Orange Team!
Mockups!
Open in New Window - All Presentation Slides (.pdf)
Presentation Video
Demo Video
Concepts
WheelCare
An attachment to give wheelchair users independence to perform their daily tasks while safely bringing along a young child.
View Product Contract in New Window
Contributors
Sylvie Waft: technical lead, CAD, integration, co-presenterDelaney Goetz: designing and machining (mill) folding mechanism, co-presenterJacky Dong: designing and assembling rotating seat mechanism, demo speakerYuka Perera: sourcing parts, building seats, product contract, demo speakerDavid Hernandez: organization/coordination, machining (lathe) telescoping mechanism, integration
Reviewer Feedback
Lauren Futami
Concept
The idea is strong and the clarity of the user was also reinforced and thoughtfully considered during the presentation. I am convinced that there is a need for this idea, though I think the clarity of use needs to be thought through a little more and discussed/tested with potential users. What are the complete steps the user takes to use this attachment? Does the user get into the wheelchair first, then attach WheelCare, then put their child in? What about at the end of the use cycle? Does it make sense to take the child out first, then detach, then store it somewhere? You might have some or most of these questions answered already, which is great, it just needs to be communicated.
Analysis
There is a promising start on the analysis, but it would be much more compelling if there was some user feedback to clearly identify all possible risks and pain points with WheelCare. Can users use their wheelchairs in the same way with the attachment? How limited is their forward reach with the attachment, or does it not even matter at all? Can they maintain normal wheelchair dexterity/usage, or will the attachment inadvertently collide with objects in too many scenarios? Is there a learning curve for wheeling around with this attachment and if so, how large is it? I think finding a user to ask these questions to and test any of the prototypes would help drastically inform the future design and use case.
Execution
There was some great execution with the baby vs toddler seat as well as the rotating mechanism. It was unfortunate that the wheel used to stabilize the seat ended up fighting against the attachment, but hopefully it informed the team on what to use next which would help with stabilization and mobility. Seeing it all attached to a wheelchair helped bring the vision to life, but opened other questions like how the user will use it in the first place (most of use seeing the mockups and being able-bodied were able to step over the rods and sit in the wheelchair, but this is something I'm assuming the user will most likely not be able to do). This idea has a lot of promise, but it can't rely on its potential to become a convincing product.
Ana Lo
Concept
Testing with a user is essential. If you cannot find a target user, find someone as close as you can. For example, test with someone who is wheelchair bound who knows/interacts with toddlers (worst case, just test with someone who is wheelchair bound). Just begin testing ASAP! Note - you STILL need to get a target user to test! This does not replace user testing, but it will allow you to begin to test aspects of the design (as you continue to search for a target user).
Analysis
This is a challenging idea to implement. Many design criteria conflict with each other (ex: structural stiffness and safety vs light weight, good mobility, and adjustability). This requires a lot of thoughtful engineering. Right now, structural stability and stiffness are the major challenges. Structural stability is a core requirement for this project. Really start investigating if you can make a stable structure while meeting the other product requirements. If you cannot, what trade-offs are you willing to make? What are the most important requirements and which are open to changing?
Execution
Plastic/pvc was the wrong choice of material for mock up reviews. It's the right idea for quick prototyping. But one of the critical risks of this project is structural. You need to use materials with the correct material properties when demoing. I recommend prototyping in aluminum (or other materials you have selected for the design) ASAP.
Jordan Tappa
Concept
At face value a good benefit for your user - the ability to carry around your child as if pushing a stroller. Curious if you've spoken with any Wheelchair users about having the bulky attachment in front of the frame (size addition and weight) and how that will impact their day to day lives. Consider carefully impacting the user's ability to turn in tight quarters, fitting through doorways, and how they get in and out of their chair.
Analysis
While you did identify mobility and strength of your hinge as potential risks, really understand that these are strong dealbreakers for you user. A baby stroller alone would need to be rigorously strong with no chance of failure for the infant's safety. Attaching that onto a wheelchair mean twofold that it needs to be robust. Consider alternatives to building your own baby seat such as a mount for the parents existing carrier (not so much a problem for toddlers, but its very important to support baby's in the proper manner.)
Execution
Be a tad careful with how fast the seat spins, even if you don't intend for the parents to trigger it with the child seated, its bound to happen. The turning mechanisms were developed well, and telescoping adjustments was a good step in the right direction. Honestly having a wheelchair user get in the chair and wheel around a 20 lbs weight would teach you so much about user need.
