Smart Mailbox of the FutureTeam 2: Going Postal

ME6102: Designing Open Engineering SystemsSpring 2014

Team 2 Members

Dorian Henao – Atlanta, GA

Jesse Caldwell – Atlanta, GA

Areeje Khalek - Atlanta, GA

Brian Epp – Atlanta, GA

Siddharth Gadepalli – Atlanta, GA

Tapan Shah - Atlanta, GA

Dustin Winchester – Atlanta, GA

Chris McKay - Atlanta, GA

Fabien Durand - Atlanta, GA

Ky-Nam Le – Atlanta, GA

Bryan Jones – Schenectady, NY

Jonathan Go – New Orleans, LA

Michael San Antonio – Washington, DC

Sergio Pena – Miami, FL

Garrison Hoe – Seattle, WA

ME 6102: Spring 2014

Instructor: Dr. Dirk SchaeferTA: Daniel Wu

George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering

Georgia Institute of Technology

Atlanta, Georgia

i

Executive Summary

This report details the work of Team 2 in the Designing Open Engineering Systems course, ME6102, at Georgia Tech in the spring of 2014. Our team, formed of ten on campus students and five distance learning students, was assigned the task of designing a mailbox of the future by the course instructor, Dr. Dirk Schaefer. Our group modified the well-known Pahl and Beitz design process for our particular needs and carried out the project in close adherence to that adapted method.

We began by conducting market research using current practices in social product development and literature reviews to get a handle on the problems and solutions that exist currently in the mail and package markets. Then we reframed and focused the problem statement and began to generate a requirements list to facilitate initial concept generation. This requirements list and the project as a whole was centered on how we could develop a robust product solution that could be categorized as fitting into open engineering systems design philosophy.

We moved forward by developing function structures that our product would need to carry out the requirements we had formulated. These function structures included the ability to receive, store, and secure mail and packages and the ability to notify a user when new items had been deposited in the container. Subsequently, we organized the function structures and identified working principles that would fulfill the operation of said functions. Concept generation following these working principles occurred in the form of brainstorming individually and in groups. The large number of initial concepts was whittled down to one principle solution by evaluating them against our requirements and the principles of open engineering systems.

The principle solution selected was a modular notification and security device that could be implemented into existing mailboxes. The modular aspect of the design allows the overall platform to be readily adaptable to changes in the mail environment. The team determined that designing a technology that would be added to a mailbox or package receiving system would allow the product to stay relevant regardless of how mail or packages are delivered in the future. We continued to improve this design even as we nailed down the particulars of the product including the materials, technologies, and costs that would be involved in manufacturing and bringing the product to market. The team then identified what further work would need to be done to make the product a reality. Finally, the group reflected on the design project and process as a whole including what was done well, what could have been done more efficiently, and how future class design projects can be improved.

ii

ContentsTeam 2 Members..............................................................................................................................iExecutive Summary.........................................................................................................................iiList of Figures..................................................................................................................................vList of Tables..................................................................................................................................vi1- Introduction.................................................................................................................................1

1.1 - Smart Mailbox Project Proposal..........................................................................................11.2 – Team Organization.............................................................................................................31.3 – Team Charter......................................................................................................................6

2 – Design Philosophy.....................................................................................................................72.1 - Open Engineering Systems.................................................................................................72.2 – Social Product Development............................................................................................102.3 – Mass Collaboration...........................................................................................................112.4 – Crowdfunding...................................................................................................................122.5 – Pahl and Beitz Systematic Engineering Design Process..................................................17

3 – Planning and Task Clarification..............................................................................................223.1 – Analyze the Potential Market...........................................................................................223.2 – Crowdsource Market Needs.............................................................................................253.3 – Remove Bias from Research............................................................................................283.4 – Project Proposal................................................................................................................293.5 – Requirements List.............................................................................................................30

4 – Conceptual Design...................................................................................................................324.1 – Identify the Essential Problem..........................................................................................324.2 – Establish Function Structures...........................................................................................334.3 – Search for Working Principles..........................................................................................344.4 – Combine into Working Structure Solutions and Iterate Concepts....................................364.5 – Evaluate Against Technical and Economic Criteria.........................................................434.6 – Reduce Complexity, Increase Flexibility and Openness..................................................464.7 – Review Against Requirements List..................................................................................484.8 – Principle (Concept) Solution(s)........................................................................................49

5 – Embodiment Design................................................................................................................505.1 - Select Best Preliminary Layouts.......................................................................................505.2 – Improve Concept, Simplify, and Maintain Flexibility......................................................575.3 – Review Against Requirements List..................................................................................62

iii

5.4 – Prototype (Physical or Virtual).........................................................................................655.5 – Crowdsource Feedback from Prototype...........................................................................665.6 – Definitive Layout..............................................................................................................67

6 – Detailed Design.......................................................................................................................716.1 – Drawings, Technical Documentation, etc.........................................................................716.2 – Field Implementation........................................................................................................72

7 – Remaining Future Work..........................................................................................................738 – Conclusion...............................................................................................................................74

8.1 – Openness of Design..........................................................................................................748.2 – Mass Collaboration...........................................................................................................758.3 – Pahl and Beitz Design Process.........................................................................................76

9 – Learning Value........................................................................................................................77References......................................................................................................................................79Appendix A....................................................................................................................................80Appendix B....................................................................................................................................81Appendix C....................................................................................................................................82Appendix D....................................................................................................................................87Appendix E....................................................................................................................................90Appendix F....................................................................................................................................95

iv

List of Figures

Figure 1. Gantt Chart.......................................................................................................................4Figure 2. OES Design Timeline.......................................................................................................9Figure 3. Statistical Summary of The Dynamics of Crowdfunding..............................................13Figure 4. Distribution of Project Funding Outcomes (N=25,058).................................................14Figure 5. Going Postal’s Modified Pahl and Beitz Design Process..............................................21Figure 6. Existing Mailbox and Package Drop Box Products.......................................................24Figure 7. Selected Results of Surveys...........................................................................................25Figure 8. Survey Results: Customer Price Demands.....................................................................26Figure 9. Survey Results: Current Mailbox Inconveniences.........................................................26Figure 10. Mailbox Function Structure.........................................................................................33Figure 11. Areeje’s Concepts........................................................................................................36Figure 12. Chris’s Concepts..........................................................................................................37Figure 13. Chris's Concept Drawing..............................................................................................37Figure 14. Fabien’s Concept Drawings.........................................................................................38Figure 15. Dorian’s Concepts........................................................................................................39Figure 16. Dorian’s Concept Drawings.........................................................................................39Figure 17. Sergio's Concept Drawing............................................................................................40Figure 18. Kynam’s Concepts.......................................................................................................40Figure 19. Mesh Bag Concept Drawing........................................................................................41Figure 20. Accordion Design (View 1).........................................................................................42Figure 21. Accordion Design (View 2).........................................................................................42Figure 22. Weighted Evaluation Matrix Legend...........................................................................44Figure 23. Preliminary CAD of Camera/Security Solution...........................................................46Figure 24. Preliminary CAD of Hi-tech Package Solution...........................................................46Figure 25. Preliminary CAD Model of Camera Module...............................................................50Figure 26. Preliminary CAD Model of Lock Module...................................................................51Figure 27. Preliminary CAD Model Cross Section of Mailbox....................................................51Figure 28. iPhone 5 Camera and Flash Components.....................................................................52Figure 29. Sensor Options.............................................................................................................53Figure 30. Locking Mechanism Options.......................................................................................53Figure 31. Preliminary Sketches of App Graphical User Interface...............................................56Figure 32. Electrical System Architecture of Go Postal................................................................60Figure 33. Final Rendering of Full Option (bare system).............................................................68Figure 34. Final Rendering of Full Option....................................................................................68Figure 35. Final Rendering of Camera Module (no lock).............................................................69Figure 36. Final Rendering of "Dumb" Lock and Camera............................................................69Figure 37. Screen Shots of Mobile Application Graphical User Interface....................................70Figure 38. Mock Crowdfunding Website Screen Shot..................................................................81

v

vi

List of Tables

Table 1. Team 2 Alignment Chart...................................................................................................3Table 2. Crowdfunding Research..................................................................................................15Table 3. Tracking and Confirmation Methods..............................................................................22Table 4. Requirements List Going Postal’s Mailbox System........................................................30Table 5. Working Principle Brainstorming Sample......................................................................34Table 6. Working Principle Morph Chart......................................................................................35Table 7. Unweighted Evaluation Matrix.......................................................................................43Table 8. Weighted Evaluation Matrix...........................................................................................45Table 9. Component Financial Analysis........................................................................................64Table 10. Requirements Analysis Summary.................................................................................64Table 11. Parts List........................................................................................................................71Table 12. Working Principles Brainstorming................................................................................87

vii

1- Introduction

1.1 - Smart Mailbox Project Proposal

This project is the direct result of a semester long assignment from the spring 2014 semester in ME6102 Designing Open Engineering Systems at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, GA. The class divided into two project teams of approximately 15 students each. Each team had a mix of local and distance learning students. The following is an excerpt from the project proposal presented to the class:

There are mailboxes for single family homes, town homes, apartment complexes, high rises, businesses, and more. While they are all somewhat different, their fundamental underlying design has hardly changed for about a century. You are tasked to conceive, design, prototype and test your concept of a “smart mailbox of the future.”

This task includes, among others, the following steps: Market analysis and clarification of problem: Understand and analyze the current

market. What kinds of mailboxes exist, what features do they support, price ranges, and so forth? What exactly is the crux of this design challenge?

If people could have their “dream mailbox,” what would it look like? What features would it have? How would it work? How much were they willing to pay, etc.? – What is feasible/financially viable?

Determination of your target market/customer. Capturing of customer requirements and related engineering specifications.

Development of initial concepts, determination of the most appropriate concept to pursue further.

Embodiment and detail design. This includes the development of function trees, CAD, and other engineering analysis models.

Development of a prototype for testing/refining.

