Power in Community

Summary

For this project my engineering team focused on a real-world issue that a client in the community faced. Our client faces with three autoimmune diseases, including ankylosing spondylitis which causes inflammation of her spine and other joints leading to excessive bone growth and fusion of her vertebrae. She is a recent breast cancer survivor and is also coping with chronic lymphedema in her arms, chest, and back, with her dominant arm and shoulder being the most affected. There are several hobbies our clients enjoys doing like painting, sewing, partaking in Brazilin Jujutsu, etc. However, the challenges she faces will often get in the way of her hobbies and other daily tasks. As a engineering team, our job is to create a product that will make it easier for her to carry out her daily tasks as all these challenges

have made it particularly difficult to do so.

Objectives

Our first objective is to frame a design problem in terms of the needs of the client. In order to do that, we need to identify the needs of the client, the attributes and behaviors that a design solution should have or exhibit (objectives ), the restrictions on the design solutions (constraints) ,the actions that the overall system is expected to perform ( functions).
Our next objective is follow an iterative design process moving from a preliminary conceptual prototype to a more detailed prototype that incorporates user feedback. To test each prototype to evaluate the concept and performance of our design.
To communicate our design process quickly and effectively to obtain feedback from non-team members, answer questions about our design process, and apply feedback to improve and refine our design.
Last objective is to finalize our design and write a professional engineering report discussing the process and outcome of our design project to our client.

Milestones

Milestone 1

For the first milestone, I took notes during our clients introductory visit. In this visit, I had the opportunity to listen to our clients story and ask questions. With the information I gathered, our team discussed and formulated an initial problem statement that outlines the set of considerations (function and constraints) in the client problem.

Based on out notes we came up with the following problem statement:

"The client has trouble with fine motor skills like small precise movements needed when dicing vegetables and meats. Therefore, the principal objective should be focusing on designing a device that is conducive to her fine motor skills and pain relief. It is particularly important that the device should minimize friction and the forces she exerted on the assistive device because the client herself has muscle spasms occasionally, which would prevent her from dicing normally."

We decided to make a device that will help the client dice/cut vegetables instead of her using the blender unnecessarily. Our reasoning behind choosing to make this device, is that we know the client has trouble with precision movement, and exerting force. This affects the clients ability in the kitchen to prepare meals, so if we were to create a device that can do those precision movements for the client, it would improve their quality of life.

To add, we came up with three objectives for out design which are:

Maximizes output force with minimal input force from the user: The client has difficulty exerting large amounts of force and if she tries to it will cause her great pain. Therefore, the output force should be greater than what the client inputs into the device in order to minimize the amount of strain on her body caused by exerting a force. This will leave the client with more energy to complete other tasks due to the reduced exertion of her muscles and body.
Lightweight: The client has occasional muscle spasms that prevents her from lifting up heaving objects for a long time. Therefore, the weight should be lightweight as it helps her relieve the occasional muscle pains and minimize forces exerted on the dicing device. Moreover, some lightweight materials can reduce the unnecessary interactions between her dominant arm shoulder since it takes less time to hold the device with her hand.
Safety/security: This device can be dangerous if not used properly because it will have a series of sharp blades that will pushed down on an object (typically food) and split it up. If not handled with caution someone can get seriously hurt. Moreover, client has children so that is something that needs to be considered. We want it to be safe so that if children were to get their hands on this device by chance, they would not be able to harm themselves or anyone else.

Milestone 2

For the second milestone, our team refined our initial problem statement, using notes from the research assignment we had to complete and from our second client visit. Moreover, we had to create several concept sketches on the design we want to make and choose our top 2.

For the research assignment, each of us needed to ask a research question relating to our design work. Mine is "ow do cooks with physical limitations work?", and the following text is my answer to this question.