Juergen Schoenstein
Concept
From your Sketch Model Presentation, I remembered this as a very compelling concept: The target user group may be small and specific, but the problem that this group experiences when they want to transport their baby (to use the most generic way of describing it) seems very urgent and traumatizing. I could imagine that a solution would not only make the lives of mothers or fathers easier, but might be just as relevant for some grandparents (since, with increasing age, the likelihood of motion impairment also increases). But I became a bit lost in trying to understand the conceptual choices that you presented for your Mock-up version: I can see the balance/center-of-gravity issues that you identified with your sketch model, but adding a bulky contraption that quite obviously alters the functionality and usability of the wheelchair seemed to be going in a not-so-promising direction.
Analysis
I really appreciated that you clearly identified the challenges that come with your suggested solution in your presentation slides. I would have loved to see more exploration how to address them in this mock-up stage; the issue with the orientation of the child carrier and its rotating mechanism seemed like a "nice-to-have" and war certainly well addressed, but not mission-critical - solving the challenges to actually operating the wheelchair will be essential if you want to proceed with this idea.
Execution
It seems that by building your mock-up model, you learned many important things about how it will affect the usability and safety of the wheelchair - and that already is a great outcome, and makes this an effective model.
Georgia Van de Zande
Concept
Well-developed. It would be good to think about a full storyboard of how a user uses this from start to finish. When the parent is putting the baby in, where does the baby start? At the end, where does the baby get placed before the parent has to remove your product? Lots of details in the center there that I think you’ve thought of. But drawing out each step can help you see where the tough spots are.
Analysis
Does the front wheel mean the baby is bouncing a lot more than in a typical stroller? This is something you can measure on your current prototype. Again, thinking about the steps the parent has to go through for this concept, and analyzing the time for each, is critical. How much can you cut down on those?
Execution
Good that you used cardboard for the less critical components (seat) and aluminum for the structure. The next model would need to consider stiffness of all your joints and the attachment part of the chair.
kleensweep
A semi-automated device that reduces the need for manual labor while increasing the frequency of table cleaning at fast-food restaurants.
View Product Contract in New Window
Contributors
Satchel Sieniewicz: Redefining design scope, CAD, designing and machining (mill, lathe, CNC), 3D printing partsJesus Rodriguez: Redefining design scope, Machining Cleaning Unit, Product Contract, Talk to Users, Model Testing, Sourcing Parts, PresenterWarren Wang: Redefining design scope, Cleaning Unit Design, Presentation design, Demo SpeakerKris Vu: Redefining design scope, Coordination/communications, Talk to Users, Machining Cleaning Unit, Integration and assembly, Model Testing, Demo HelperAnna Haddad: Redefining design scope, Product Contract, Talk to Users, Assembly, Model Testing, Demo Helper
Reviewer Feedback
Lauren Futami
Concept
The team identified a good use space and was able to convey the concept and use case fairly well, however it seems pretty difficult to make something that can outmatch the speed and flexibility of a person with a dish rag. It also looks like one unit of kleensweep would be installed on a single table which would suggest that restaurants would have to purchase multiple units to cover all of their tables, and this is assuming that all of their tables are compatible with the system. Although it might not be able to compete with a person, I can see this as a novelty product that plays into its performance rather than its utility. I would look into restaurants that lean into this specialty food/entertainment strategy like the revolving sushi bar Kura (https://kurasushi.com/) or restaurants that use robot servers (https://www.richtechrobotics.com/matradee).
Analysis
Talking to several restaurants about the initial concept and seeing that they responded positively did inspire confidence in the product. I'm curious if the restaurants have the same enthusiasm after seeing what you've built. If they do, it could indicate that you are on the right track, and if they aren't, it could be reason to redevelop the use case and see whether or not it's a product vision discrepancy that they would hopefully be able to help inform you further on what they're really wanting/thinking. It would also be helpful to get customer insight as well, like whether or not they find this device to to be amusing or distracting. Fleshing out all of the possible use cases you imagine tackling is also vital to possibly narrow down what type of messes you will encounter on tables and in what form - liquids, solids, viscosity, food vs debris (napkins, dishes, silverware, etc.). This could subsequently help narrow your target restaurants, such as those that primarily serve drinks, so you wouldn't have to worry so much about food cleanup, etc. Are there other product forms you want to investigate? How will you tackle round tables, bars, etc.?