Preparation steps and related questions are: We would like to have two competing teams that mass collaborate on this project.

There must me a mix of on-campus and distance learning students. How could you go about forming teams? What are the competencies you need to successfully complete the project? What

competencies do you have/lack? How to go about closing your “gaps”? What other aspects are relevant, e.g., diversity?

What tools will be needed to collaborate/communicate as well as for the actual engineering work required?

How will you ensure your team operates both efficiently and effectively?

Frame of reference The Question for the Semester (Q4S), which is also your take-home exam, is:

“Imagine that you are operating a product creation enterprise in the post Globalization 3.0 era where individuals are empowered to participate in the global value network. Your brief is to identify and discuss the opportunities, challenges, and ramifications of new Product

1

Development Processes and Tools (from Ideation through Design to Manufacture) that revolve around Social Product Development (SPD) and the so-called “new” industrial revolution.”

Over the past weeks, you speculated about the world of 2030 and what the design and manufacturing industry may look like by then. You were introduced to game-changing paradigms such as Open Innovation, Mass Collaboration, and Crowd-sourcing and in the weeks to come will also learn about Product Development in Social Networks and Online Communities of Practice. With that context in mind, you learned and will learn more about design-related topics, including Open Engineering Systems (OES), Mass Customization, Systematic Design (Pahl and Beitz), Modular and Set-based Design, the relationship between Engineering Design and Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE), and other related topics.

Through this assignment, we aimed to gain a better understanding of the above topics by addressing them holistically within the context of this challenging design project. While we did not address every one of the paradigms listed above, many will be discussed in detail and played an integral part in realizing the final product presented herein.

2

1.2 – Team Organization

The class formed two teams during the first month of the semester. First, one of the students in the class created a Google document in which all of the students were invited to edit by adding elements of their contact information, physical location, educational history, and professional interests and experience. From there, the teams formed organically with students grouping themselves into one of two teams. Each team was comprised of a mix of on-campus and distance learning students. The results of the inquiry for our team are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Team 2 Alignment Chart

Name Email DL/ATL Assignment Preferences Assignment Dislikes Hobbies Engineering Interests 6101?

Areeje Khalek khalek.areeje@gmail.com ATL ME/ME Presentations Individual No

Jesse Caldwell jesse@gatech.edu ATL PTFE/ME Programming; Electrical No preference Yes

Chris McKay cmckay3@gatech.edu ATL ME/ME Programming; Electrical No preference Yes

Ky-Nam Le kle6@gatech.edu ATL ME/ME CAD No preference Design manufacturing Yes

Brian Epp bepp3@gatech.edu ATL ME/BME CAD No preference Video games Medical devices Yes

Fabien Durand frdurand92@gmail.com ATL ME/ME No Preference No

Siddharth Gadepalli sgadepalli7@gatech.edu ATL BME/ME Programming; Electrical M-TR after 6; Sun after 5 No preference Sports, reading, music Yes

Tapan Shah tshah3@gatech.edu ATL ME/ME Programming; Electrical M-TR after 6; Sun after 5 No preference Sports Yes

Dorian Henao dhenao1990@gmail.com ATL ME/ME Electrical simulation Group No

Dustin WInchester dustin.winchester@gatech.edu ATL ME/ME Progamming No preference Yes

Sergio Pena spena3@gatech.edu DL ME/ME Writing No preference No

Michael San Antonio mtsa3@gatech.edu DL ME/ME No preference Yes

Jonathan Go jgo3@gatech.edu DL ME/ME No preference Yes

Bryan Jones bjones75@gatech.edu DL ME/ME Mechanical Design M-F after 7 PM No perference Thermal systems No

Garrison Hoe ghoe3@gatech.edu DL AE/AE CAD; Modeling and simulation Electrical Design MWF after 6 PM Group No

Name Email DL/ATLUndergrad /Grad Major Assignment Preferences Assignment Dislikes

Availability(ATL Time!)

Preferred WorkIndividual/Group Hobbies Engineering Interests 6101?

Areeje Khalek khalek.areeje@gmail.com ATL ME/MECAD; Prototyping; Documentation; Creating Eng Tools;

PresentationsTR after 4:30 PM; MWF after 7 PM; Sundays all day.

Individual Fabricating things, drifting, wrenching.

Manufacturing, automotive

No

Jesse Caldwell jesse@gatech.edu ATL PTFE/ME

Writing; Editing; Troubleshooting designs; Video shooting and editing (know professionals too); Presentations

Programming; ElectricalM after 1 PM; TR 1:30-4:30; F after 1 PM; Sunday after 1 PM

No preferenceSports, video games, movies, daydreaming about saving the world

Consumer product development and testing

Yes

Chris McKay cmckay3@gatech.edu ATL ME/MEPresentations; Market Research; Ideation/Conceptual Design

Programming; ElectricalTR after class; MW before 3 PM; Sunday after 4 PM

No preferenceSports, games, movies, gym, reading

Product design, customer input/feedback

Yes

Ky-Nam Le kle6@gatech.edu ATL ME/MEMarket Analysis; Math modeling; Design; Presentation CAD

Weekdays after 4:30 PM; weekends if needed No preference

Soccer, triathalon, traveling Design manufacturing Yes

Brian Epp bepp3@gatech.edu ATL ME/BME Design; Programming; Lots of unrelated skills

CAD MWF all day; TR after 3 PM; SAT/SUN all day

No preference Video games Medical devices Yes

Fabien Durand frdurand92@gmail.com ATL ME/MECAD; Prototyping; Concept Generation/Design; Machining Skills

Programming; Writing; Mathematical simulations or modeling

M all day; TR after 5; W all day except 2-3 PM; F after 2

No Preference

Guitar, piano, music production,sleeping, netflix, movies, fabricating things, sleeping, cooking, did I mention sleeping?

Design in general. automotives, aerospace, consumer product design, 3rd world applications

No

Siddharth Gadepalli sgadepalli7@gatech.edu ATL BME/MEPrototyping; 3D Modeling; Creative work; Hands on work; Ideation

Programming; Electrical M-TR after 6; Sun after 5 No preference Sports, reading, music Energy, fluid mechanics, heat transfer etc.

Yes

Tapan Shah tshah3@gatech.edu ATL ME/ME Design; Modeling; Editing; Creative Design; Ideation

Programming; Electrical M-TR after 6; Sun after 5 No preference Sports Yes

Dorian Henao dhenao1990@gmail.com ATL ME/ME

CAD/ Modeling; Creative Design; Problem Solving; Writing/Editing; Documentation/ Papers; Communication

Electrical simulationW after 6 PM; T after 8 PM; F after 2 PM; Weekends all day

Group No

Dustin WInchester dustin.winchester@gatech.edu ATL ME/ME

CAD; Prototyping; Product ideation; Social media structure development; FEA; P&B proces modification

Progamming

MW from 11 AM to 2:30 PM; M after 4 PM; W after 6 PM; TR after 9 PM; Saturday after 3 PM; Sundays - special circumstances only

No preference

Running, biking, brewing beer, drining beer, architecture, art, alt music, shooting, photography, kickball, snowboarding

CAD, 3D printing, engine development, project management, heat transfer, thermal structural analysis, structural engineering, material science

Yes

Sergio Pena spena3@gatech.edu DL ME/ME

CAD; Modeling and Structural Analysis; Presentations; Mathematical Models; Technical Research; some Programming,

WritingWeekdays after 5:30; Weekends any time No preference

Weight Lifting, sports, sleeping

Vehicular design, manufacturing, CAD No

Michael San Antonio mtsa3@gatech.edu DL ME/MEPresentations; Writing; Editing; Market research; Technical analysis; Risk management

Modeling & Sim; Video editing; CAD

Weekdays after 630; Weekends any time

No preference Sports, snowboarding, movies, music

Defense systems, renewable energy systems

Yes

Jonathan Go jgo3@gatech.edu DL ME/MECAD; Presentations; Research; Video Development

Activites that require physical presence No preference

Sports, 3D printing, traveling, cycling, martial arts, robots, helicopters, olympic drinking

Tanks, hovercraft propulsion, rockets Yes

Bryan Jones bjones75@gatech.edu DL ME/MEModeling and Simulation; Programming; Automation and optimization

Mechanical Design M-F after 7 PM No perferenceCoaching ultimate frisbee, writing, commentating, reading

Thermal systems No

Garrison Hoe ghoe3@gatech.edu DL AE/AE CAD; Modeling and simulation Electrical Design MWF after 6 PM Group Airplanes, skiing, being outdoors, going fast

Aerospace, UAVs, product developemnt

No

3

Our team first made contact with each other via e-mail and established that we would utilize Google Hangouts for our team meetings requiring as many members of the team as possible. During the first Google Hangout meeting, we created a team charter, set the schedule for future meetings, decided where we would collectively store documents (a shared Google Drive folder), and produced multiple goals for the next meeting. The timeline we created for the project is displayed in Figure 1 in the form of a Gantt chart. Eventually, the team adopted the name “Going Postal.”

Figure 1. Gantt Chart

Based on the pace and effectiveness of our first couple of meetings, we realized that conducting working meetings with the full contingent of team members was not practical or efficient. There were simply too many voices and opinions for which to account and decisions were too difficult to make. For that reason, we decided to break the team into several working groups or subcommittees dedicated to specific final project deliverables. Each working group had a team lead that was responsible for communicating with other team leads to ensure the full team was working as one cohesive unit. The full team continued to meet on a weekly basis, as outlined in the team charter (see Section 1.3), to report out on the project’s current status and future plans. The subcommittees then met separately throughout the week, as needed, to complete the required tasks and deliverables. These subcommittees were as follows:

Phase 1: Product Organization & Market Research Organizational Team – Dorian Henao, Ky-nam Le Crowdsourcing Survey Team – Chris McKay, Tapan Shah, Fabien Durand Literature Review Team - Mike San Antonio, Dustin Winchester, Areeje Khalek Personal Interview Team – Jesse Caldwell, Sergio Pena, Jonathan Go

Phase 2: Product Design & Documentation

4

● General Organization/Management Team – Dorian Henao (lead), Jonathan Go● Design Tools Team - Fabien Durand (lead), Areeje Khalek, Ky-nam Le, Chris

McKay, Dorian Henao● Video/Presentation Team – Dustin Winchester (lead), Bryan Jones, Jonathan Go● Paper Organization Team – Mike San Antonio (lead), Jesse Caldwell● CAD/Prototyping Team – Tapan Shah (lead), Sergio Pena, Brian Epp● Crowdfunding Team - Siddharth Gadepalli (lead), Garrison Hoe, Bryan Jones

5

1.3 – Team Charter

We decided at the onset of the project to develop a team charter in order to formalize the project mission statement, team policies and procedures, and an agreed upon regular meeting time. With a project team of this size and dynamic, it is crucial to set ground rules and expectations prior to starting any design work. This ensures the team operates as an efficient, cohesive unit. The team charter can be seen in Appendix A.