Cooking is an important part of life, people cook so they are able to feed themselves and others. Humans need to eat every day and often they will cook to get their food than go out to eat. Unfortunately, there are some individuals may be put at a disadvantage when it comes to cooking because they might have some handicap that prohibits their ability to prepare food. Restrictions can include in not being able to use certain tools or not being able to reach in certain location. However, that does not mean they will not be able to prepare meals at all, there are alternative methods of preparing food they can use to overcome their challenges. For instance, “there are plenty of adaptive tools created to make cooking and eating easier, like automatic pot and pan stirrers, stabilized utensils for people who experience tremors or mobility issues, safer and easier one-handed cutting boards, braille measuring cups, and more[3]”. Individuals who have a hard time dicing vegetable can use the one-handed cutting board to dice vegetables. This specialized cutting board clamps down on the food, so the individual does not have to. There are sites like handicappedequipment.org or amazon who sells specialized kitchen tools for people who needs it. These specialized tools will make it incredibly easier and less stressful to prepare food for themselves. To add, kitchens can be renovated to fit the needs of the user, so countertops heights can be changed to make it easier to grab tools, kitchen materials can be changed to make cleaning easier, and more. Another support challenged individuals can get to help with cooking is just support from others. Having friends and family being there for them will greatly help them with their cooking. That could mean bringing the ingredients for them, helping them will tasks that they have more difficulty with, just being patient or just being for them when they try to cook. Moreover, how the individual thinks of cooking play as a factor on how well they are able to cook. It will be easier and more enjoyable for them to cook if they see it as a fun activity, they need to solve in an unorthodox way compared to seeing it as a chore. Even with reduced mobility or some other disadvantage, there are many alternative methods that will allow challenged individuals to prepare meals easier. In all, for the individuals with disabilities cooking might not be the easiest task to do, but it will not be the hardest, especially with all these resources to help them. Cooking with a physical disability is an endless, solution-finding puzzle that they will have to figure out for themselves. Even with the disadvantages they have, there are many of them who are still able to cook professionally or cook as a hobby, so its very possible to overcome their challenges.

List of sources:

[1] “One Handed Cutting Boards | Handicapped Equipment.” https://www.handicappedequipment.org/tag/one-handed-cutting-boards/ (accessed Mar. 07, 2021).

[2] “Cooking with a Physical Disability | Kitchn.” https://www.thekitchn.com/cooking-with-aphysical-disability-171416 (accessed Mar. 07, 2021).

[3] “Cooking With a Disability Is Hard Thanks to Societal Barriers | Well+Good.” https://www.wellandgood.com/cooking-with-disability-barriers/ (accessed Mar. 07, 2021).

Based on the new information we acquired from the client visit and research question, we refined our problem statement.

"The client needs additional aid when it comes to tasks that require fine motor skills or precision movement, which affects the client’s ability to perform tasks in the kitchen. Therefore, the design solution should be a light-weight device and conducive to her fine motor skills. The device should minimize the forces she exerted on the assistive device because the client herself has muscle spasms occasionally, which would prevent her from dicing and performing any other basic tasks in the kitchen."

For the last part of this milestone we had to create couple of concept sketches and choose the top two. My concept ended up in the top two.

My concept

Team mate's concept

My concept

1/2

Milestone 3

For the third milestone, my team mate and I had to refine our two concepts from the last milestone and explain our thought process.

My Refined Concept

Isometric View

Front View

Top View

Isometric View

1/4

Based on the concept sketch, I noticed that the user would have a hard time getting a proper grip on the tool because it would be like they if they had to pinch with all their fingers to hold the device. To solve the gripping issue, I added a large gap in the handle so that the user can wrap their hand around the device providing them with a much better grip. To add, the handle in the concept sketch stuck out more than it needed to, which would cause discomfort to the user. For the refined design, the handle was altered to provide more comfort to the user when gripping on to this device. One last change for the refined design is that I changed the orientation of the blades by 90 degrees so that it would mimic the motion of dicing vegetables (going forward and back with the knife), because previously would need to go side by side with the tool to cut vegetables.

Team Mates Concept

Component 1

Component 2

Component 1

1/2

The concept sketch introduced a handle for the user to hold the device securely and a set of protection cases preventing the blades from injuring the user. The device itself can rotate freely by using a hinge, making it easier for the user to perform fine motor skills. The internal blade is saw-shaped which helps to fasten the food and makes it a lot easier to dice.

