Garden State CLE

21 Winthrop Road • Lawrenceville, New Jersey 08648 (609) 895-0046 fax- 609-895-1899 Atty2starz@aol.com !

Video Course Evaluation Form

Attorney Name____________________________________ Atty ID number for Pennsylvania:______________________ Name of Course You Just Watched_____________________ !

Please Circle the Appropriate Answer !Instructors: Poor Satisfactory Good Excellent !Materials: Poor Satisfactory Good Excellent !CLE Rating: Poor Satisfactory Good Excellent!Required: When you hear the bell sound, write down the secret word that appears on your screen on this form. !Word #1 was: _____________ Word #2 was: __________________ !Word #3 was: _____________ Word #4 was: __________________ !What did you like most about the seminar? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ !What criticisms, if any, do you have? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ !

I Certify that I watched, in its entirety, the above-listed CLE Course

Signature ___________________________________ Date ________

Garden State CLE, 21 Winthrop Rd., Lawrenceville, NJ 08648 – 609-895-0046 – fax 609-895-1899

New Jersey Continuing Legal Education Services

Presents…

Technical & Scientific

Defenses in an Alcotest

Case

Table of Contents

1. Alcotest – 7110 – “What’s Under the Hood” –

Evan Levow, Attorney

2. Analysis of Alcotest Foundational Documents –

John Menzel & Robert Ramsey

3. Data Downloads – Analysis & Review

Samuel L. Sachs

4. Top Useful Scientific & Technical Arguments &

Defenses- Panel - Samuel Sachs, Evan Levow, and

John Menzel

Documents & Witnesses Needed to Prove Per Se

Offense Using Alcotest-7110 Evidence

State v. Chun, 194 N.J. 54 (2008)

I. In General - (Page 134)

(1) the device was in working order and had

been inspected according to procedure;

(2) the operator was certified; and

(3) the test was administered according to

official procedure.

II. Alcotest Documents Needed to be introduced in

Evidence

([W]e have required the routine production in discovery of all of the

foundational documents that might reveal some possible flaw in the

operation of the particular device and we have demanded that the core

foundational documents that establish the good working order of the

device be admitted into evidence. Page 148))

Core Foundational Documents

1. Operator Qualification Card (page 141)

2. Most Recent Calibration Report (page 145)

(Part I Control Tests)

(Part II Linearity Tests)

(Credentials of Trooper who performed Calibration)

3. Most Recent Standard Solution Report Prior to

Defendant’s Test (Page 145)

4. Certificate of Analysis for Solution Used in

Defendant’s Control Tests (Page 145)

5. Alcohol Influence Report (Page 148)

6. Work Sheet A (Page 118 Order page 150)

7. Operator Must Testify (Page 148)

III. Foundational Documents to be Produced

During Discovery (Page 135 and Order on Page

153)

(Absent a pre-trial challenge to the admissibility of the AIR based on

one of the other foundational documents produced in discovery, we

perceive of no reason to require that they be made a part of the record

routinely. (Page 145))

Foundational Documents

(1) Calibrating Unit, New Standard Solution Report, most

recent change, and the operator's credentials of the officer who

performed that change;

(2) Certificate of Analysis 0.10 Percent Solution used in New

Solution Report;

(3) Draeger Safety Certificate of Accuracy Alcotest CU34

Simulator;

(4) Draeger Safety Certificate of Accuracy Alcotest 7110

Temperature Probe;

(5) Draeger Safety Certificate of Accuracy Alcotest 7110

Instrument (unless more relevant NJ Calibration Records

(including both Parts I and II are offered));

(6) Calibration Check (including both control tests and

linearity tests and the credentials of the operator/coordinator

who performed the tests);

(7) Certificate of Analysis 0.10 Percent Solution (used in

Calibration-Control);

III. Foundational Documents to be Produced

During Discovery

(8) Certificate of Analysis 0.04, 0.08, and 0.16 Percent Solution

(used in Calibration-Linearity);

(9) Calibrating Unit, New Standard Solution Report, following

Calibration;

(10) Draeger Safety Certificate of Accuracy Alcotest CU34

Simulator for the three simulators used in the 0.04, 0.08, and

0.16 percent solutions when conducting the Calibration-

Linearity tests;

(11) Draeger Safety Certificate of Accuracy Alcotest 7110

Temperature Probe used in the Calibration tests; and

(12) Draeger Safety, Ertco-Hart Digital Temperature

Measuring System Report of Calibration, NIST traceability.