6

2 – Design Philosophy

Going Postal has developed the smart mailbox of the future by utilizing a modified Pahl and Beitz design method. The original Pahl and Beitz method is outdated and narrow in scope (limited in use to traditional mechanical engineering design). That being said, the foundational principles of the method still pertain to current engineering design. We have tweaked the method to account for several engineering, design, and manufacturing paradigms that we chose to implement throughout the design process including open engineering systems, social product development, mass collaboration, and crowdsourcing. Each of these concepts will be further discussed below, and a discussion of our modified Pahl and Beitz design process will follow.

2.1 - Open Engineering Systems

According to Dr. Dirk Schaefer in his course on Designing Open Engineering Systems, “Open Engineering Systems (OES) are systems of industrial products, services, and/or processes that are readily adaptable to changes in their environment, which enable producers to remain competitive in a global marketplace through continuous improvement and indefinite growth of an existing technological base.” This definition is somewhat overwhelming; therefore, it will be broken down for clarification.

Products – physical items that satisfy customer needs Examples - computer, car, razor, camera, mailbox

Services – serves customer needs by providing a serviceExamples - catering, hair-cut, car wash, transportation, physical examination

Processes – a system of machines, computers, robots, humans, etc. working together to serve a greater function

Examples - oil refining, aluminum recycling, product assembly, manufacturing

Readily Adaptable - implies that a product, service, or process requires no change or a quick, easy, and inexpensive change in form to adapt to the following changes in environment:

changes in the market changes in customer needs/requirements changes in technology and/or resources changes in the system environs changes in the government/legislation

Remain Competitive - the goal for large companies is to make money today and to keep making money in the future. By remaining competitive, shareholders can reap profits year after year.

Continuous Improvement - implies that the system or product will never be stagnant. In other words, open engineering systems will always be changing to increase efficiency, integrate new technology, sense future changes, or satisfy new customer requirements.

7

Indefinite Growth – implies that the existing technology can be modified or used in some manner each time a change occurs in the process or product and the existing process or product will never have to be discarded and replaced if the system is truly an open engineering system.

Going Postal’s primary goal was to design the smart mailbox of the future, a product and in some ways a service, to be readily adaptable to changes in the mail and package delivery environment. According to common open engineering design theory, this is most easily achieved by increasing design knowledge, increasing design freedom, and implementing any or all of the following three concepts of flexible design:

Robustness – capability of system to function properly despite small environmental changes or noise

Mutability – capability of system to be contorted or reshaped in response to changing requirements or environmental conditions

Modularity – relationship between a product’s functional and physical structures such that there is a one-to-one correspondence between functional and physical structures and a minimization of unintended interactions between modules

A design team can increase design knowledge by identifying design drivers and the significance of design variables early on, examining different trade-off studies, enhancing concept exploration, and answering “what-if” questions. The team can increase design freedom by finding ranged sets of solutions and incorporating robustness into the design process to decrease sensitivity to design changes. These processes drive efficiency into the design and help avoid unnecessary rework in the later stages of design, as shown in Figure 2 below on page 9.

8

Figure 2. OES Design Timeline

9

2.2 – Social Product Development

According to the CEO of Ideavibes, social product development (SPD) is a product development/marketing framework where product or service organizations use engagement and open innovation with internal and external stakeholders for the development of products or services in various stages of the product development life cycle. SPD consists of three main concepts: mass collaboration, crowdsourcing, and social media/networking. Those three terms are defined as follows:

Mass collaboration - a form of collective action that occurs when large numbers of people work independently on a single project, often modular in its nature.

Crowdsourcing - the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people, and especially from an online community, rather than from traditional employees or suppliers.

Social media/networking - a platform to build social networks or social relationships among people who, for example, share interests, activities, backgrounds, or real-life connections.

Mass collaboration will be discussed in the next section of this text.

Social media/networking is a very powerful tool that can be used throughout the design process for customer and co-creator outreach and information gathering. For instance, Going Postal used various social media avenues to conduct relatively thorough market research studies in a very short amount of time. More on that market research will be discussed in Chapter 3. Social networking can also be used to connect with co-creators to facilitate in engaging in mass collaboration. Several web based services are available as complete social product development packages including Quirky, SalesForce.com, and Ponoko.

Crowdsourcing is the act of taking a task traditionally performed by an employee or contractor and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people in the form of an open call. The benefits of crowdsourcing include the exploration of problems at relatively low costs since companies only pay out when results are achieved. In addition, companies can access a wider range of talent since they are not limited to their current employees. For this particular design endeavor, Going Postal did not engage in crowdsourcing activities due to the short timeline of the project.

10

2.3 – Mass Collaboration

With mass collaboration, an individual’s input is now more valuable than ever before, and geographical or distance boundaries are being torn down by interconnecting information and communications across nations of various socio-economic status. An engineer in India or China could provide the missing step in an algorithm for a British based organization, for example. For this reason, problems can be explored at relatively little cost. Ultimately, the design and manufacturing enterprise can tap a wider range of talent than might be present within its own organization. According to Wikipedia.org:

Mass collaboration is a form of collective action that occurs when large numbers of people work independently on a single project, often modular in its nature. Such projects typically take place on the internet using social software and computer-supported collaboration tools such as wiki technologies, which provide a potentially infinite hypertextual substrate within which the collaboration may be situated.

Mass collaboration comes in various forms from open source software to crowdsourcing for companies’ innovations to shared computer power. In some cases, such as open source software, intellectual property barriers are broken down, and traditional economic gain of product development almost ceases to exist. In other cases, mass collaboration is used to drive innovation faster than ever before, thereby boosting revenue without the need for locking down intellectual property. While the full effects of it, both good and bad, are still unknown, mass collaboration is not a trend that will soon fade. It is the future of design and manufacturing, and those who do not embrace it are sure to fall behind.

Going Postal formulated its organizational model on the idea of peer production, a subcomponent of mass collaboration. Peer production, or peering, is a new form of innovation and value creation that happens when masses of people and/or firms collaborate openly to drive innovation and growth in their industries. In our case, the peering was limited to a group of individuals collaborating openly to achieve a common goal. Rather than having six groups of five people, each developing distinct solutions, the teams for this project were broken up into only two groups of approximately 15 persons each. The key attribute that separates this team project from those to which most of us were accustomed is that several of the team members were dispersed throughout the country, including several in different time zones. Whereas that type of collaboration would have been difficult and inefficient to work with three decades ago, communication and information flow is made much easier due to computer supported collaboration tools such as Wiggio (design collaboration site), Google Drive and Dropbox (file sharing sites), and Google Hangouts (instant message and group video chat client). Our team chose Google products to facilitate our team’s collaboration and communication. Google Drive, for instance, allowed the team to work simultaneously in the same text or spreadsheet document with all modifications being updated in real time. Google Hangouts provided a virtual meeting space where all team members could congregate for video, voice, and/or text chat as well as screen sharing.

11

2.4 – Crowdfunding

We have looked to crowdfunding as a way to finance the project. Crowdfunding is a relatively new financial strategy which falls within the scope of social product development. It is, in a sense, “mass funding” as opposed to “mass collaboration.” Rather than having a single entity finance a project with a lump sum of money, crowdfunding seeks to collect small amounts of funding from many investors and/or potential future customers. In this way, individuals are only investing very small amounts of money with the advantage that they will receive the product as soon as it hits the market, while the design enterprise is gaining not only funding but also additional market research as well. Lambert and Schwienbacher (2010) describe crowdfunding as “an open call, essentially through the Internet, for the provision of financial resources either in form of donation or in exchange for some form of reward and/or voting rights in order to support initiatives for specific purposes.”

There are many alternate, traditional methods of raising capital for design and manufacturing projects. Most fall within two broad categories: equity and debt. Equity includes funding from entrepreneurs and team members, personal savings, friends and family, business angels (wealthy individuals who invest in small worthwhile companies), venture capitalists (specialized investors who gather money from non-specialists and invest in larger projects with long term gains), other companies, and potentially the stock market. Debt includes bank loans, leasing companies (providing equipment and office space), government subsidies, supplier trade credit, and bootstrapping (use of trade credit, credit cards, and other methods including working capital management). The downfall of these funding methods is of course what you owe your eventual investors or loaners. With investors, traditionally, a sizeable portion of the profits is owed to them for a definitive or indefinite period of time. With loaners, the initial loan must be paid back with considerable interest. Each of these setbacks results in a lower profit margin for the product line. Crowdfunding, on the other hand, is based on many small donations or pre-purchases, meaning the debt is repaid in the form of initial orders or not at all. This helps alleviate the initial financial burden brought on by the non-recurring engineering costs and initial manufacturing buildup and allows the company to hold the production load steady when it would otherwise be cyclical during the initial product launch.

Going Postal researched the most popular crowdfunding organizations, their best accolades, and their specific requirements, which can be found in Table 2 below.