Then, we decided on an appropriate decision matrix to explore how each initial prototype might perform against each other while taking into account of our functions, objectives, constraints.

For our criteria, we judged the devices based on its weight, safety, minimizing force and dicing ability. We chose these options as our criteria because we need a device that is light so the user can carry and use with ease. This device must be safe for the user so the user doesn’t unknowingly injure herself. To add, the client also has children, giving us more reasons to make the device safer. The well being of the users are very important. Minimizing user input because we don't want to cause additional stress to our client while using this deice. Lastly, the dicing ability is our main criteria because it is our main objective.

The last part of this milestone is the design review and to choose the final design. For the design review, we will first discuss our initial prototypes and make note of all feedback. Then, we will discuss it with and record feedback from some science student mentors.

Based on the feed back we got and our decision matrix, it was decided that my prototype (Multibladed Knife) will be used for our final design.

Milestone 4

For our last milestone, I needed to refine my prototype using the feedback I got from the last design review. Then I will present my refined prototype to the science students again to get more feedback so that I can further develop my prototype.

Refined Prototype

Isometric View

Refined Prototype

Front View

Blade Cover

Isometric View

Refined Prototype

Isometric View

1/3

Based on the feedback form the last design review, we made this concept fully detachable. We are able to remove every single blade and the blade holder. This allows us to sharpen each of the blades, replace the blades if they become dull, and change the spacing of the blades by replacing the blade holder. Added screw holes to hold the device together. Entire device consists of 18 pieces (excluding the screws). The two-piece handle, blade holder and the 15 blades. Having them separate like this makes the time to 3D print much shorter. Moreover, from the feedback we got, we gave the handle a more comfortable design, so the user is able to easily grip on it with no discomfort. I accomplished that by making all the square edges on the handle rounded. To add, was also asked to improve on safety by adding a blade cover which we also modelled in Inventor. This was done for the safety of the client and any other individual using this product.

Before we get on with our interview, we needed to create a testing plan four our product. A present testing pan and a future testing plan was created due to the limited resources we had during the pandemic(COVID-19).

Present Testing Plan

The device will me 3D printed with a PLA material to give us a good understanding of the overall design. With the 3D printed model, we can check for:

Safety: To test safety for our device by feeling for sharp edges and corners with our hands. Identify number of small components when the device is fully disassembled. Identify number of blades for the device, and effectiveness of the blade cover to see if it holds the blades in place and covers the sharp edges.

Ease of use: The ease of use of the device can be tested by testing how easy the device’s handle is to grip. This can be tested by running a trial with at least 10 people. Each test subject will grip the devices handle and mimic a cutting motion. The test subject will mimic this motion at least 20 times. The test subject will then answer the following questions in a written format: how did the device feel in your hand when in motion, on a scale of 1-10 how comfortable was the device to hold? and do you have any concerns about the device?

Drop/Durability: This objective can be tested through determining number of drops, usage and height of drops. The device itself contain multiple detachable blades that will become loose after it is being used for a long time. The user can decide how often the device will be used in terms of the weight/toughness of the food. The user can also test the durability by dropping the device from different heights to see whether it will break apart.

Future Testing Plan

In this scenario the device would be made of wood and stainless steel.

Functionality: To test functionality, we can trial cutting various different fruits/vegetables to determine how effective the device is at cutting the fruits/vegetables. We can also let others trial the device and listen to their feedback/ reviews of the device, and how they felt the device performed compared to traditional dicing.

Ease of use: To test the ease of use of the device a trial with at least 10 people over the course of 3 weeks will be run. Where they the device to cut any vegetables and fruit that are ingredients in a meal they are preparing. After each use of the device the user will log the usage of the device. The user will record the following in each log entry: what was being cut, how well the device cut the object on a scale of 1-10, a brief description of how the device felt in their hand, and any criticisms or concerns the user has about the device.