IV. Data Downloads (page 90)

Similarly, the Special Master recommended, and the parties by and

large agree, that the State should create and maintain a centralized

database of information regularly uploaded through modem (Special

Master's Finding 7), and that defendants should have access to centrally

collected and maintained data on their own cases, as well as to the

compiled scientific data on matters involving others that has been

redacted to shield the personal information related to those other

individuals as appropriate (Special Master's Finding 2(h)).FN20

Our

review of the record satisfies us that there is substantial, credible

evidence that supports the Special Master's recommendation

concerning the creation and maintenance of a regularly-updated

database, as well as his recommendation relating to providing access to

that data to defendants.

FN20. The amicus NJSBA suggests that defendants should have access

to previously downloaded, centrally collected data. We do not perceive

this to be different from the Special Master's recommendation in this

regard and the extent of the access to be afforded to any litigant does

not appear to be a matter in dispute. In the absence of any suggestion in

the record that there is a genuine difference of agreement among the

parties on this matter, we see no need to address it further.

Order (Page 153)

Create and maintain a centralized statewide database, comprised of

downloaded Alcotest results, and shall make the data, following

appropriate redactions of personal identification as needed, available to

defendants and counsel.

V. Pending Amendments to Rule 7:7-7

(f) Time and Procedure. A defense request for discovery shall be made

contemporaneously with the entry of appearance by the defendant's attorney,

who shall submit a copy of the appearance and demand for discovery

directly to the municipal prosecutor. If the defendant is not represented, any

requests for discovery shall be made in writing and submitted by the

defendant directly to the municipal prosecutor. The municipal prosecutor

shall respond to the discovery request in accordance with paragraph (b) of

this rule within 10 days after receiving the request. Unless otherwise ordered

by the judge, the defendant shall provide the [government] prosecutor with

discovery, as provided by paragraph (c) of this rule, within 20 days of the

prosecuting attorney's compliance with the defendant's discovery request.

Unless otherwise ordered by the judge, the parties may exchange

discovery through the use of e-mail, internet or other electronic means.

(g) Continuing Duty to Disclose; Failure to Comply. If a party who has

complied with this rule discovers, either before or during trial, additional

material or names of witnesses previously requested or ordered subject to

discovery or inspection, that party shall promptly notify the other party or

that party's attorney of the existence of these additional materials and

witnesses. If at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to

the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with this rule or

with an order issued pursuant to this rule, the court may order that party to

permit the discovery, inspection, copying or photographing of materials not

previously disclosed, grant a continuance, prohibit the party from

introducing in evidence the material not disclosed or enter such other order

as it deems appropriate.

VI. State v. Holup, 253 N.J. Super. 320, 325-326

(App. Div. 1992)

By way of clarification of the situation where discovery has not been

provided, we would also recommend that defense counsel serve a

motion, on the papers, with certification similar to R. 1:6-2, upon the

municipal prosecutor, filing the original with the municipal court

seeking an order limiting time for the production of discovery and upon

the municipal prosecutor's failure to do so, dismissal of the action. Such

an application and the ensuing order would alert the municipal

prosecutor and enforcement authorities to their discovery

responsibilities and avoid the inconvenience to litigants and witnesses

that occurs with such frequency when all parties appear in court for

trial. Another salutary affect of such a practice is to expedite the

processing of cases by assuring both sides of the certainty of the trial

date and eliminating the unnecessary work, expense and delay resulting

from the continuance of a case because the discovery process has not

been completed.

In the State's brief counsel infers that the sanction imposed by the

Law Division judge would be paid by the municipality. We believe that

sanctions imposed pursuant to R. 1:10-5 in the form of relief to a

litigant, in the municipal court context, will only rarely be paid by the

municipality. If the failure is that of the municipal prosecutor, then the

burden falls personally upon that officeholder. After all, the

municipality relies upon the municipal prosecutor to perform his job

properly and with due diligence and should not be charged with paying

for his individual failures.

