Background

Like 8 million Canadians, I order coffee outside of my home nearly every day (http://www.coffeeassoc.com/coffeeincanada.htm) . At an average of 2.8 cups a day (CCAC, 2010), me and my Canadian coffee cohorts are responsible for BILLIONS of paper cups ending up in landfills every year (Buist, 2003). In fact, in the USA, approximately 63 billion paper cups are thrown out on a yearly basis (http://www.earthdistributors.com/learning/fastfacts.php). After years of public service announcements on the unsustainability of our disposable lifestyles, why are these numbers so high? Why do more people not use reusable alternatives such as travel mugs? Crucially, can a product or system of products profitably curb this trend, and change customer preference?

Personal experience, and customer interviews revealed that a persistent pain point of owning a mug is the need to clean it. For example, when I get home from work, I often forget my mug in the car; the next morning it is cold, and caked with crud. When I go into my local coffee outlet, they will not clean the mug or lid - Green Steam wants to change that.

Final Design

The Green Steam system is two-tiered travel mug incentivization program including: 1) a travel mug cleaning machine that would be installed at retail coffee outlets, and 2) a corresponding line of mugs that have an RFID system capable of storing a customer’s billing information and common drink order.

Initial Concepts

Embarking on this Fourth Year Project, I already had a few ideas I had wanted to pursue in the past. Digging through my old notebooks, and jotting new ideas as they came, I came up with a short list of about ten projects. They varied hugely in scope, and market sector, for example:

While I think all of these ideas were valid, the trick was picking a project with enough depth to challenge me over the eight month development period, as well as granting the potential to demonstrate my skills. The Green Steam system was most in-line with these requirements.

Research

The research phase was of particular importance for a project like this because the system was destined to fit within another very structured system, that of coffee retailers. As such, this phase tried to consider all stakeholders, as well as technology. Specific topics included:

1) The Corporate Market

2) End-Users of Machine and Mug

3) Existing Insulated Mugs

4) Rapid Cleaning Technology

This research was critical in determining the minimum performance requirements for the machine, as well as: the technology employed, the use cycle limitations, and the best prospective clients.

Concept Development

The conceptual phase is where the concept began to take shape. With measures of success clearly laid-out, it was now time to figure out:

1) Will high-pressure hot water be effective?

2) What major components will be needed?

3) How will the mug and lid interact with the nozzles inside the cleaner?

4) How will the employees interact with the machine?

The first logical step was to test the theory of high-pressure cleaning, and steam cleaning. For both of these tests I used a variety of soil - old coffee, lipstick, crusty hot-chocolate - as the machine would be encountering fatty and non-fatty types of dirt. As a final test, high-pressure cold water was used to remove fully cured acrylic paint from the inside of a stainless steel mug.

These tests, coupled with primary and secondary research into existing cleaning technologies and NSF standards, gave me a rough estimate of the amount, temperature, and pressure of water needed for adequate cleaning within 20 seconds. At the component-level, I ended up choosing a general assembly of pump, boiler, and motor, versus steam boiler, for three main reasons:

1) Pump, boiler, and motor, are not very specialized and made for custom assembly.

2) High pressure hot water can be delivered further from the surface to be cleaned, therefore increasing the wash envelope and size variations for mugs.

3) The steam boiler would still require a pressurized water line.

With this established, a scale model of the components was made to give an idea of overall size requirements. It was clear that this could be a counter-top unit, under-counter unit, or split configuration. The split configuration was chosen to save counter space, and reduce pump noise.

After determining the best interaction between the mug and nozzles in the wash basin, I turned my attention to the user interaction. The main use criteria were speed, intuitiveness, safety, and the fact that a dirty lid could not be handled by employees.

Testing

At this point, I had devised a couple potential use scenarios for the machine. The main focus was insertion of the mug, and insertion of the lid. I made two test models, each with a different way of loading the mug and lid.

The models were installed onto an improvised three foot counter, and testing was performed on over a dozen participants. At first, the basic concept was explained, and participants were told to use the machine how they imagined it should be used. This gave insights into the intuitiveness.

For the second part of the test, participants were asked to repeat the operation to determine which was fastest.

The testing concluded with loosely structured interviews which provided surprising qualitative insights that helped guide the final design:

Final Design and Aesthetic Refinement

With the size, scenario, and environment established, it was now time to stylize the machine. It was nice to have a solid framework to build the final design over. My work flow on stylistic exercises is very CAD-centric; while I will always start by rough sketches for the basic form and gross details, once I have a variety of strong directions I will move into SolidWorks or Rhino. This approach has taught me how to use modeling software to rapidly design aesthetic alternatives around a set template, and has allowed me to quickly output high quality renderings of alternatives, as well as scaled drawings for physical modeling purposes.

I came up with four preliminary designs, three of which I modeled in foam to get a better idea of the real world object. While I had my own assessment of what model I should go with, I decided to see which was best received. This was a sort of test in itself; the machine markets itself, so it should have wide appeal.

In the end, I decided to go with the most dynamic (and well received) design. I proceeded to make a final model out of vacuum-formed styrene.

Steps to making the model:

1) Finalize SolidWorks assembly.

2) Split assembly into parts, and modify for molds.

3) CNC'ed molds from SW files.

4) Front glass was laser cut from .ai file, and grooves were machined for easy splicing.

5) Control Panel and Lid Remover Bezel were 3-D printed from SW files.

6) Lid Remover dome was free-formed.

7) Parts were prepped, painted, and spliced.

Awards

• Runner-Up in Consumer Product Category – ROCKET Show 2013. ROCKET is an Industrial Design Exhibition and Competition featuring thesis projects from Carleton University, OCADU, and Humber College.

• Elmarson Award for Environmental Design, Awarded by Carleton University