Several recent studies have examined the effectiveness of modern crowdfunding techniques and identified areas where the approach succeeds and fails. The first of these is from Belleflame et. al. where the authors take a broad look at the options for an entrepreneur to launch their product. They come to the conclusion that it is important to build a strong community that will have unique benefits as a result of participating in the crowdfunding venture. This may be achieved by implementing price discrimination where pre-orders to raise funds are discounted at the cost of profit to the producer. The other option is to raise a fixed amount of money for a share of future profits. Belleflame et. al. show that, when small initial capital compared to the market size is required, it in the best interest of the entrepreneur to raise funds through pre-orders.

12

In The Dynamics of Crowdfunding: An Exploratory Study by Ethan Mollick, the author looks at data from over 48,000 projects that have collectively raised over $237M through crowdfunding. Mollick finds that the major factors to a successful crowdfunding effort are the quality of the product, the network of personal connections, and the geographic location of the launch. It is noted that for crowdfunded projects they tend to either fail by large margins (mean amount funded is 10.3% of goal) or succeed by small margins (25 percent of projects raise 3% or less over their goal). The author theorizes that this is because consumers are able to identify the nature of the projects themselves and are more attracted to quality projects. Through social dialogue, consumers are able to spread word and attract even more funding to efforts that project quality and signal preparedness. By setting appropriate goals, the founder can avoid delays and deliver a product on time. A statistical summary of the study’s findings is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Statistical Summary of The Dynamics of Crowdfunding.

Lastly, Kuppuswamy and Bayus’ paper looks at how social information plays an important role in the success of a crowdfunding effort. The authors examine data from Kickstarter to examine some of the physiological effects that influence a variety of projects. Many times, potential backers will not contribute to a project because they assume the project will gain the necessary funds since it has already received a lot of support. By reducing a diffusion of responsibility effect and providing project updates with a positive influence, many projects are able to increase support through the final stages of funding. Figure 4 below is a chart that shows the distribution of funding for projects in Kickstarter:

13

Figure 4. Distribution of Project Funding Outcomes (N=25,058)

Utilizing the information from these research papers, we can take away some key ideas that would help our project succeed if we chose to raise capital through crowdfunding. First and foremost, it is immediately apparent that, although crowdfunding is proving itself to be a viable alternative to traditional methods, it is by no means an easy approach or a shortcut. A successful effort needs dedicated time and resources to launch a crowdfunding project. Many successful campaigns have a dedicated team whose sole responsibilities are social media as well as design and presentation of crowdfunding resources. The growth in popularity of crowdfunding means that potential investors have many choices in products and that they have been exposed to varying levels of preparation, presentation, and professionalism.

Preparation is an essential part to any funding venture, whether it is through traditional methods of raising capital or crowdfunding. The founders need to have a clear and well-formed idea with some proof that the idea will work, e.g., prototype, research, etc. In our case, we will have an embodiment of our design to present to the crowd and data about why we have steered the project in this direction thus far. The next step to preparedness is establishing realistic goals. Knowing the material and manufacturing costs of early runs will allow a funding goal to be estimated. Combined with social outreach to establish the market size and estimated public interest an accurate number can be reached, which is important since many crowdfunding efforts do not raise much more than their goal and having sufficient funds will be key to delivering on time. Traditional ventures often involve altering plans as new information is discovered but crowdfunding efforts have to use budgets that were built very early in the process and have to deliver on promises made before much of the new learning can take place.

Presentation is another key element in a crowdfunding venture. Consumers who are pre-ordering your product need to be sold on the idea. This includes a sleek and well thought out presentation of your ideas and designs. Utilizing video media to showcase prototypes and design features are found in many of the successful efforts. Kickstarter recommends the key to demonstrating product preparation is a video, saying “Rule #1 for Kickstarter videos: make one! There are few things more important to a quality Kickstarter project than video. Skipping this step will do a serious disservice to your project.” There is information asymmetry that allows the

14

founder to have knowledge of the product and quality that a potential investor and consumer do not. This allows the founder to set prices that attract consumer to pre-order based on their notion of quality.

Professionalism exudes confidence. Since crowdfunding is staged on a virtual setting, an entrepreneur needs to send strong signals of quality, legitimacy, and preparedness since identifying these traits is much less defined when compared to traditional venture settings. It is shown that projects with spelling errors in their material have 13% less chance of success than those without and that not including a video decreases the chance of success by 26%. Likewise failing to provide timely updates reduces the chances of success by 13%. It is clear that a professionally run project has much greater chances of succeeding. These statistics outline the importance of putting the work and organization into preparing the crowdfunding effort and are applicable across many forms of venture financing. The fact that crowdfunders react to quality signals suggests that financial backing is linked to a large degree on the rational assessment of probability that a project will succeed.

Since the team determined that the end goal of this design endeavor was to design and potentially prototype the product, but not mass produce and sell it, our team quickly realized that, without the resources, time, and manpower to fully develop the smart mailbox of the future, (from design to mass manufacturing to sales) crowdfunding would not be a viable source of funding, nor would it be necessary. We identified several prototyping resources available to Georgia Institute of Technology students, such as the Invention Studio, which could suit the team’s needs, and time permitting will be used to prototype the design. In sum, we developed a potential crowdfunding proposal as an example of what could be developed to generate capital through crowdfunding. A screenshot of this mock potential crowdfunding page can be found in Appendix B.

Table 2. Crowdfunding Research

Service What Accolades RequirementsSponsume Multicurrency

crowdfunding online platform for a variety of subjects including science, engineering, technology, films, etc. using social networks and people wisdom

Has helped crowdfund over 1000 campaigns as of 2012

Project owners choose a timeframe deadline and a target funding goal. They create non-monetary rewards generally linked to their project. It is by selling these rewards to their social network and beyond that creatives raise the funds they need to make their project happen. Unlike many forums for fundraising or investment, Sponsume claims no ownership over the projects and the work they produce.

RocketHub Crowdfunding online platform used by a variety of people including scientists, game developers, engineers, musicians, etc.

On June 26, 2012, RocketHub testified in Congress regarding the JOBS Act, presenting 3 points. They included crowdfunding democratizes fundraising; crowdfunding will lead to job growth; and crowdfunding empowers investors.

RocketHub enables Direct-to-Fan social media-based outreach and fundraising. Project leaders, i.e., fundraisers, publicize campaigns themselves through Facebook, Twitter and similar platforms. When posting a campaign, users choose a campaign deadline, target funding-goal, and offer “perks” in exchange for contributions.

15

Pozible Pozible is an Australia-based crowdfunding platform and community-building tool for creative projects and ideas. It was developed to help people raise funds.

Pozible celebrated $1 million in pledges in October 2011. By May 2012, Pozible had raised over $2.5 million and successfully funded over 1300 projects. By June 2012, Pozible had reached $3 million in pledges. As of December 2013, Pozible successes total more than AUD$17 million.

Projects are launched on the Pozible website after a reviewing process to make sure the project abides by the platform's project guidelines. Project creators select a deadline and a target amount to achieve. Pozible takes a 5% service fee from successful projects, and a transfer is made into the project creator's bank account or PayPal account.

Piggybackr Piggybackr is a US crowdfunding website for students and youth teams to fundraise for their schools, projects, and causes online.

Norcal Crew youth rowing team raised $45,000 to buy a new eight-man racing boatand University of California at Berkeley Alternative Breaks raised $14,565 to support college students doing volunteer work during spring break.

Works like Kickstarter, you create your own page, spread the word, and collect donations

Peoplefund.it Peoplefund.it is an online crowdfunding platform in the UK that operates in an 'All or Nothing' method for individuals or groups to raise funds for creative projects.

The Bicycle Academy raised over £40,000 through Peoplefund.it in November 2011 in 6 days. Young Rewired State raised £20,000 after being mentioned by Stephen Fry and being featured on TechCrunch

Peoplefund.it operates on the "all or nothing" way of funding. Projects upload their information including a project description, list of rewards and a short video. They choose a target and if they reach it before their time runs out then the money is transferred to them. The most important aspect of the projects is the rewards they offer, as these will attract supporters to each project. Peoplefund.it charges 5% of contributed funds, plus 3% payment processing fees, if a project is completely funded.

Funding Circle Platform where investors can browse businesses Funding Circle has approved for lending

Facilitated £223 million in loans to small and medium sized firms

Businesses must have at least 2 years of filed or formally prepared accounts and have no outstanding county court judgments over £250. A minimum turnover of £100,000 is also required.

Innovestment GmbH

Website for crowdfunding equity investments

26 companies funded € 2,250,814

Promising business idea with unique characteristics and growth potential

Invesdor An investment matching service between the market and growth companies

Capital raised: 1.52M € There is an experienced team behind the organization and/or the company is 2–5 years old with existing results.

Lending Club Peer-to-peer lending company

Lending Club has originated over 3 billion USD in loans, and averages $7.8 million in daily loan originations

If you qualify, you will instantly be presented with multiple loan offers

MicroVentures Equity crowdfunding website offering investments in early stage companies

Portfolio includes: Twitter, Facebook, and Yelp

Startups and existing businesses that need between $100,000 to $1,000,000 in capital

Prosper Marketplace

Peer-to-peer lending 2,210,000 members, $905,000,000 in personal loans funded.

Rates from 6.73% to 35.36% APR

16

2.5 – Pahl and Beitz Systematic Engineering Design Process

The original Pahl and Beitz (P&B) design method is a systematic approach for engineers to develop effective and customer-based products. It represents the best practices of design of the later part of the 20th century. This method is based on a collection of work starting in the middle of the 19th century. The information flow of this method is from abstract problems to conceptual solutions and finally to the embodiment and detailed solutions of these problems.

There are several key principles and characteristics of the original Pahl and Beitz systematic design process:

Principles: Explore design alternatives early in the process Reduce or eliminate design changes late in the process Clearly define all design objectives and constraints at the beginning of the process Use abstract functional models as a foundation for the completed design solution Use objective evaluation techniques based on predefined requirements to select between

design variants or move between process stages

Characteristics: Systematic design processes does not rely on chance or “trial and error” methods for

achieving an optimum design. Systematic design processes are defined by a series of phases. The process starts by identifying an unmet design need. The initial tasks involve clarifying the problem into a form that a designer can use to

move towards a solution. Systematic design is based on a requirements list that explicitly documents the constraints

for the design. Most systematic processes are “divergent-convergent” Systematic process move from the abstract to the concrete. Iteration, particularly between phases, is typically the result of encountering problems

and not a planned process. Systematic design focuses on the early stages of the design process. Systematic design processes encourage objective analysis and decision making process. The systematic method works particularly well for low and medium complexity design

problems.