VI. State v. Holup, 253 N.J. Super. 320, 325-326

(App. Div. 1992)

Lastly, we are constrained to comment on the effect of R. [7:7-2(a)]

which permits motions in the municipal courts to be made “orally and

informally.” As our municipal courts mature and become responsible

for the disposition of more complex, more serious in terms of penal

consequence and more communally important cases, more formal

practices become essential. We understand that much of the subject

matter in controversy in the municipal courts is minor and, in such

cases, informal practices should continue, but in the more significant

cases, a more careful, thorough procedure is warranted. There is a

recognizable difference in the analysis of the discovery in a drunk

driving case as compared to one involving a stop light violation. The

mere fact that the Court Rule allows informality does not give broad

license to counsel. Motions and supporting documents assist the

municipal court judge in making a fair and considered decision. A

motion limiting the time for completion of discovery in this case would

have ensured notice to the prosecutor and avoided the waste of time by

defendant, the expert witness and defense counsel.

DONINI & RAMSEY

448 HAMILTON AVENUE

TRENTON, NEW JERSEY 08609

(609) 396-7979

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

___________________________

STATE OF NEW JERSEY : HAMILTON TWP. MUNICIPAL COURT

MERCER COUNTY

Plaintiff :

vs. : SUMMONS NO.

SCOTT A. BROWN :

CERTIFICATION OF ROBERT RAMSEY

Defendant :

____________________________

I, Robert Ramsey, of full age do certify the following to be true:

1) I am an attorney at law of the State of New Jersey.

2) On or about January 18, 2001, I entered my appearance in the above

captioned matter pursuant to Rule 7:7-9. At the time I entered my appearance

with the Court, I simultaneously served a copy of my letter of appearance with the

prosecutor and included a demand for discovery consistent with Rule 7:7-7(b).

3) Within thirty days of the entry of my appearance, I had not received any

discovery from the municipal prosecutor. As a result, I wrote a separate letter to

the prosecutor and once again made a demand for discovery upon him.

4) To date, I have had no response from the municipal prosecutor and have

been unable to prepare the defense in this case.

5) My client has been charged with a violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a), driving

under the influence of alcohol. The police alleged from the motor summons that

this offense took place on January 10, 2001.

6) I have reason to suspect that there is significant evidence in possession

of the state, which will help me prepare my case and put forth an appropriate for

my client. Without this information, my client and I are not able to prepare the

matter for trial or other disposition.

I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true to the best of

my knowledge. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are

willfully false, I am subject to punishment.

___________________________

Robert Ramsey

Dated: January 12, 2008

DONINI & RAMSEY

448 HAMILTON AVENUE

TRENTON, NEW JERSEY 08609

(609) 396-7979

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

___________________________

STATE OF NEW JERSEY : BORDENTOWN TWP. MUNICIPAL

COURT

BURLINGTON COUNTY

Plaintiff :

vs. : SUMMONS NO.

SCOTT A. BROWN :

NOTICE OF MOTION

Defendant : PURSUANT TO RULE 1:6-2

___________________________

TO: John Doe, Municipal Prosecutor

Hamilton Township Municipal Court

222 Slabtown Road

Matthewville, New Jersey 08648

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on a date to be set by the Court, the

undersigned counsel will move for an Order limiting the time for the production of

discovery upon the State of New Jersey. In the event the municipal prosecutor

fails to comply with the ensuing Order of the Court a dismissal of the within action

and sanctions to be paid by the municipal prosecutor pursuant to Rule 1:10-3.

In support of the within application, the undersigned counsel will rely upon

the annexed certification, oral argument and the rule of law established by the

Appellate Division in State vs. Holup, 253 N.J.Super 320 (App.Div.1992).

DONINI & RAMSEY

ROBERT RAMSEY

Dated: January 12, 2008

DONINI & RAMSEY

448 HAMILTON AVENUE

TRENTON, NEW JERSEY 08609

(609) 396-7979

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

___________________________

STATE OF NEW JERSEY : HAMILTON TWP. MUNICIPAL COURT

MERCER COUNTY

Plaintiff :

COMPLAINT NOS.

vs. :

SCOTT A. BROWN :

ORDER

Defendant :

___________________________

THIS MATTER having been opened to the Court upon a Motion of Donini &

Ramsey, Esquires, Robert Ramsey, Esquire, representing the defendant, Scott A.