Cleanliness: Visual inspection on how clean the device is after putting it through a dishwasher.

Drop/Durability: If more money and more advance technology are provided, durability can be tested by letting a robot simulate how well the device behaves when it comes to different types of food. The robot itself can also attempt to drop the device either from different altitudes or by changing the applied forces exerted on the device.

For our second design review, it will be the same as last time. I will get feedback from by teammates and the science students, which I will use to further improve my concept for the final presentation where I present my product to the client.

Final Design

Exploded View of Multi-Bladed Knife

Multi-Bladed Knife

Wireview of the Multi-Bladed Knife

3D Printed Prototype of Multi-Bladed Knife

Multi-Bladed Knife Holder

Wireview of the Multi-Bladed Knife Holder

CAD Model of Multi-Bladed Knife and Holder

Final Deliverable

Relevant Background Information

The client has been a health care provider for over 15 years. In 2016, the client accumulated enough autoimmune diseases that made her no longer able to work as a midwife. The perpetual lack of sleep resulted in the impact on her immune system and would cause occasional muscle spasms while painting or performing any kitchen stuff. In 2017, she started painting, sculpturing, and training adapted Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. There are a lot of design spaces that are worth exploring. Finally, team Mon-20 decided to design a dicing device that could improve the client’s fine motor skills in the kitchen.

Refined Problem Statement

The client needs additional aid when it comes to tasks that require fine motor skills or precision movement, which affects the client’s ability to perform tasks in the kitchen. Therefore, the design solution should be a light-weight device and conducive to her fine motor skills. The device should minimize the forces she exerted on the assistive device because the client herself has muscle spasms occasionally, which would prevent her from dicing and performing any other basic tasks in the kitchen.

Objectives and Constrains of the Design

One of the objectives of the design is to maximizes output force with minimal input force from the user. The client has difficulty exerting large amounts of force and if she tries to it will cause her great pain. Therefore, the output force should be greater than what the client inputs into the device in order to minimize the amount of strain on her body caused by exerting a force. This will leave the client with more energy to complete other tasks due to the reduced exertion of her muscles and body. Another objective is lightweight as the client has occasional muscle spasms that prevents her from lifting heaving objects for a long time. Therefore, the weight should be lightweight as it helps her relieve the occasional muscle pains and minimize forces exerted on the dicing device. Moreover, some lightweight materials can reduce the unnecessary interactions between her dominant arm shoulder since it takes less time to hold the device with her hand. Also, safety is paramount as the client has children so that is something that needs to be considered. The device should be as safe as possible so that if children were to get their hands on this device by chance, they would not be able to harm themselves or anyone else.

The constraint of the design also relates the safety of the client, which is the number of sharp edges present in the design. The device should not contain any sharp edges as the client doesn’t want to choose a device that has safety hazards.

Existing Ideas and Solutions

Currently, most of the dicing devices contain only one blade and are not detachable compared with our design. The protection cases of the dicing devices are made of plastic, which are not friendly to the environment. These dicing devices also do not give consideration to people with physical disabilities as most of these people might feel uncomfortable when holding stiff plastics.

Conceptual Design

Ideation

We explored multiple paths in deciding which path to take for our device.

Design Alternatives

Marcus’s prototype was discarded as it was more complex and required a motor and various moving part that would have been very hard to create in inventor whereas Biswajit’s design is much simpler, easier to make and accomplishes all of the desired objectives. Samad’s prototype was discarded because it was designed with the intention of using the body weight of the client to push the vegetables through the cutting apparatus which goes against the objective of minimizing the amount of force the user must exert to cut/dice vegetables, and it didn’t allow the user to adjust the size of the cuts made on the vegetables.