The process can best be explained by outlined the four phases and core transformations. These phases are the planning and task clarification phase, conceptual design phase, embodiment design phase, and finally the detailed design phase.

Going Postal decided to modify the Pahl and Beitz problem solving process to better suit the needs of designing in the 21st century (see Figure 5 on page 21). The modified process retains the original core transformations. We felt that the four core transformations were critical to the design process. Therefore, even with the incorporation of open engineering systems design, mass collaboration, and social product development, the four core transformations remained intact. As

17

is evident in the figure, the process is iterative; however, iterations should only be made where it is most sensible and cost effective.

The basic framework and high level steps of the process are still the planning and task clarification, conceptual design, embodiment design, and detail design. These four steps, regardless of project, discipline, or scale, are necessary and required. While these four steps are essential, they are not necessarily strictly defined. In other words, there will often times be some overlap between these steps, which would not necessarily be a setback.

The first step in the task clarification process is to identify the requirements that determine the solution and embodiment and formulating and documenting these quantitatively as far as possible. A requirements list is necessary to represent the specification against which the success of the design project can be judged. A requirement should be able to be classified as one of two things: a demand or a wish. A demand is a requirement that must be met under all circumstances whereas a wish is a requirement that should be taken into consideration whenever possible. Overall, the requirements list should contain the following information:

User: company or department Person responsible for each requirement Version number and/or index number Project or product name Date of issue for the overall requirements list Page number Requirements labeled as demands or wishes Date of last change

This step is possibly the most critical and often overlooked. A well-defined and steady requirements list is crucial for keeping projects within projected costs and schedule constraints. We modified the original Pahl and Beitz design process here by specifying that crowdsourcing be used to identify customer needs and market demands. We also touched on open engineering systems theory by specifying that flexibility in ideation be maintained during this initial phase of product development. This includes increasing design knowledge and design freedom.

The next phase of the P&B design method is conceptual design. Conceptual design is the part of the design process where – by identifying the essential problems through abstraction, establishing function structures, searching for appropriate working principles and combining these into a working structure – the basic solution path is developed through the elaboration of a solution principle. The first step in this phase, abstraction, aims to solve the problem of stove piping ideas through preconceived notions and biases. After constructing a requirements list in the previous phase, the task is to analyze the requirements list with respect to the required function and essential constraints in order to confirm and refine the crux of the problem. The analysis coupled with following abstraction steps, will reveal the general aspects of the problems of the task as follows:

1. Eliminate personal preferences

18

2. Omit requirements that have no direct bearing on the function and the essential constraints

3. Transform quantitative into qualitative data and reduce them to essential statements 4. As far as its purposeful, generalize the results of the previous step5. Formulate the problem in solution-neutral terms

After the crux of the problem has been established, it is possible to indicate an overall function that can express the solution-neutral relationship between inputs and outputs with the use of a block diagram based on the flow of energy, material, and signals. The overall function can be broken down into subfunctions of lower complexity. The reason we break down complex functions is twofold: to determine subfunctions that facilitate the subsequent search for solutions and to combine these subfunctions into a simple and unambiguous function structure. After having successfully set up a function structure, we must search for working interrelationships between the functions. Additionally, working principles need to be found for the various subfunctions, and these principles must eventually be combined into a working structure. The concretization of the working structures will eventually lead to the principle solution. The following steps are recommended when evaluating principal solution variants:

1. Identifying evaluation criteria 2. Weighting the evaluation criteria3. Compiling parameters4. Assessing values 5. Determining overall value6. Comparing concept variants

With respect to Going Postal’s design project, in this phase, the traditional P&B design process was modified once again to accommodate open engineering systems design by reducing complexity and maintaining flexibility and openness of all concepts under consideration. In this phase, less change was made to the process itself, but instead, we changed the way designs were evaluated against each other based on OES principles.

The third phase of the traditional P&B method deals with embodiment design. During embodiment design, the principle solution or solutions are further defined and the material solution is formed through material selection, general layout, functionality, and signals selection. This definitive layout provides a means to check special compatibility, function, and strength. It is also another economic checkpoint where financial viability of the project is assessed. We planned to implement additional crowdsourcing at the onset on the embodiment design phase in order to gain valuable feedback from potential collaborators on feasibility and efficiency of our chosen design concepts. Again, flexibility through robustness, mutability, and modularity were revisited at this stage of development. Also, prototyping (either physical or electronic) were to be executed through either 3-D printing or CAD modeling. Prototyping is a critical step in the product development process, which was ignored in the original P&B process.

The final phase of the P&B design method is detail design. This phase is dedicated to finalizing all the arrangements, forms, dimensions, and surface properties of all the individual parts. In addition, the materials are specified, production possibilities assessed, costs estimates refined, and all the drawings and production documents are produced. Additionally,

19

documentation is provided for the process required for the assembly, manufacturing, and operation of the product. The final stage requires taking the definitive layout and producing sufficient documentation to support the realization, use, and ultimate disposal of the product. Every detail of the solution is determined during this stage including materials, size, attachment methods, failure modes, etc. This phase from the original P&B design method remained relatively constant and was not influenced significantly by the aforementioned design phenomena.

Throughout all four core steps of the design process it is important to constantly consider project costs and schedule. Ultimately, regardless of the goal of the design enterprise, a product that is too expensive to produce or profit from or is completed after it is needed to meet market or user needs is considered a failed product. This aligns well with the concepts of open engineering systems discussed earlier. Driving efficiency and flexibility in design enables a project team to deliver a successful product on time, on cost, and with the ability to maintain relevance in a rapidly changing marketplace. In the case of a mailbox system, the marketplace for mail is declining, while that for packages is increasing. This is the type of market environmental change that makes designing a mailbox of the future more difficult.

20

Figure 5. Going Postal’s Modified Pahl and Beitz Design Process

21

3 – Planning and Task Clarification

3.1 – Analyze the Potential Market

Our market research can be broke down into three categories: literature review, individual interviews, and crowdsourcing. The literature review and individual interviews are more traditional forms of market research and are discussed in this section, whereas the crowdsourcing research is thought to be the wave of the future and will be discussed in the following section.

The literature review was conducted almost entirely through internet searches and yielded several valuable and venerable sources. For example, the USPS annual report for 2014 stated that while the total volume of letter mail has been decreasing steadily since 2006, the total volume of shipping/package volume has been steadily increasing. More specifically, according to StatisticBrain.com, the total quantity of letters mailed annually has decreased by 25% between 2007 and 2013. This seems to be a common tread throughout much of our literature review. While we do not believe tradition letter mail will vanish completely in the near to intermediate future, we do believe that package delivery will continue to increase and a demand for the capability to accept packages securely and conveniently will therefore also increase. Also, the individual interviews and crowdsourcing information, to be discussed later, shows similar trends. This type of information has driven us to heavily consider package, or parcel, storage in our smart “mailbox” of the future. On a slightly different note, the demographic of households living in an individual home as opposed to an apartment or community of homes is an interesting statistic regarding the types of mailboxes that should be designed. The two home styles require significantly different solutions. According to the National Multifamily Housing Council website, approximately 89% of all Americans live in “housing unit” and only 11% live in “apartment residents.” While this does not paint an exactly picture of how many households have individual mailboxes, as opposed to community of mailbox clusters, it does show that the majority of households most likely have individual mailboxes. This statistic was taken into consideration later on in the design process as the project proposal was being finalized.

Another part of the literature review concentrated on how the most popular mail delivery services track and confirm shipment of mail and packages. Table 3 below shows the results of that research.

Table 3. Tracking and Confirmation Methods

USPS UPS FedEx DHLTracking methods

Number Number Number Number

Tracking technology

Intelligent mail barcode IMbp is standard for any company using USPS (including piece-level address or ZIP+4 Code information)

MaxiCode, Zip code, Country Code and shipment type

Intelligent mail barcode

Barcode

Highest level of confirmation

Signature Signature Signature Signature

22

Finally, the third part of the online research of our market analysis involved identifying pre-existing technologies and products within the realm of our product concept. We searched the patent records for existing intellectual property claims, Kickstarter, and other crowdfunding websites for possible startup concepts, and traditional home living online websites for existing products already on the market. Figure 6 shows several graphics of existing technologies. These technologies ranged from mailbox securing/locking systems to real time mail notification, to drone delivery landing platforms.

Through this final stage of literature review, the team determined that no one specific feature would allow our product to stand apart from existing technologies and future market competition. Instead, we need to identify several key aspects of the smart mailbox of the future that all customers deem essential to a superior mailbox and incorporate all features into one system. This revelation helped the team to narrow the focus of the next two stages of the market research, the individual interviews and crowdsourcing information collection.

Individual interviews were conducted by several of the team members. The demographic of the interviewees varied somewhat, but the overall sample size was too small to provide a high level of merit that no biases were inherent in the results. For this reason, we decided to use the interview results as a supplement to the crowdsourcing surveys to be discussed shortly. Overall, the interview results reinforced several key takeaways from the literature review. For example, many interviewees commented on how paper mail was becoming of less importance to them while at the same time package delivery was becoming of increasing importance and is causes the majority of the frustration. A few common features that the interviewees would like to see in their future mailbox were notification and sorting features. The full interview results can be found in Appendix C.

23

24

Figure 6. Existing Mailbox and Package Drop Box Products

3.2 – Crowdsource Market Needs

Based on the literature review and personal interviews that were described above, we developed a market survey to be distributed throughout each team member’s social network. In doing so, the team capitalized on a relatively new concept of crowdsourcing, where large amounts of market research and market data can be gathered in a limited amount of time. This crowdsourcing not only provided valuable information about the status of the current market and the market demands, but also provided interesting product ideas that would otherwise have been missed or overlooked by a team of only 15 people.