Brown, and good cause having been shown;

IT IS ON THIS __________ DAY OF __________, 2008;

ORDERED that discovery in the above captioned matter be provided by the

municipal prosecutor to the defense within ten days; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the absence of the production of

discovery within this time period, the Court will entertain a motion to dismiss the

within complaint and to grant sanctions pursuant to Rule 1:10-3.

______________________________________

J.M.C.

Barred from using discovery at trial.

Top Useful Scientific & Technical Arguments &

Defenses- Panel

Samuel L. Sachs, Alcotest Expert

1. Plus or minus 5% (State v. Lentini, 240 N.J.

Super. 330 (App. Div. 1990))

2. Patterns of Repeated Failures (Data

Downloads)

3. Repair Records & Fuel Cell Replacement

4. Data Integrity & Completeness

5. Defective calibration, certification, linearity and

new standard solution sequence.

Attorney Discovery Review

Purge time less than 2 minutes

Blank Data Fields on AIR

Unsigned AIR

Top Useful Scientific & Technical Arguments &

Defenses- Panel

John Menzel, Attorney

1. Data Completeness

2. Otherwise undisclosed

3. Environmental Issues & RFI

4. “Blowing” Refusals

5. Quality of Breath Samples

Attorney Discovery Review

Twenty-minute observation issues

Transport to another department

Outdated Discovery Documents

Temperature Probe

Mouth Pieces

Link the Documents

Work the Numbers

Top Useful Scientific & Technical Arguments &

Defenses- Panel

Evan Levow, Attorney

1. Get Five Prior Reports from Same Officer

2. Street PBTU (Brady Materials/Confusion)

3. “You Give Me Fever!” Breath Temperature

4. No Checks on Breath Tube Temperature

5. Tolerances Between EC and IR Results

Attorney Discovery Review

Officer’s Instruction in Refusal Case (Language)

Confusion & State v. Spell, 196 N.J. 537 (2008)

Errors (Mouth Alcohol/Plateau not Reached)

Check Expiration Dates in Officer Cards

!Loo

king�Und

er�th

e�Hoo

d/Technical&

ScientificDefen

sesinan

AlcotestC

ase

Technical�&

�Scientific�Defen

ses�in�an�Alcotest�C

ase

May�22,�200

9Evan�M

.�Levow

Dra

eger

50 Y

ears

Alc

otes

t:19

53Alcotest�Rö

hrchen

/Tube

1953

1980

1981

AlcotestRö

hrchen

�/�Tub

e

Alcotest�7

310

Alcotest�7

010

Draeger�Alcotest��

Breath�alcoh

ol�te

sting�worldwide

1983

1988

1991

Alcotest�7

110�MK�I

Alcotest�7

410

Alcotest�7

110�MK�II

1992

1994

1996

Alcotest�7

410�Printer

Alcotest�7

110�MK�III (

)19

96

1997

2002

Alcotest�7

410�Plus�(R

S)

Alcotest�7

110�Mk�III�C

Alcotest�E

PAS

1953

:

Drä

ger A

lcot

est t

ubes

1978

:19

78:

Dra

eger

Alc

ytro

n

Prototype�with�infrared

�sen

sor

1980

:

Dra

eger

Alc

otes

t 731

0

Han

dheld�instrumen

t�with�

semicon

ductor�sen

sor

1982

:19

82:

Alc

otes

t 701

0

Infrared

�sen

sor�(3.3�µm)

in�han

dset

2002:

EPAS

Eviden

tial,�Portable�Alcoh

oltesting�System

�with�pa

lm�

compu

termag

card

read

eran

dcompu

ter,�mag�card�read

er�and

�printer

1998

:A

lcot

est 7

110

MK

III

-C

Infrared

�and

�electroche

mical�sen

sor

Measuremen

t�of�

breath�te

mpe

rature

DrägerA

lcotest®

9510

DrägerA

lcotest�9510

(Washing

ton�State)

!Loo

king�Und

er�the

�Hoo

d/

The

711

0 em

ploy

s tw

o di

ffer

ent t

echn

olog

ies

capa

ble

of a

naly

zing

and

mea

suri

ng th

e sa

me

ib

id

dh

li

spec

imen

by

two

inde

pend

ent t

echn

olog

ies:

IR

spe

ctro

scop

y an

d Fu

el C

ell t

echn

olog

y.