Decision Matrix

For the criteria in our decision matrix, we judged on the devices based on whether its light weight, safe, minimizes user input and dicing ability. We chose these options as our criteria because we need a device that is light so the user can carry and use with ease. Metrics for these criteria would be in grams. We put weight as the lowest rank because this objective is not as pressing as safety or the main function of the device which is to cut. This device must be safe for the user, so the user does not unknowingly injure herself. To add, the client also has children, giving us more reasons to make the device safer. Metrics for this would be number of incidents. Safety was ranked the second most important because we don’t want anyone getting hurt using this device. The well-being of the users is very important. Minimising user input is our second rank with the metric of mm by using a microscope to see thew width of the blade. Our main objective is to cut food, so how well it cuts is an important factor. Last, the dicing ability is our main criteria, it is ranked 1 because it is our main objective. Number of blades would be used for the metrics. The multi-bladed knife received a rating of 4 for lightweight while the lever knife received a rating of 1. This is to be expected as the lever knife is much larger and is intended to be stationary when in use, while the multi-blade knife is meant to be hand-held. The multi-bladed knife was given a rating of 2 for safety because it has sharp exposed blades. The lever knife was given a rating of 4 for safety as the blade is on a fixed axis of rotation that is controlled, and the design makes it harder to injure yourself with the device without intentionally doing so. Both devices were given a rating of 3 for minimizing user input as both would require less force to cut a vegetable then a standard kitchen knife for cutting vegetables. Finally, the multi-bladed knife received a rating of 4 for dicing ability and the lever knife received a 3. This was the case as the multi-bladed knife is able to cut many more slices in one usage than the lever knife. Ultimately, the multi-bladed knife was higher rated than the Lever-knife as it can cut a vegetable into more slices than the lever knife and is much lighter and can be held in the user’s hand.

Design Evaluation

Final Proposed Design

The device has a handle at the top and has fifteen blades at the bottom This device allows the user to easily cut food into several pieces without the need for precision motion. The device is designed to be easy to hold and operate, to assist those with physical limitations with their kitchen cutting tasks. The blades can be easily disassembled and put together again, making it easy to clean and sharpen the blades of the device. The removeable blades also allow for them to be replaced if any blade breaks. The device has curved blades making the blade better suited to cutting round vegetables and minimizing the force the user must exert to make the blade cut up the vegetables. To use the device, it is similar as using the knife where the user goes in a forward and back motion with the device. The handle consists of two pieces or 2 halves which can be put together with 4 long screws. Then the blade holder will slide in the bottom of the handle where we can put the fifteen blades in the blade holder. To finish, there are two more screws that goes through the handle, blade holder and all the blades making the device whole. In Figure 26 is our 3D printed prototype and Figure 27 is our final CAD model of our device. For our current prototype, it was 3D printed using a PLA filament. With more resources it would normally me made of maple wood for the handle and stainless steel for the blades. The number of sharp edges present in the design is zero, which guarantees that there should be zero safety incidents occurring while the client is using the device. The weight of the device is 0.817 kg, which is significantly lighter than any other dicing devices sold on market. Therefore, the design met the lightweight objective and reduces the unnecessary interactions between her dominant arm shoulder since it takes less time to hold the device with her hand. Furthermore, the device also met the minimum user input criteria as the 3D-printed model worked well when dicing an onion shown in the Pitch Video. Therefore, the client will be left with more energy to complete other tasks due to the reduced exertion of her muscles and body.

Conclusion

Our final product is quite impressive, as we were able to test it by 3D printing it. We were able to test out comfortability of the handle and the durability of the device, and the results exceeded our expectations. Though we were not able to fully test it due to the limited resources we have, this device is promising. To improve our device, we could determine exactly what material to use through testing and determine what the ideal spacing between the blades should be. With more time and resources, we could have multiple prototypes made with different materials and with minor design changes to test which is prototype is best. To add, we could have developed a better handle by physically creating it and allowing other people to test it to determine which handle is most ideal. From this experience, we learned that it is important to have multiple drafts of an idea instead of just your own because other people will have different ideas than you. The diversity of ideas is important because it can give you solutions you never could have thought of. This will give the team more ideas to come with a proper solution since people will look at a problem differently, giving us a perspective on a problem we typically would not be able to come up with. With all their multiple views on the problem, we can come up with a better solution than the one we would come up with if we did it individually.