In less than 5 days the team was able to collect over 175 responses for a 12-15 question survey with each respondent’s demographic information, current mailbox situation (including likes and dislikes), and wishes for the mailbox of the future. If a longer time was allotted to market research, this survey could have easily reached over 1,000 responses with and even greater sample size for a more accurate picture of the market demands. One critical step at this point in the project was to decipher the information to paint a worthwhile picture of the market demand. The following is some key information extracted from the results:

Statistics of survey:a) Current mailbox arrangement:

a. 33% of respondents live in a house and therefore have an individual mailbox (either curbside of near/in front door)

b. 67% of respondents live in an apartment or community style home and therefore have a mailbox at a centralized location

b) Preferred mailbox arrangement:a. 12% of respondents preferred the community style mailbox over the individual

mailboxb. 44% prefer an individual curbside mailboxc. 44% prefer an individual on home mailbox

c) Amount willing to spend on “Smart” mailbox (see Figure 8):a. 4% would pay more than $100b. 10% would pay between $70-$100c. 20% would pay between $40-$70d. 66% would pay no more than $40

d) The most common complaints for the current system are (see Figure 9):a. 33% – distance of mailbox from home/aptb. 22% – lack of securityc. 17% – lack of notificationd. 12% – too small to hold packagese. 9% – not weather/environmentally resistant enough

25

Figure 7. Selected Results of Surveys

66%

20%

10%3%

$0-$40

$41-$70

$71-$100

$100-$500

Customer Price Demands

Figure 8. Survey Results: Customer Price Demands

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

16

60

9

40

31

21

Current Mailbox Inconveniences

Figure 9. Survey Results: Current Mailbox Inconveniences

26

The task of developing a “smart mailbox of the future” is extremely broad and somewhat ambiguous. There is no one mailbox fits all solution. The literature research and crowdsourcing market research discussed above helped break down the problem and identify strong potential market sectors and desired future mailbox attributes. Some attributes could be combined into a core functional improvement, such as the inconvenient location, useless mail received, and lack of a notification system. All three of those issues could be improved with the addition of a notification system alone. Ultimately, we determined the most desired attributes are an enhanced security device, a notification system, more effective weather resistance, an increase in parcel size capacity. These were the critical functions that we examined moving forward into the concept design phase and they were also the foundation for the requirements list to be discussed later.

Finally, the price point information was an eye opener. The customers demand advanced features for their mailbox of the future, but most are not willing to pay a hefty price for it. In order to combat this difficult design situation, a tiered solution was discussed. With a tiered/modular solution, the final product would actually be a family of products sold at different price points depending upon the level of capability of the product. In this way, the more financially willing customers will spring for all the bells and whistles, while the customers that are strapped for cash can chose to purchase a more limited model with the characteristics that matter most to that individual. This is a great example of designing an open engineering system that is adaptable to rapid changes in the market.

27

3.3 – Remove Bias from Research

Going Postal made a concerted effort to remove each of our personal biases and preconceived notions while analyzing the market research, formulating the project proposal, and developing the requirements list. Although it is difficult to ignore personal experiences or problems, it is critical to keeping an open design space and fostering inventiveness. This step becomes even more important during the second phase of the design process at the onset of conceptual design, but we felt it was also important to institute restraint at this point in the process to ensure the project proposal and requirements list was not tainted by individual bias.

28

3.4 – Project Proposal

With this new understanding of user needs, our team was able to go back and properly define the problem. Based on our initial market research information we defined the problem as follows:

Design the intelligent secure parcel collection system of the future, which will be scalable and modular, for high density population communities.

We wanted to focus on high density populations because that is a larger market than small communities are, and with the population growth trend, this market will be getting even bigger in the future. However, after taking a second look at the market research, we found that people in both high and low density population communities were seeing the same problems of lack of notification after receiving mail and security. Therefore, we generalized our final problem statement to be:

Design the intelligent secure mail/parcel collection system of the future, which will be scalable, modular, and applicable to current mailbox users.

With this final project proposal, we generalized our design space and opened up our market segment tremendously. We feel that we were still able to provide our original intended market with mail/parcel delivery features, while catering to additional users of smaller communities and especially single family homes. The second and final project proposal concentrated more on the new mailbox features and less on the type of user for the design.

29

3.5 – Requirements List

The requirements list is typically the final product of the first phase of the design phase. This list is the result of the projects initial market research, the elimination of bias’s, and defining the project through the project proposal. The key to developing an effective requirements list is to ensure that all requirements are obtainable and verifiable within the fiscal and schedule constraints of the project. Another popular and effective strategy is to set demands and wishes for the requirements list. The demands are requirements that must be satisfied in order to provide the lowest possible solution. The wishes are requirements that are designed to be met upfront, with the expectation that not all wishes will be met throughout the process of tradeoff studies during design.

As one can see from the column on the left of Table 4, the requirements list is a fluid document throughout the design process. While changes to the requirements document should be kept to an absolute minimum, the changes are a necessary part of the design process as the conceptual and embodiment design phases progress. The earlier the final requirements list can be locked down in a design, the better. This is because the cost of a requirements change typically increases as a design becomes more mature.

Many of the requirements were derived through the crowdsourcing and personal interviews, such as the locking mechanism and notification system. Several of the other requirements, such as the forces, safety, maintenance, and cost, were derived through all of Going Postal’s own experiences and knowledge of common engineering practices. These requirements have constantly been revisited as design decisions are made and cost and schedule is considered.

Table 4. Requirements List Going Postal’s Mailbox System

Going Postal Requirements List for Smart Mailbox of the Future Issued on: 03/01/14Changes D or W Requirements

1. Geometry of the MailboxMailbox Structure

1-Apr-14 D Must accept parcel at least 10 inches wide1-Apr-14 D Must accept parcel at least 12 inches length1-Apr-14 D Must accept parcel at least 8 inches depth1-Apr-14 D Must accept mail up to a standard letter size

W Must accept parcel at least 20 inches wideW Must accept parcel at least 24 inches lengthW Must accept parcel at least 16 inches depth

 1-Apr-14 D Must be able to house documents/packagesW Shape can be customized

2. KinematicsD Locking mechanismD Access system

30

W Digitally locking mechanism

3. ForcesD Must require five pounds of force or less to openD Withstand environmental and everyday forces

4. EnergyW Should be self-sustaining

DThere must be an energy-independent method of obtaining mail

W Should utilize less than .5kwh per day

5. MaterialsD Materials must not be hazardous to the environmentW Materials should be able to able to survive -50F to 130FD Corrosion resistantD Lightweight

6. SafetyD Must not have sharp edgesW Must minimize casualtiesW Should be clearly visible

7. OperationD Must protect mail/package from environmentD Must have a security system to protect from theftD Must notify the user when mail/package is deliveredW Remotely operated

8. Maintenance

 14-Apr-14 WShould go minimum of ten two years without repair/maintenance

D Should have easy to understand maintenance proceduresD Maintenance is easy to carry out

9. CostsW Should be manufactured (excluding labor) for <$100D Should be manufactured (excluding labor) for <$300

10. SchedulesD Must have a complete design by end of semesterW Want a proof of concept by the end of the semester

31

4 – Conceptual Design

4.1 – Identify the Essential Problem

As we entered the conceptual design phase of our modified Pahl and Beitz design process, we began by identifying the essential problem(s) that we were attempting to address. With a relatively large problem at hand, i.e., the creation of a smart mailbox of the future, and many directions in which we could go to approach the task, it was necessary to narrow the scope of the project by honing in on the key issue(s) that we wanted our problem to solve. The beginning of this process started with the original project prompt and was further clarified following our market research and the formation of the requirements list.

By examining the requirements list, we were able to recognize what elements our product solution needed to encompass. The product or product family would need to fulfill the basic functions of a mailbox in that it must be able to hold documents and packages and protect them from the mailbox’s surrounding environment, whether those items are being received or shipped. Additionally, our product would involve a security mechanism and a notification mechanism with which the user could interact. Obviously, we identified several other features or functions that we demanded or wished for our product to have or accomplish, but housing, security, notification, and interaction were classified as our essential problems.

32

4.2 – Establish Function Structures

With our essential problems identified, we set about creating function structures to serve as a framework to guide the development of our initial concepts. In Figure 10 Error: Reference source not found, we depicted the functions we desired our product to carry out in a manner where the overarching function, stated as “Manage Mail/Parcels,” was subdivided into four sub-functions determined by the previous step in the design process. These four sub-functions, “Receive Mail,” “Send Mail,” “Secure Packages,” and “Communicate with User,” were then further broken down into another level of more specific sub-functions.

Notice that several steps were taken to ensure that as little bias as possible was introduced into the solution development portion later in the conceptual design phase. The functions and sub-functions were named and intentionally kept as generic as possible so as not to bias our design concepts with preconceived solutions. Furthermore, the level of detail in the function structure is not too great, again, so as not to introduce design bias into the process. If more levels of sub-functions had been added, it would have been difficult not to stray to the area of specific concept solutions.

Figure 10. Mailbox Function Structure

33

4.3 – Search for Working Principles

Our search for working principles actually began unintentionally as soon as we heard the project prompt. Almost everyone in our group admitted that different possible product ideas, features, solutions, etc. popped into his/her head long before we got to the conceptual design phase. As ideas would be brought up prematurely in meetings, the group was careful to recognize that we should not be solely focused on our preconceived ideas of what would make for a good product. Whenever this case would arise, we would be sure to tell the group member with the idea to write it down and save it for later, so that we would not be biased towards “pet” solutions.