Cla

imed

Feat

ure:

Cla

imed

Fea

ture

:T

he 7

110

dem

ands

the

follo

win

g m

inim

um

requ

irem

ent (

defa

ult)

to d

eter

min

e an

alv

eola

r, d

hl

tib

thl

end-

exha

latio

n br

eath

sam

ple:

-M

inim

um fl

ow r

ate:

2.5

L/M

in.

-Min

imum

bre

ath

volu

me:

1.5

Lite

r-M

inim

um b

low

dur

atio

n: 4

.5 s

econ

ds-S

lope

det

ectio

n-S

top

blow

ing

Stop

blo

win

g

Cla

imed

Ben

efit:

An

inte

rnat

iona

lly a

ccep

ted

brea

th te

st

sam

plin

g re

quir

emen

ts

pg

equ

ee

Dra

eger

Cla

imed

Fea

ture

:T

h71

10i

tifi

db

NH

TSA

dh

The

711

0 is

cer

tifie

d by

NH

TSA

and

as s

uch

publ

ishe

d on

the

Con

form

ing

Prod

ucts

Lis

t (C

PL) a

s an

EB

T.

Dra

eger

Cla

imed

Ben

efit:

Bas

ic p

erfo

rman

ce r

equi

rem

ent a

nd

cert

ifica

tion

inth

eU

SA

cert

ifica

tion

in th

e U

.S.A

.

Display

/Printer

Display�/�Printer

Conn

ector�po

rts�/�ON�/OFF�Switch

41

ON�/OFF�Switch

2AC�receptacle

3Fuses

45

3Fuses�

412

�V�Con

nector�port

5Keyboard

port

5Keyboard�port

6RS�232

7Functio

n�key

and�Tempe

rature�probe

12

36

7

All�conn

ectio

ns�are�located�on

�the�backside

�of�the

�instrumen

t.

Dual�Sen

soric

Mot

or

Pist

on

Posi

tion

Switc

h

Out

let

EC S

enso

r

Sim

ulat

or in

let

Mirr

orM

irror

Inpu

t Tub

e

Cyli

nder

Volt.

/Cur

r.C

onve

rter

EC S

enso

r

Mirr

orM

irror

Sam

ple

Cha

mbe

rIR

em

itter

IR d

etec

tor w

ith9.

5 um

filte

r

ELEC

TRO

CH

EMIC

AL S

ENSO

R(F

UEL

CEL

L SE

NSO

R)

Flow

Sen

sor

Airb

lank

/ D

ry-G

asin

let

Brea

th in

INFR

ARED

CU

VETT

E(IR

SEN

SOR

)

The�IR�cuvette�ope

rating�at�9.5�

m

Absorption�cham

ber

Infrared

�Sou

rce

Infrared

�Detector

Flow

�Sen

sor

Gas�(b

reath)�inlet�to

()

cuvette

Cuvette

&l

Draeger&s�Claim

s•Metallic

(solidbrass)cuvettebo

dywith:

Metallic�(solid�brass)�cuvette

body�with:

•�

/Sup

erior3�ethanol�spe

cificity

�@�9.5�m

icron�range

pp

y@

g

•�

/Fully�enclosed,�no�du

st�build�up3

�N

hh

l•

�No�chop

per�w

heel

•�

70ml�volum

e

•�

/Sho

ck�re

sistant�IR�source3

•�

Parabo

lic�gold�coated

�(40�m

)�mirrors

Draeger�Fue

l�Cell

(man

ufacturedby

Draeger)

(man

ufactured�by�Draeger)

Draeger&s�Claim

ed�Features:

