack of personnel capability

1 1 The team has enough capable personnel to develop the project.

Require little upfront costs 2 2 The project will require a server to host the system

Require low total cost of ownership

1 1 Depending on the scale of the project, it may require



ownership costNot-so-powerful local machines

3 3 The development hardware being used and the server is not very powerful as they are entry level consumer machines.



3. Risk AssessmentTable 2: Risk Assessment

RisksRisk Exposure

Risk MitigationsPotential Magnitude

Probability Loss

Risk Exposure

The Time may not be sufficient to complete the project

9 9 81 Devise and follow a strict schedule coordinating with all the different team members and Owner.

The NDI’s and COTS may change.

10 8 80 Use the latest versions of API’s so that they may not get obsolete fast. Moreover, Keep up to date with the latest trends.

Tour Takers may not be able to view all the relevant tours that are near them

5 8 40 Develop a mechanism for users to search tours based on current location and tour keywords and tags.

If the project grows to very large scale then the cost of keeping the project alive may become very high (API call costs, and Server Costs)

5 5 25 Give functionality to enable a sustainable business model that results in profit. This may include getting income from advertisements or app pricing depending on the future needs of the owner.

The Layout of the web and mobile app may not be preferred by the stakeholders

5 5 25 Get feedback from potential users about the layout and design details

The Web hosting service may be suffering downtime.

10 1 10 Research and choose a good quality web hosting service that has good

reliability



4. NDI/NCS Feasibility Analysis 4.1 Assessment ApproachWe will select those NDI’s and NCS’s which will provide the essential features of the project such as the mapping API, the database management system, the web hosting service and the Android application development IDE.

4.2 Assessment Results

4.2.1 NDI/NCS Candidate Components (Combinations)Table 3: NDI/NCS Products Listing

NDI/NCS Products PurposesGoogle Maps, Apple Maps, Bing Maps Creating and displaying

Map for tours

MySQL, MongoDB Database Management System

Amazon web server, Go daddy Virtual Private server, Local Server.

Web server to host the database and website

Android Studio, Eclipse Developing the Android Application.

4.2.2 Evaluation Criteria

Table 4.1: Evaluation Criteria – Map API Attributes

No.

Evaluation Criteria – NDI/NCS attributes Weight

1 Cost 302 Maturity 203 Ease of Implementation 204 Functionality 155 Interoperability 15



Total 100

Table 4.2: Evaluation Criteria – DBMS Attributes

No.


1 Cost 302 Familiarity 203 Maturity 204 Security 155 Scalability 15

Total 100

Table 4.3: Evaluation Criteria – Web Servers Attributes

No.


1 Cost 302 Maturity 203 Performance 204 Scalability 155 Functionality 15

Total 100

Table 4.4: Evaluation Criteria – Application Development Platform Attributes

No.


1 Cost 302 Maturity 203 Development Aids 204 Functionality 155 Familiarity 15

Total 100

Table 5.1: Evaluation Criteria – Mapping API features

No.

Maps Features/sub features Weight

1 Be able to set up a map with desired position 402 Have good Geocoding capability 203 Can get directions and routes between different stops 30

4Can make XML and JSON calls to the Mapping API to get information relating to an address location

10



Total 100

*There are no special features required for DBMS, Web servers and Development platforms

4.2.3 Evaluation Results Screen Matrix

Table 6.1: Evaluation Results of Map API Attributes Screen Matrix

No W Google Maps AVG Total Apple Maps AVG Total Bing Maps AVG TotalR1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R3 R4

1 (Cost) 30 9 9 10 8 9 270 10 10 10 10 10 300 6 6 8 7 6 1802 (Maturity) 20 10 10 10 10 10 200 5 4 5 6 5 100 8 7 9 8 8 1603(Ease of Implementation)

20 10 10 10 10 10 200 7 8 6 7 7 140 5 3 4 4 4 80

4 (Functionality) 15 10 10 10 10 10 150 10 10 10 10 10 150 10 10 10 10 10 1505(Interoperability)

15 10 10 10 10 10 150 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 5 4 5 225

Total 100 970 690 795

Table 6.2: Evaluation Results of DBMS Attributes Screen Matrix

No W MySQL AVG Total MongoDB AVG TotalR1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R3 R4

1 (Cost) 30 10 10 10 10 10 300 10 10 10 10 10 3002 (Familiarity) 20 10 10 10 10 10 200 2 4 3 2 2 403(Maturity) 20 10 10 10 10 10 200 7 6 8 7 7 1404 (Security) 15 10 10 10 10 10 150 10 10 10 10 10 1505(Scalability) 15 10 10 10 10 10 150 10 10 10 10 10 150Total 100 1000 780