To begin our search for working principles in earnest, we had each member of the group come up with working principles that would solve the main functions we had identified. We purposely only set one guideline to guide our brainstorming. That guideline was that no idea would be off limits, no matter how impractical it may seem. This guideline was meant to encourage a large quantity of creative ideas. In addition to soliciting working principle ideas from our group members, we also crowdsourced ideas by posting a survey on Facebook and Imgur using Google Docs. We did this to keep in line with our philosophy of crowdsourcing as much as possible throughout various phases of the design project. A sample of a group member’s ideas for working principles can be found in Table 5 below. A more complete version of this brainstorming exercise including team members and survey responders’ results can be found in Table 12 in Appendix D.

Table 5. Working Principle Brainstorming Sample

What is an innovative way to secure mail and packages?

What is an innovative way to notify people that they have mail in their mailbox?

For packages, we may utilize a flexible, expandable bag. This bag can be weather proof to prevent damage to sensitive materials due to weather conditions, as well as contain steel meshing to prevent theft of packages by cutting the bag open. When not in use a soft storage mechanism will be able to be stuffed back into the mail box portion intended primarily for letters to thus conserve space.

Notifications of mail received could be made more specific by not only telling the recipient that they have mail, but also what the mail is. If important letters or packages contained RFID information or QR codes to scan text messages or emails could be sent as notifications and not only alert the arrival of mail but also important mail.

It became quickly apparent that while our initial individual brainstorming produced useful and creative concepts, we were not all on the same page regarding the direction of the final solution. As a second step for developing working principles, we decided to meet as a group, both in person and via video teleconference, to develop a complete list of working principles based on our individual inputs and on the spot collaborative brainstorming/discussion. The result was a morph chart of individual solutions to each of the functions from our initial function tree. Through this exercise, we also determined which functions were critical and which were less so. Table 6 shows the chart that was developed.

34

Table 6. Working Principle Morph Chart

Idea 1 Idea 2 Idea 3 Idea 4 Idea 5 Idea 6 Idea 7 Idea 8 Idea 9 Idea 10 Idea 11 Idea 12 Idea 13 Idea 14 Idea 15Accept Incoming Mail

Slot Simple door (current method)

Automatic door keyless entry

Store Incoming Mail Simple box (current)

Weatherproof bag

Box with heater and antifreeze

Weather-resistant box

Sort Incoming Mail Assign #'s on arrival

Scan & email Infrared None

Allow Access Keyless fob Combo lock Finger swipe Retina scan Ear scanner PIN pad Actual key Slot App on phone Door

Protect Mail Keyless fob Combo lock Finger swipe Retina scan Ear scanner PIN pad Actual key Slot App on phone Door Electric Discharge

Booby trap Queen's Guard

Alarm GPS

Accept Outgoing Mail

Simple door (current method)

Automatic door keyless entry

Slot

Store Outgoing Mail

Simple box (current)

Weatherproof bag

Box with heater and antifreeze

Weather-resistant box

Notify mailman Flag (current method)

LED Screen Fireworks LED lights Voice/sound Smart app GPS notification

Accept Packages Slot Simple door (current method)

Automatic door keyless entry

Drone drop Bag opening

Store Packages simple box (current)

Vanishing chute Parcel distribution channels

None Foldable door Wire-wrapping security device

Metal mesh bag

Protect Packages keyless fob Combo lock Finger swipe Retina scan Ear scanner PIN pad Actual key Slot App on phone Door Sniper on your roof

Booby trap Lazer boundaries

Alarm GPS

Detect Entry RFID tag Weight sensitive platform

Camera inside Schedule Flag Button Door w/ sensor

Process Data Direct Algorithm (chip) Wi-fi Data network Radio signal power signal

Alert User Vibrating underwear

Fireworks Email/text Smart app Door bell Flag Light None Mail song from blue's clues

Pidgeons

Recieve Input from User

Manual knobs/buttons

Voice control Clap control Smart app Whislte

Power Wind Solar Battery Electric Mechanical Chemical Magentic induction

35

4.4 – Combine into Working Structure Solutions and Iterate Concepts

With a wide variety of working principles established, the scene was ripe for the group to start forming initial working structures from those principles. Using the morph chart shown in Table 6, each individual from the design subcommittee developed working structures, or preliminary design concepts, by combining several of the ideas for each function where it made sense to do so. Some concepts incorporated most or all of the functions and several of the concepts only concentrated on a few critical functions. Also, certain designers decided to present their concepts as smaller morph charts, while others sketched out designs with short descriptions. The following figures are a compilation of these working structures:

Simple Box with Slot Smart built-in mailbox Mailbox + drone drop zone Paranoia has taken overAccept Incoming Mail slot automatic door, keyless entry door automatic doorStore Incoming Mail simple box weather resistant box box weather resistant boxSort Incoming Mail none none none infraredAllow Access door keyless fob door ear scanner and pin padProtect Mail key keyless fob none ear scanner and pin pad/sniper on roof

Accept Outgoing Mail slot automatic door door automatic doorStore Outgoing Mail simple box weather resistant box box weatherproof boxNotify mailman flag led screen/lights flag app/gps

Accept Packages simple door automatic door drone drop automatic door (drones too risky)Store Packages large box vanishing chute into house foldable door vanishing chuteProtect Packages key one way door escape hatch retina scanner/sniper on roof

Detect Entry button rfid tag weight sensitive platform cameraProcess Data direct wifi wifi directAlert User flag smart app smart app smart appRecieve Input from User manual input smart app smart app voice control

Power none solar and battery electric (to house) battery and electric

Figure 11. Areeje’s Concepts

36

Functions Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 Concept 4

Store Incoming Mail Simple Box weather proof bag weather-resistant box weather proof bagSort incoming mail none None assign #’s on arrival infraredAllow access Actual Key combo lock finger swipe ear scannerProtect mail Actual Key combo lock PIN Pad sniper on your roofAccept outgoing mail simple door simple door slot slotStore outgoing mail simple box weather proof bag weather-resistant box box with heater and antifreezeNotify mailman flag LED Voice/sound fireworksAccept packages simple door simple door bag opening drone dropStore packages simple box vanishing chute weather-proof bag vanishing chuteprotect packages actual key combo lock PIN pad booby trapdetect entry button weight-sensitive platform RFID tag flagprocess data radio signal wifi direct direct

alert user smart app email/text mail song from blue’s clues vibrating underwear

Accept Incoming Mail Simple Door Simple Door Slot automatic keyless door

Figure 12. Chris’s Concepts

Figure 13. Chris's Concept Drawing

37

Figure 14. Fabien’s Concept Drawings

38

Figure 15. Dorian’s Concepts

Figure 16. Dorian’s Concept Drawings

39

Figure 17. Sergio's Concept Drawing

Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 Concept 4 Concept 5Slot Automatic door Keyless entry Simple door Simple door

Weather resistant box Weather resistant box Box with heater and antifreeze Simple box Weather resistant boxNone None None None None

Finger Swipe Keyless fob Retina scan PIN pad Combo lockFinger Swipe Keyless fob Retina scan PIN pad Combo lockSimple door Automatic door Automatic door Simple door Automatic door

Weather resistant box Simple box Box with heater and antifreeze Simple box Weather resistant boxFlag GPS nofication LED screen Flag LED light

Simple door Automatic door Drone drop Simple door Automatic doorSimple box Simple box Foldable door Simple box Parcel distribution channels

Finger Swipe PIN pad Retina scan PIN pad Keyless fobDoor with Sensor RFID tag Weight sensitive Door with sensor Door with sensor

Data Network Data Network Data Network Data Network Data NetworkEmail/text Door bell Email/text Email/text Email/textSmart app Manual knobs, buttons Smart app Voice control Voice control

Battery Mechanical Solar Electric Magnetic/Electric

Option 1Option 2Option 3Option 4Option 5

Accept outgoing mailStore outgoing mailNotify mailmanAccept packages

FunctionsAccept Incoming MailStore Incoming MailSort incoming mailAllow accessProtect mail

Power

Store packagesProtect packagesDetect entryProcess dataAlert userReceive input from user

StandardManual orientied where some physical work required with the mail boxPremium, most expensiveBudget, most simple with some technology incorporatedDigitally oriented where everything is done wirelessly.

Figure 18. Kynam’s Concepts.

40

Figure 19. Mesh Bag Concept Drawing

41

Figure 20. Accordion Design (View 1)

Figure 21. Accordion Design (View 2)

The following step of our design process will flesh out how the various design concepts were turned into a core set of concept solutions to be evaluated against one another.

42

4.5 – Evaluate Against Technical and Economic Criteria

The group now had a plethora of product concepts from which to choose. To develop each concept, test it, and obtain market feedback about it would be prohibitively costly in terms of time and money. To narrow down our options in an objective, efficient manner, the group employed a design tool known as an un-weighted evaluation matrix.

Table 7. Un-weighted Evaluation Matrix

ME 6102 – Team Going Postal

Selection Chart

Conceptual EvaluationEvaluation Matrix

Crit

eria

Ran

king

Evaluation CriteriaEvaluated on scale of 1-7 (1 being worst, 7 best) as to how well they fulfill the requirements list. 1 indicates fulfilling just one or none sub-criterion, 7 indicates all filled

ObjectiveLooking for an objective score for each concept regarding the categories listed below.

Decision Individual scores are based

on qualitative assessment to facilitate objective analysis.

Best idea is based on how many requirements are met. All requirements are weighted equally.Geometry of Mailbox

Kinematics/ForcesCosts

EnergyMaterials

SafetyOperation

MaintenanceTotal

Notes4 4 7 7 7 4 4 4 41 Mesh Bag Tied for 3rd

7 7 4 4 7 7 7 4 47 High-tech mailbox Tied for highest4 4 7 4 7 4 4 4 38 Hexagonal Clamshell Lowest4 7 4 7 7 4 4 4 41 Accordion Attachment Tied for 3rd

7 7 4 4 7 4 7 1 41 House Design Tied for 3rd

7 7 7 4 7 4 7 4 47 Camera Device Tied for highest7 4 7 4 7 4 7 4 44 Attachments to existing 2nd place

Bes

t Ide

a

Multiple

Multiple

Multiple

Multiple

All

Hi-tech

Multiple

Multiple

High ScoreHighest scores are for Hi-tech mailbox and Camera Device, scoring 47 out of

a possible 56 points

43

In Table 7, the methods and results of the matrix are displayed for seven of our initial concepts. As shown, the results were of a high quality and very close for all concepts, which is a good problem to have since it means that we had many good options from which to choose. Since two ideas stood out as the best, we decided to see if we could pick a clear winner through the use of a weighted evaluation matrix.