�1Alcoh

ol�spe

cific8

p

�1Fast�recovery8

�1Sup

erb�stability8

�1App

rox.�4�6�years�life�expectancy8

BiC

ifh

FlC

llBa

sic�Co

nstruction

�of�the

�Fue

l�Cell

Hou

sing��Ca

se

vapo

r�inlet

vapo

r�outlet

casecase

electrod

e��o

xidatio

n

mem

branewith

Sche

matic�of�the

�hou

sing

bottom

�part

mem

brane�with

electrolyte

electrod

e��red

uctio

n

Mecha

nicaland

Chem

icalCo

mpo

sition

Mecha

nical�and

�Che

mical�Com

position

�of�the

�Fue

l�Cell�M

embran

e

The�mem

brane�plate�is�th

e�.heart/�of�th

e�fuel�cell. catalytic�electrode

�(Platin

um�black)

cond

uctive�layer�(Gold)

porous�m

embrane

cond

uctive�layer�(Gold)

y

catalytic�electrode

�(Platin

um�black)

Sche

matic�diagram

Thb

i�

tfth

tl

td

The�mem

brane�is�

�supp

ort�for�th

e�tw

o�electrod

es.

�matrix�for�the�electrolyte.

�The

�gold�layer�is�to�increase�th

e�electron

ic�con

ductivity

�in�th

e�electrod

e�area.

�The

�catalytic�electrode

s�are�po

rous�Teflon�bo

nded

�platin

um�black�electrode

.�T

he�tw

o�electrod

es�are�identical�on�bo

th�sides

Wet

Bat

hS

imul

ator

Wet

Bat

hS

imul

ator

Wet

Bat

h S

imul

ator

Wet

Bat

h S

imul

ator

EC

Sen

sor

Out

let

Out

let

HEATER

INF

RA

RE

D C

UV

ET

TE

(IR

SE

NS

OR

)

7

HEATER

INF

RA

RE

D C

UV

ET

TE

(IR

SE

NS

OR

)

7

R

WE

T B

AT

H

SIM

ULA

TO

R4

6

5

R

WE

T B

ATH

S

IMU

LAT

OR

4

6

5

Am

bien

t air

23

1) M

outh

piec

e

2) B

reat

h ho

se

3) P

ump

4) V

alve

5) V

alve

2-w

ay

6) F

low

sen

sor

Am

bien

t air

23

1) M

outh

piec

e

2) B

reat

h ho

se

3) P

ump

4) V

alve

5) V

alve

2-w

ay

6) F

low

sen

sor

DR

Y G

AS

CY

LIN

DE

R

17)

Pre

ssur

e se

nsor

DR

Y G

AS

CY

LIN

DE

R

17)

Pre

ssur

e se

nsor

Intle

t

INF

RA

RE

D C

UV

ETT

E(I

R S

EN

SO

R)

Out

let

HEATER

WE

T B

ATH

S

IMU

LATO

R

7

Out

let

4

6

55

inou

t

23

1) M

outh

piec

e

2) B

reat

h ho

se

DR

Y G

AS

CY

LIN

DE

R

1

3) P

ump

4) V

alve

1-w

ay

5) V

alve

2-w

ay

6) F

low

sen

sor

7) P

ress

ure

sens

or

Draeger&s�Claim

ed�Features:

Fact

Fact�

Fiti

?or�Fictio

n?

Cla

imed

Fea

ture

:T

he71

10is

shie

lded

agai

nstr

adio

freq

uenc

yT

he 7

110

is s

hiel

ded

agai

nst r

adio

freq

uenc

y in

terf

eren

ce a

nd h

as a

n op

tiona

l RFI

det

ecto

r to

abo

rt a

ny te

st if

RFI

leve

ls e

xcee

d a

pres

et

liit

limit.

Cla

imed

Ben

efit:

Freq

uent

lyad

dres

sed

inco

urtc

halle

nges

Freq

uent

ly a

ddre

ssed

in c

ourt

cha

lleng

es

John

�Chu

rchill

RFI�Testin

g

Feat

ure:

The

7110

offe

rsop

tiona

lbre

ath

tem

pera

ture

The

711

0 of

fers

opt

iona

l bre

ath

tem

pera

ture

se

nsin

g.

Ben

efit:

“Exh

aled

bre

ath

tem

pera

ture

has

bec

ome

a pr

efer

red

defe

nse

man

euve

rin

vari

ous

cour

tpr

efer

red

defe

nse

man

euve

r in

var

ious

cou

rt

chal

leng

es.