Execution
It was definitely fun to watch the sweeping mechanism, and I was generally impressed that it was able to sponge off most of the oil (although there was a bit of residue). Were you able to learn much from the mock-up about how to clean tables? It seems like dry foods can be manipulated, while oils will prove to be more challenging. Will the sponge be able to handle that type of mess without having to be replaced often?
Ana Lo
Concept
I don't think this idea aligns with the needs of fast food restaurants. I don't think dirty tables have a significant impact on their sales (actually, I believe Burger King is starting to do drive thru only at many of their locations). Buying a cleaning module for every table would be a huge investment. However, these are all assumptions I am making. If restaurants do want to automate table cleaning, what exactly do they expect from it? What does it need to do to be a worthwhile investment? These questions are essential for guiding design decisions.
Analysis
The prototype was very bulky. The mechanisms for cleaning were effective for debris but left streaks of mustard on the table. Whether or not this is sufficient performance goes back to my previous comments--what do you actually need to deliver to make this a worth while investment for restaurants? Talk to your potential customers!
Execution
The sweeping mechanisms need refinement to actually get the debris into the side receptacle (otherwise it's just transferring mess from table to floor). Adding a water reservoir will increase size and weight--talk to users to see if they really want this. Can you solve the issue (mustard and other icky things stuck to the table) using a different mechanism?
Jordan Tappa
Concept
I'm not sure if you've quite narrowed down which flavor of restaurant would use this. At smaller restaurants/fast food joints like the one I used to work at in high school, It really wouldn't have been more than a minutes or two per table, and often you'd be in the kitchen/at register during a big rush and then really bored when things die down so you go wipe tables. Clearing things like leftover food, trays and lost-and-found items are easy and quick for a worker with nothing else to do, but difficult for a robotic arm to distinguish. The place I would see this used most often is an urban McDonalds, or Raising Canes like restaurant that has a small crew working and they spend most of their time shelling out food which may leave the dining area unattended. However I'm unsure if the time-save your claim would be worth it to the companies more-so than just the novelty of having an automatic cleaner. I would need to be convinced that this is saving anyone time or money.
Analysis
The test materials - which it certainly was misc debris - seemed ill fitting for the situations you were saying. I would be more interesting in seeing typical restaurant droppings than a few cheerios brushed away. When you test out your hard-built mechanisms, test them on things that will show you accurate success/failure and not easy things you're pretty sure it can do. Would've liked to see it clean up a ketchup/jam/coffee stain or brush away a half-eaten burger into the bin no problem. Definitely go back to the analysis professor Josh Weismen brought up in lecture regarding how much time you're saving relative to cost, cleaning refills, maintenance, and the new time demand that an employee will have to do to interact with Kleensweep - emptying the bin a couple times a day.
Execution
Unfortunate that the model broke before Mock Ups, props for running with it and having the team mates assist in the demo regardless. The conveyor belt to sweep small debris is a good change from the knock off Roomba, but I feel some logistic work needs to be done on resource management (fluid storage more than power, as this bigger item likely could be plugged into the wall).
Juergen Schoenstein
Concept
If the Covid 19 pandemic has taught us anything, then it is the importance of hygiene, to avoid the spread of diseases. And I am confident that your idea - at a high level, at least - would be able to attract the attention of investors.
Analysis
A strong analysis tries to identify challenges and risks - your model seemed to have been designed mainly to impress superficially, rather than explore and verify actual performance parameters. Even the "evidence" for table cleaning in your slide presentation seemed unconvincing: sure, the cardboard chips and other debris had disappeared in your "after" pictures, but that alone does not a clean table make. The demonstration in lab actually showed the exact opposite: Even when assisted by guiding hands (which is precisely what you promise to make obsolete), there was NO cleaning at all: the Cheerios were kicked to the floor, the oil was smeared all over the surface. Using a rag and taking 20 seconds would have achieved a better result. Also, it is a fallacy that replacing manual labor with a machine will inevitably lead to savings: Nobody (and I will repeat that louder: NOBODY) is ever so busy in their job that they can't take a moment or two for a simple cleanup task. And labor in fast-food restaurants tends to be cheap anyhow, which inevitably limits the appeal of investing in technical equipment. So unless you can beat human labor in QUALITY of cleaning (which you would have to prove, and it would have to involve cleanliness on a biological level), you are benchmarking against the wrong metric.