Table 6.3: Evaluation Results of Web Servers Attributes Screen Matrix

No W Amazon Web Server AVG Total Godaddy Server AVG Total Local Server AVG TotalR1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R3 R4

1 (Cost) 30 5 5 6 8 6 180 3 4 2 3 3 90 10 10 10 10 10 3002 (Maturity) 20 10 10 10 10 10 200 10 10 10 10 10 200 10 10 10 10 10 2003(Performance) 20 2 2 2 2 2 40 1 3 2 2 2 40 10 10 10 10 10 2004 (Scalability) 15 10 10 10 10 10 150 10 10 10 10 10 150 0 0 0 0 0 05(Functionality)

15 10 10 10 10 10 150 10 10 10 10 10 150 10 10 10 10 10 150



Total 100 720 630 850

Table 6.4: Evaluation Results of Application Development Platform Attributes Screen Matrix

No W Android Studio AVG Total Eclipse IDE AVG TotalR1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R3 R4

1 (Cost) 30 10 10 10 10 10 300 10 10 10 10 10 3002 (Maturity) 20 10 10 10 10 10 200 10 10 10 10 10 2003(Development Aids)

20 10 10 10 10 10 200 6 7 8 7 7 140

4 (Functionality) 15 10 10 10 10 10 150 10 10 10 10 10 1505 (Familiarity) 15 9 8 10 9 9 135 10 10 10 10 10 150Total 100 985 980

Table 7: Evaluation Results of Map API features Screen Matrix

No W Google Maps AVG Total Apple Maps AVG Total Bing Maps AVG TotalR1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R3 R4

1 (Setting up map)

40 10 10 10 10 10 400 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 8 8 8 320

2 (Geocoding) 20 10 10 10 10 10 200 8 8 8 8 8 160 9 9 9 9 9 1803(Directions and routes)

30 10 10 10 10 10 300 6 6 7 5 6 180 7 8 6 7 7 210

4 (XML and JSON calls)

10 10 10 10 10 10 100 4 3 5 4 4 40 10 10 10 10 10 100Total 100 1000 380 810

4.3 Feasibility Evidence

4.3.1 Level of Service FeasibilityTable 8: Level of Service Satisfiability Evidence

Level of Service Win Condition RationaleLOS-1: The system shall render all the components such as map, markers, description correctly on the mobile phone

There are currently applications on the market that can easily render maps with different markers and details.



LOS-2: The system shall not have a down time of more than 12 hours

Almost all the web services can easily achieve this level of uptime easily. Moreover, any maintenance and bug fixes can be done locally first and then applied to the system, which will not take more than a few minutes.

Table 9: Level of Service Implementation Strategy

Level of Service Win Condition Product SatisfactionLOS-1: The system shall render all the components such as map, markers, description correctly on the mobile phone

Product Strategies: Android Studio, Android OSProcess Strategies: PrototypingAnalysis: We will find code from different users on online forums that have dealt with similar problems before and try to develop a fix.

LOS-2: The system shall not have a down time of more than 12 hours

Product Strategies: Local server, MySQL, Google MapsProcess Strategies: Prototyping, Analysis and evaluation of NDI/NCSAnalysis: Find a list of stable web servers that can provide with this level of service and up time. Evaluate the time it takes to migrate new versions of the application to the server.

4.3.2 Capability FeasibilityTable 10: Capability Feasibility Evidence

Capability Requirement Product SatisfactionCR-1: As a tour taker, I can choose from a list of near-by tours and select a desired tour.

Software/Technology used: : Local Server, MySQL, PHP, Android Studio, JSONFeasibility Evidence: Created Prototype to access data from the server databaseReferred use case diagram: Refer to SSAD document

CR-2: As a tour creator, I can upload videos links, pictures URL, and other descriptive information about the stops in my tours.

Software/Technology used: Local Server, MySQL, PHP, Android Studio, JSONFeasibility Evidence: Implemented new features in Prototype version 2 such as setting and getting description data.Referred use case diagram: Refer to SSAD document

CR-3: As a tour taker, I can click on a stop on the

Software/Technology used: Local Server, MySQL, PHP, Android Studio, JSON



map that's visible, so that, I can view all the uploaded information about that stop.

Feasibility Evidence: Constructed code for the application to be able to display the information on the application from the URL received from the server. Moreover, we successfully implemented this feature in the final version prototype.Referred use case diagram: Refer to SSAD document

CR-4: As a tour creator, I can edit and delete any tours that I created before.

Software/Technology used: Local Server, PHP, JSON, MySQLFeasibility Evidence: Created database for tour creators and tested basic CRUD (Create, Read, Update, and Delete) functionality of MySQL database. Created the web user interface to be able to edit the details of created tours and delete tours and tour stops.Referred use case diagram: Refer to SSAD document

4.3.3 Evolutionary FeasibilityTable 11: Evolutionary Feasibility Evidence

Evolutionary Win Condition RationaleER-1: Scalability of the System The owner will need to set up the application on a

paid hosted server on his own after the application has been fully developed. This is not a difficult process as it simply need monetary authorization.