An

incr

easi

ng m

anda

te in

var

ious

t

i”

coun

trie

s.”

Breath�Tem

perature:��Facts,�Problem

�and

�Solution

Breath�Tem

perature:��Facts,�Problem

�and

�Solution

Note:��

Deviation

�of�the

�actua

l�end

�respiratory�breath�tempe

rature�from

�the

�assumed

�34�C�will�eithe

r�over�or�un

derestim

ate�the�true

�alcoh

ol�

concen

tration�by�6.58%

�per�one

�degree�Ce

lsius.

Rather�re

cent�studies�sug

gest�th

at�th

e�average�breath�te

mpe

rature�

is�between�34.5�C�and

�35�C

Alcotest®7110�M

K�III�C�

Alcotest®7110�M

K�III�C�

Man

dates�for�breath�te

mpe

rature�ana

lysis

German

yBu

lgaria

German

yBu

lgaria

Taiwan

Alaba

ma,

U.S.A.

Hon

gKo

ngSouthAustralia

Hon

g�Ko

ngSouth�Australia

Feat

ure:

The

bre

ath

hose

is h

eate

d an

d th

e t

ti

lt

ill

tll

db

tem

pera

ture

is e

lect

roni

cally

con

trol

led

by

sens

ors.

Ben

efit: Tr

aditi

onal

ly, b

reat

h ho

ses

are

only

y,

yhe

ated

but

not

tem

pera

ture

con

trol

led.

M

aint

aini

ng a

nd m

onito

ring

the

tem

pera

ture

ata

pres

ette

mpe

ratu

rete

mpe

ratu

re a

t a p

rese

t tem

pera

ture

al

low

s pr

oper

hea

ter

oper

atio

n an

d pr

even

ts o

verh

eatin

g of

the

brea

th h

ose

whi

ch c

an d

amag

e th

e ho

se m

ater

ial.

Feat

ure:

The

711

0 op

erat

es fr

om 9

0 th

roug

h 26

0 VA

C.

Cla

imed

Ben

efit:

The

sst

emis

imm

neto

olta

gefl

ctat

ions

The

sys

tem

is im

mun

e to

vol

tage

fluc

tuat

ions

.

Feat

ure:

Pow

erco

nsum

ptio

nin

"Rea

dy"

mod

eis

less

Pow

er c

onsu

mpt

ion

in

Rea

dy m

ode

is le

ss

then

40

Wat

ts.

In "

Stan

d-B

y" m

ode,

less

then

15

Wat

ts.

Ben

efit:

To m

inim

ize

heat

bui

ld u

p in

the

inst

rum

ent.

H

eati

sany

elec

tron

ics’

enem

yH

eat i

s any

ele

ctro

nics

ene

my.

N

o ne

ed fo

r ve

ntin

g th

e in

stru

men

t. N

o du

st im

port

.

Feat

ure:

The

711

0 pe

rfor

ms a

“tr

ue”

"Am

bien

t Air

C

hk"

Thi

ili

hd

bt

tiC

heck

". T

his i

s acc

ompl

ishe

d by

ext

ract

ing

an

air

sam

ple

afte

r th

e pu

rge

cycl

e fr

om th

e IR

ch

ambe

r fo

r an

alys

is b

y th

e Fu

el C

ell s

enso

r.y

y

Ben

efit:

Ben

efit:

The

nee

d fo

r a

true

air

bla

nk te

st h

as b

ecom

e th

e ce

nter

poi

nt o

f man

y co

urt c

halle

nges

. Onl

y a

fuel

cell

anal

ysis

ofth

eai

rin

the

IRch

ambe

ra

fuel

cel

l ana

lysi

s of t

he a

ir in

the

IR c

ham

ber

can

prov

ide

assu

ranc

e th

at th

e IR

syst

em is

tr

uly

set t

o ze

ro p

rior

to a

bre

ath

test

.

How

ever

, IT

IS N

OT

set t

o a

true

zer

o.