Execution
Not much to say here: When we arrived at the station (we were the second team to visit you), your model was already broken. But even in its resting state, it seemed like a contraption that would not be capable of thoroughly cleaning a surface, even if all parts would have worked as designed.
Georgia Van de Zande
Concept
Definitely a need in fast food and fast casual restaurants. However, I’m not convinced yet that this is the most economic way for a restaurant to have clean tables. I wonder if there are other solutions. What if there were a device that recognized a dirty table and alerted the staff that one needed cleaning? Are there other ways to achieve the same result?
Analysis
What are the hardest things someone has to clean off a table surface? I’m thinking dried ketchup. How does your concept go up against that? Is that a spec you need to hit? Or what happens if someone leaves a drink on the table, and the device pushes it off and makes a bigger mess on the floor? This is a tough problem for a device because there are so many variables. Humans are great at dealing with complex situations, but you have identified that humans are busy, so the tables don’t get clean.
Execution
The model worked for some of the tasks, so nicely done. Some of the other tasks (like cleaning oil) were challenging and may need more testing.
ContROLL
An automatic device that limits the speed of a wheelchair going down a ramp in order to prevent uncontrolled descent and hand friction burns
View Product Contract in New Window
Contributors
Max Fan (subconcept - Generative Dampening): Construction, Feasibility Calculations, Product ContractAdam “Zimm” Zimmermann (subconcept - Friction Dampening): Team Lead, CAD, Part Sourcing, FabricationLillian Linden (subconcept - Magnetic Dampening): Feasibility Calculations, CAD, Fabrication, Presentation, PresenterEnya Ryu (subconcept - Magnetic Dampening): Machining (mill, lathe), sourcing parts, product assembly and testingJustin Li (subconcept - Hydraulic Dampening): Concept development, calculations, feasibility testing, assemblyGaby Ulloa (subconcept - Friction Dampening): Machining (milling, lathe), mount fabrication, sourcing parts (edited)
Reviewer Feedback
Lauren Futami
Concept
The clarity of use and user are both pretty strong, I'm also just curious how often this scenario occurs for wheelchair users? Are wheelchair users often losing control on inclines/declines? Why aren't they able to hold their brakes for a more controlled descent? I was also unsure of the specific use case this would be used for - how steep are these inclines? I'm assuming this is for more unexpected inclines found on hills since I would expect that ADA compliant ramps wouldn't put wheelchair users in a steep incline scenario. Although the general problem you're trying to solve makes sense to me, I have no experience relying on wheelchairs and am curious if potential users would find this much more helpful than existing handbrakes. From your presentation, I wasn't sure whether or not you had a user/users to confirm this need, and if you have, then that's great(!) and I am much more convinced, but if not, I would strongly suggest doing so before pursuing this idea further.
Analysis
I was really impressed that the team was able to build and test 4 different models, that was seriously great! I think having these pathways will also help determine which model might be the best to pursue once you think more about the other considerations for wheelchair users. I saw you compared each method on effectiveness, obtrusivity, disassembly, and rolling resistance, what else have you considered are other priorities? How much does each weigh and how does that in turn affect general use of the wheelchair? Having users to explain these concerns will help narrow down which idea might best be suited for what you're thinking and ground it in a stronger foundation as you take the next steps forward.
Execution
Having 4 methods to show for mockups was fantastic. Pursuing so many different ideas gives you a better ability to discern what is a better idea vs a less useful idea based on facts rather than thought experiments. These would be interesting to present to wheelchair users and have them test your various methods to see what is most useful/natural to them, as I'm sure even they wouldn't be able to definitively point to one without testing to really know for sure.
Ana Lo
Concept
Can you get a sense of what speed scares wheel chair users? You tested with the team, but someone used to a wheel chair might have a different threshold (this will also vary a lot from person to person). How dangerous is it to descend at these speeds? Are their injuries associated with specific speeds? I think you need to strengthen your reasoning behind the max speed you've chosen.
Analysis
Two of the four mechanisms were not discussed at all much during mock ups. It felt like these designs were not give much consideration. I'm curious why you dismissed eddy current brakes, they seem perfect for the application as their braking force scales with velocity. The number of design iterations you showed was great. But make sure to give each idea careful thought and research! I encourage you to spend more time looking at eddy current brakes.