ER-2: Taking the product to the market The owner will need to publish the application to the google play store and will therefor need to incur some licensing costs.



5. Business Case Analysis

Assumptions: People desire information of an area before they tour around the area Stakeholders

(Who?)Initiatives (What?)

Value Propositions(Why?)

Beneficiaries(For Whom?)

Tour creator Tour taker Developers Maintainers Client

Design and develop the new system

Market the system

Create proper training for admin to create tours

Make user manual documentary

Make it convenient for users to tour around any area

Help users find specific location in a certain area

Help the Cities(or other areas) to promote any touring route

Tour creator Tour taker

Cost Development costs Maintenance costs Web hosting, domain name, and

services(e.g- Google APIs)

Benefits Increase number of tour creators Increase number of tour takers Increase Number of tourists at

significant locations



5.1 Market Trend and Product Line Analysis

Table 12: Market Trend and Product Line Analysis

Google Maps MySQL Android StudioMarket Trend Google Maps is the most

widely used mapping software and its accuracy in location finding is the highest. Its future in the market is very secure, and it is unlikely that this technology will become surpassed any time soon.

MySQL is the most mature and robust database management system in the market. It has maintained its dominance in the market for over a decade now and continues to do so.

Android Studio is a relatively newer development platform but its popularity is increasing due to its Android specific features.

Product Line There are various add-ons to the Maps API such as roads API and distance matrix API.

There are various plugins available for MySQL databases and documentation is easy to access and understand.

New updates are frequent and they are adding better and newer feature with each update.

5.2 Cost Analysis

5.2.1 Personnel CostsTable 13: Personnel Costs

Activities Time Spent (Hours)Development Period (24 weeks)Valuations and Foundations Phase: Time Invested (577a, 12 weeks)Client and Team meetings: [3hr/week * 12 weeks * 1person] 36

Win-Win Sessions: [3 sessions * 1hr/session * 1 person] 3Architecture review board: [ 1.5 hours/session * 2 session * 1 person ] 3Development and Operation Phase: Time Invested (CS577b, 12 Weeks)Client and Team meetings: [3hr/week * 12 weeks * 1person] 36Architecture review board: [ 1.5 hours/session * 2 session * 1 person ] 3

Deployment of system in operation phase and training - Installation & Deployment [ 5 hours * 1 person ] - Training & Support [ 5 hours * 1 person ]

10

Total 91Maintenance Period ( 1 Year)



Maintenance [0.5hr/week * 52 weeks/year] 26Total 26

5.2.2 Hardware and Software Costs

Table 14: Hardware and Software Costs

Type Web Server Maps APIOwnership Cost 75$/Year 0$Operation Cost 0.0086$/Hour 0.50$/1000 callsMaintenance Cost 0$ 0$Total 150.336$/Year 0.50$/1000 calls

5.3 Benefit AnalysisTable 15: Benefits of Tour Conductor System

Current activities & resources used % Reduce Time Saved (Hours/Year) Time trying to locate tour spots in a

location (20 minutes/person/location)80

110/person /location

Total 97

Non-Monetary Benefits: 1. People can get quality information about locations and places2. Increase familiarity of people to different locations and therefore promote number of visitors3. Promote tourism4. Tourist spots and tour creating organizations get a platform to advertise the attraction and landmarks they have.



5.4 ROI AnalysisTable 16: ROI Analysis

Year Cost(hours) # Benefit(hours)

Cumulative Cost

Cumulative Benefit ROI

2015 91 0 91 0 -12016 26 97 105 97 -0.072017 29 97 134 194 0.442018 32 97 166 291 0.752019 35 97 201 388 0.93

#- Assuming 10% per year increase in maintenance cost

Figure 1: ROI Analysis Graph

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

ROI



6. Conclusion and RecommendationsWe have successfully implemented the prototype using the various NDI and COTS, namely Google Maps as the mapping API, a local server and MySQL database and PHP with CSS3 framework for the front and back end. Moreover, we have developed the mobile application on Android Studio.This Conclusion was drawn after performing evaluation on the following criteria:

Cost Maturity Functionality Compatibility Familiarity Security Scalability

A recommendation is that, in the final launced version of the product, the server should be hosted on a professional grade service such as Amazon Web Services or Godaddy servers as mentioned in this document. Without this the application will not work on a large scale however it will work fine for normal use of up to 20-40 people.


Documents

greenbay.usc.edu€¦ · Web viewGoogle Maps. MySQL. Android Studio. Market Trend. Google Maps is the most widely used mapping software and its accuracy in location finding is the