Feat

ure:

The

7110

can

prov

ide

com

plex

test

data

for

The

711

0 ca

n pr

ovid

e co

mpl

ex te

st d

ata

for

rem

ote

data

col

lect

ion:

•Blo

w ti

me

and

brea

th v

olum

eIR

Ab

ti(

lti

)t

•IR

-Abs

orpt

ion

(rea

l-tim

e) c

urva

ture

•Bre

ath

flow

(rea

l-tim

e) c

urva

ture

•Fue

l cel

l (re

al-t

ime)

cur

vatu

re

Ben

efit:

Opt

imiz

ing

the

test

’s in

tegr

ity

Feat

ure:

The

711

0 pr

ovid

es P

C, m

odem

and

Eth

erne

t in

terf

ace

and

com

mun

icat

ion

capa

bilit

ies.

p

Ben

efit:

To a

llow

711

0 bi

-dir

ectio

nal c

omm

unic

atio

n,

syst

em c

ontr

ol, d

ata

uplo

ad a

nd v

ario

us

serv

ice

and

qual

ity a

ssur

ance

feat

ures

.q

y

Feat

ure:

Com

plet

eca

libra

tion

ofth

e71

10re

quir

esC

ompl

ete

calib

ratio

n of

the

7110

req

uire

s on

ly o

ne s

imul

ator

and

one

bot

tle o

f sol

utio

n.

Thi

s pr

oces

s ta

kes

less

than

5 M

inut

es.

Ben

efit:

Min

imal

labo

r tim

e re

quir

emen

t, m

inim

al

equi

pmen

t and

sup

ply

need

s re

sult

in

subs

tant

ialc

osts

avin

gs.T

here

are

nosu

bsta

ntia

l cos

t sav

ings

. The

re a

re n

o po

tent

iom

eter

adj

ustm

ents

nee

ded.

Cos

t-of

-ow

ners

hip

is th

e m

ost s

igni

fican

t ti

li

tSt

top

erat

iona

l exp

ense

in m

ost S

tate

pro

gram

s.

Obvious

Errorsin71

10Co

deObvious�Errors�in�711

0�Co

de

•Disabled�catastroph

ic�error�detectio

np

•Disabled�error�d

etectio

n�logic���No�

reason

ablene

ss�che

cking

•No�po

sitive�feed

back

•Arbitrary�substitution�of�data�on

�diagnostics�

dfl

and�flo

w�m

easures

•Excessive�Use�of�G

lobal�Variables�re

ducing�

insulatio

nbe

tweenmod

ules

insulatio

n�be

tween�mod

ules

•Incorrect�fun

ctions�as�fund

amen

tal�as�

averaging@averages

andweightedaverages

averaging�

averages�and

�weighted�averages

Obvious

Errorsin71

10Co

deObvious�Errors�in�711

0�Co

de

TIMING�AND�SAMPLING

•A/D�con

verters

•Sine

�wave�is�con

verted

�to�stepp

ed�curve

•Step

s�de

pend

�whe

re�th

e�sine

�curve�is�sam

pled

•Sampling�was�claim

ed�at�1

28/secon

d

/•

Sampling�is�actually�122

/secon

d

•Times/secon

d�are�furthe

r�redu

ced�by�sam

pling�to�8�

12/secon

d12

/secon

d

ErrorsAdm

ittedon

Cross

Errors�Adm

itted�on

�Cross

We�knew

:�

As�fuel�cells�age,�the

y�get�u

sed�up

�and

�drift

Draeger�adm

itted

:�

Drifting�fuel�cells�are�fo

rced

�to�agree�with

�IR�sen

sors

Draeger�LIED:�

�IR�and

�EC�do

�not�cross�che

ck�and

�verify�each�othe

ry

Wha

t�Draeg

er�M

ust�D

o�Fi

hP

blto�Fix�th

e�Prob

lems

REWRITE

CODEFROM

SCRA

TCH

REWRITE�CODE�FROM�SCR

ATCH

�

Dep

loy�code

�correctly,�scien

tifically

�Ado

ptarecognized

standard

�Ado

pt�a�re

cognized

�stand

ard

�Docum

ent�its�cod

ing

�Docum

ent�e

rrors

�Docum

ent�e

rror�correction

Exercise�cod

e�against�h

ardw

are�via�OIM

L�g

proced

ures

Thankyou

Thank�you