Execution
Nice job integrating two of the mechanisms into the wheel chair. Keep testing prototypes on the wheel chair (and not just the bench)! It will help prevent integration problems later on.
Jordan Tappa
Concept
I would reexamine your use case for this product. In general wheel chair users reduce the weight (and attachments) on their chair so that its easier to carry themselves around for the entire day. Some of the few attachments I do hear about them using regularly include a light mesh under storage bag, and a motored wheel for extra juice in pushing uphill. I can see benefits for not wanting to exert that extra downhill effort near the end of the day, or perhaps if they're trying to carry something (most wheelchair users my team spoke to just wanted us to make a cup holder). The majority of experienced wheelchair users are experts at maneuvering their chair (wheelies, special maneuvers for curbs, insanely strong physique) and I worry the device you attach will be more cumbersome than beneficial.
Analysis
While I commend you for exploring multiple avenues and mechanisms (not easy to do in such a short sprint) you really do need to convey to your audience what you learned from those 4 options and which was the the winner/front runner. The point of doing the experiments is to learn and be decisive about picking a direction forward. I worry with the two models you did end up putting on the chair that they may damage the wheels and frame over long term use. Often, wheel chair users that are in their chairs long term buy custom chairs through their insurance, but it can be a pain to get timely repairs if they break.
Execution
Definitely focus on implementation for the user, you've identified a few promising methods for slowing down a wheel, but I'm a bit skeptical if the value add for these users will be worth the cost and potential inconvenience if this device gets in the way of their hands and mobility while wheeling the chair. Also be super critical of weight - larger motors and attachments are understandable at this stage, but if you want someone to put this on their person and carry it around all day everyday, it better be as light as humanly possible.
Juergen Schoenstein
Concept
It seemed quite clear what you want to accomplish. And on the face of it, the scenario in your slides seemed to support the existence of the need for wheelchair brakes. But I will be honest: I checked your visuals, and they greatly exaggerate the problem. Wheelchair ramps are required by law to have a 1:12 ratio of height to length, but what you showed was closer to 1:6. Hyperbole (in this case: visual hyperbole) might be an acceptable tool in advertising, but in a technical context, accuracy and truthfulness should take precedence. I am not saying that the problem does not exist, but seeing this exaggeration made inevitably undercut my confidence in the credibility of your argument. I also struggled to understand who you see as your user, your target persona: I particularly found it difficult to envision somebody who has enough grip strength to propel themselves in a manual wheelchair, but nor enough hand strength to apply a simple brake mechanism (not unlike bike brakes). Those two (in)abilities seem to be in direct contradiction. When asked about this, you seemed to brush these concerns aside, without using actual evidence (remember "FNAP - Facts, Not Assertions, Please").
Analysis
Exploring 4 different concepts of slowing down wheelchairs was definitely a strong move, and those models should be able to give you a lot of data to explore these concepts. I strongly suggest to do more analysis for all those concepts, before deciding on your final project. Also, make sure to explore what the real user needs are, by talking to many, many wheelchair users and/or specialists (this requires far more research than finding the one user who likes our ideas). And keep in mind that anything that adds complexity and weight to a wheelchair makes the lives of riders more complicated, so just because it functions on a technical level might nor translate to actually being useful - again, only the users themselves can tell you what their respective needs are.
Execution
As I mentioned earlier, I was impressed that you were able to show four different models; considering the size of your sub-team and the time that you had, this was a commendable effort. But one effect of this "smorgasbord" of possible solutions was that we could not fully engage with all of them equally. I would have liked, for example, to get a better sense of your reasoning for using electronics to trigger one of your brake systems - this could have just as easily been resolved with a manual "switch" (or lever, for example). I am not saying that you did not have those reasons - but they just did not come across clearly enough to convince.
Georgia Van de Zande
Concept
You’ve identified an issue for wheelchair users. I still want to challenge you to find (from users) if they want the braking to be manually activated or automatically activated. Make sure you aren’t putting your thoughts into their answers and assuming what they might have trouble with. I couldn’t tell from the review if you had heard this from users/doctors or if it was assumed.
Analysis
It was great that you made multiple models! For each one, there are fundamental equations that govern the size, weight, cost etc. Have you looked at those equations to help you determine which way to go?
Execution
Again, thank you for exploring multiple directions! Did you try all four on the chair? What did you learn from that?