1. A Clean Hand Device for Manual Wheelchairs March 4, 2004

2. 2 Team Members Fannie Black Peter Pipchenko Jeff Dahlgren Mitsunori Kaibara

3. 3 Presentation Scope To review the history of the project and our four step process work. To summarize what we have done and plan to do in the areas of: –Design –Analysis –Verification

4. 4 Original Proposal Change Sponsor requested us design of a complete clean hand wheelchair. After consideration of the market niche, we successfully pitched designing an add-on alternative propulsion clean hand device.

5. 5 Mission Statement We will design an alternative propulsion clean hand device for manual wheelchairs that will be inexpensive and fit the most popular wheelchairs in use today. (Rev. 1)

6. 6 PDS Criteria Selection Biomechanical Efficiency Fits Popular Chairs Adjustability & Comfort Controllability – Braking, Turning Environmental Survivability Impact Strength Size & Weight Device Attachment Point Customer Installation Safety Company Cost Appearance (Rev. 2)

7. 7 External Search - 1 GlovesWijit Handcycle Motorized Competing Solutions Comparison

8. 8 External Search - 2 Analysis Methods Wheelchair User StatisticsAlternative Propulsion Test

9. 9 Internal Search - 1

10. 10 Internal Search - 2

11. 11 1 st Critical Step We realized designing this device required personal experience with a wheelchair. We rented a wheelchair and rode it around.

12. 12 Wheelchair Use Learnings Your hand really does get filthy! Controllability is the highest priority. Side space is incredibly limited. Adaptability will be key. We dont really have a clue what its like, so we must get wheelchair user input.

13. 13 Final Concept Selection +

14. 14 Hybrid Concept

15. 15 2 nd Critical Step We had two meetings with actual wheelchair users. We wanted to get their input on our design criteria. We wanted to see if they would buy and use our final concepts.

16. 16 Wheelchair User Learnings They substantially shot down all ideas, because of four main factors: –The motion was too complicated and required too much relearning. –The devices stood out too much. Disabled people want to minimize their disabilities. –No propulsion method gives better control to actual manual wheelchair users than the traditional hand to rim method. –All they and the sponsor really want is a clean hand guard, without the alternative propulsion aspect. Back to the drawing board.

17. 17 Human Element Theres a strong human element in this project. Were designing a device that will literally become a part of a persons body. Theres nothing more personal than that, and thus the most important factor in designing this device has to be how the user feels. We had completely ignored this before. The user must be consulted as early as possible in the design of any product with a strong human element.

18. 18 Revised Mission Statement We will design an alternative propulsion clean hand device for manual wheelchairs that will be inexpensive and fit the most popular wheelchairs in use today. (Rev. 2)

19. 19 Revised PDS Criteria Biomechanical Efficiency Fits Popular Chairs Adjustability & Comfort Controllability – Braking, Turning Environmental Survivability Impact Strength Size & Weight Device Attachment Point Customer Installation Safety Company Cost Appearance (Rev. 3)

20. 20 Revised Concept Counterbalanced Squeezable Hand Rim Extender & Guard + Without the lever arm

21. 21 Revised Concept Wheel Spider Attachment Point Adjustable Default Counterbalance Position Palm Guard Rim Extender Squeezable Grip (Contd)

22. 22 What Weve Done Design –Concept Brainstorming –9 Different Concept Models –A Complete Wheelchair Model from Actual Dimensions Analysis –Zero Verification –Rode a Wheelchair to Consider Our Concepts –Got Input from Wheelchair Users about Our Designs

23. 23 What We Plan To Do Design –Material Selection & Part Sourcing –Nuts & Bolts Model (Add Fasteners, Bearings) –Dimension Drawing (Piece Part, Assy) –Plastic Part Mold Model & Drawings (Parting Line, Draft Angles) –Final Concept Refinement Analysis –Strengths Analysis of All Components –Machine Design Fatigue Analysis of Bearings, etc. Verification –Simple Cardboard Prototypes –Tougher Metal or Wood Prototypes for Actual Use –Testing of Prototypes by Wheelchair Users

24. Please ask questions. Thank you.