By using a weighted evaluation matrix, we could rank our requirements with more

emphasis on the more critical requirements. This allows us to flush our concepts that may have on a multitude of wishes but miss some of the key demands. Also, it is important to point out that between the un-weighted evaluation matrix and the weighted matrix to be shows, the total number of concepts shrunk from 7 concepts to 5 concepts. This is because it was determined that several of the concepts could be combined or absorbed by others. Specifically, the mesh bag concept was also incorporated in the high tech mailbox; therefore, this concept was dropped. Table 8 shows the resulting weighted evaluation matrix while the weight and rate scale are found in Figure 22.

Based on both evaluation matrices, un-weighted and weighted, we determined we had two very strong designs. As one can see from the weighted evaluation matrix and the un-weighted evaluation matrix, the two most highly rated designs were the hi-tech mailbox/package delivery system and the modular camera notification and security system. Rather than further evaluate at this point in the process, we decided to keep both designs moving forward through the remainder of the conceptual design process. There are several reasons for this determination. The first is that the combination of the two designs addresses several of our key requirements. The camera/security mailbox design addresses the issues of notifications and mail security, while keeping the solution very simple and inexpensive. The hi-tech mailbox solution addressed almost, if not all, requirements, but would be a more difficult sell on the market due to its higher price. In keeping with the open engineering systems design philosophy, we felt that having a suite of products could lead to a more marketable and customizable solution. These two designs will be further detailed and analyzed in the upcoming sections.

Weight: 10 = Most Important6 = Moderately Important1 = Not Very Important

Rating: 5 = Fulfills req. completely3 = Fulfills req.1 = Does not fulfill req.

Legend:

Figure 22. Weighted Evaluation Matrix Legend

44

Table 8. Weighted Evaluation Matrix

Category/concept Weight

Acccordion Package System

Hi-Tech Mailbox

Camera Notification System

"House" Design

Hexagonal Clamshell Design

1. Geometry of the MailboxMust be able to house mail/documents 10 5 5 5 5 5

2. KinematicsLocking mechanism 6 5 5 4 3 4

Access system 6 5 5 5 4 4

3. ForcesMust require five pounds of force or less to open 6 4 5 5 5 5Withstand environmental and everyday forces 10 4 3 3 4 4

4. EnergyThere must be an energy-independent method of obtaining mail 8 5 3 5 5 5

5. MaterialsMaterials must not be hazardous to the environment 6 5 5 5 5 5Corrosion resistant 6 5 5 5 5 5Lightweight 4 5 5 5 5 5

6. SafetyMust not have sharp edges 6 5 5 5 5 1

7. OperationMust seperate mail from environment 6 4 5 3 5 5

Must have a security system to protect from theft 8 4 5 4 4 4

Must notify the user when a parcel is delievered 10 5 5 5 5 4Must injure Team A during use 10 5 5 5 5 5Simplicity to implement (Modularity) 8 2 3 4 2 2Customizability 5 4 5 5 4 4

8. MaintenanceMaintance is easy to carry out 4 3 5 3 5 5

9. CostsHas to be profitable 6 4 5 5 3 5TOTAL 552 573 563 548 532

45

4.6 – Reduce Complexity, Increase Flexibility and Openness

With the limited amount of time we had to complete the project, we felt it was best to split our design team into two subgroups so that we could continue to develop both the hi-tech package receptacle and the camera notification and security system concurrently. By doing this, we could continue to improve the concepts and evaluate their potential. The design team created preliminary CAD models of both concepts as shown below in Figure 23 and Figure 24 in order to give our team a clear picture of what the product ideas were.

Figure 23. Preliminary CAD of Camera/Security Solution

Figure 24. Preliminary CAD of Hi-tech Package Solution

The next step in our modified P&B process required us to look at our two chosen conceptual designs in terms of how well they fit in with our goal of designing an open engineering system. We looked at both designs with a critical eye towards evaluating how well the designs reduce complexity and increase the flexibility and openness. Each design had qualities that matched up with these aims, but as we came to see, one design stood out as a better fit.

The hi-tech package solution was unfortunately rather complex. The product would require several moving parts for the automated package bay doors. Multiple materials would be needed to be acquired and processed to build the idea including multiple types of wood and a touchscreen. The finished product would involve a non-trivial assembly and installation process by the user or by a professional. While the product would have the advantage of being an all-in-one mail and package solution, the other complex aspects of the design render it unappealing as we strive to design under the philosophy of open engineering systems.

46

Simpson et. al. (1998) point out that open engineering systems are characteristically able to adapt to changes in environment. In this regard, the package solution again fell short. The concept did allow for both mail and packages of various sizes to be delivered and securely stored. However, the design did not allow for the product to adapt to changing consumer trends, regulations, and technology. Not only does the design not allow for adaption in the face of these changing environments, the size and bulk of the product also would not allow consumers adapt to changes in physical environments, i.e., to move it easily in case the need arose.

In several areas where the package solution fell short, the modular notification and security system shined. The product was less complex, consisting of fewer total and moving parts and fewer different types of materials. The manufacturing of the solution would be much simpler as would the assembly. Installation could be done on a standard mailbox by one person with a few common shop tools such as a Dremel® tool and a screw driver.

In terms of flexibility and openness, the camera and security system had several promising features that intrigued the team. The product could be modular in that a variety of types of locks could be chosen including a manually operated key lock, a remotely operated automatic lock, or a proximity activated automatic lock. Modularity would also be achieved through a variety of communication technology options including Bluetooth and Wi-Fi and the option to select the quality of camera to be used. The product could be upgraded or downgraded as the user saw fit as their needs changed and as new technologies came about. The solution was also flexible in its ability to be installed in the user’s existing mailbox, transferred from one mailbox to another, or to be moved in conjunction with the entire mailbox. The concept also could be used in a variety of housing settings including being used in a cluster of mailboxes and linked together wirelessly. Apartment complexes, condominiums, and universities could order in bulk and even control the devices from a central location to manage their mail systems.

47

4.7 – Review Against Requirements List

The design team was definitely leaning towards the camera notification and security solution. Though all products were designed with and superficially compared against the requirements list, in proceeding with our modified Pahl and Beitz process, we decided to continue evaluating both solutions in greater detail in regards to the list as shown in Table 4 on page 30 as it stood at the time.

The package solution met several aspects of the list including the ability to accept packages of various sizes as well as the safety and operational requirements. The design also incorporated all the kinematic and durability requirements listed as demands or wishes. Where the design fell short was in its energy requirements, weight, cost, and complexity. The product would need a significant amount of energy to operate its touchscreen and the moving package bay doors. The concept could not be considered to be made of lightweight materials if it was to be durable and made of wood, i.e., a wood such as balsa could not be used. The finished product would certainly cost more than $100 and could very well approach the hard $300 limit we set for a selling price. The touchscreen, solar panel, and manufacturing costs would all be significant contributors to the cost. Finally, to flesh out the complex design in a reasonable amount of detail would take longer than this course/semester would allow.

On the other hand, the modular camera notification and security system was only found lacking in two particular requirements that happened to be wishes, not demands. Unless some power option for the device like a solar panel module was added, the concept would not be able to be classified as self-sustaining. In addition, the goal of having the product last for ten years without repair or maintenance was almost certainly too optimistic for the amount of electronics that we would be implementing. That goal was shortened to two years towards the end of the design process. The notification system did meet or have the potential to meet all of the rest of the requirements. The product concept would be less energy intensive, lightweight, lower costing, and able to be sufficiently explored in the amount of time the team had.

48

4.8 – Principle (Concept) Solution(s)

While the hi-tech package solution was still a strong concept, we put it aside for the remainder of the project so that we could focus the entire design team on one primary solution. The modular camera notification and security system proved to be the more promising design in its potential to fulfill a greater number of our important requirements. We decided to move forward with it as our principle solution into the embodiment design phase where we would continue to develop the idea in greater detail. We had to keep in mind why we chose this concept, what made it an OES, and how to improve it without losing sight of its key appeal.

49

5 – Embodiment Design

5.1 - Select Best Preliminary Layouts

At this point, Going Postal had down selected from dozens of initial concepts to a single solution. It was around this time that the module notification and security system, including a “smart” locking mechanism for security, was given a product name. Staying in line with our team name, Going Postal, the team decided to name the product the “Go Postal” system. From this point forward, the system will be referred to as its official product name.

Go Postal was chosen as the single point solution for various reasons, the largest of which was the potential openness of its system architecture and the low total cost. The Go Postal system, if designed correctly, could be a very open system with customization, modularity, flexibility, mutability, and robustness. The devil was in the details. At this point, what did we know about Go Postal? We knew it would entail a camera notification system, it would be powered by one of several means but would require relatively low power, it would have an option for a remote and local locking mechanism, and it would have the ability to wirelessly communicate with the user. All the specifics of the design beyond those details were unknown, however. This is where the embodiment design phase of the augmented Pahl and Beitz design process takes over. The first step of the embodiment design phase involves redefining all of the major system functions based on the final concept and addressing specifically how each of the functions needs will be met.

Figure 25. Preliminary CAD Model of Camera Module

50

Figure 26. Preliminary CAD Model of Lock Module

Figure 27. Preliminary CAD Model Cross Section of Mailbox

First, we concentrated on the flash enabled camera module as we felt it was the most important module and we did not want to sacrifice any design space due to predetermined layouts of other modules. This module allows the user to receive a photograph of the contents of their mailbox, without having to physically inspect it. It serves two purposes. The first is to notify the user that they have mail. There was a multitude of ways to make this happen. Since we were unable to accomplish one of our requirement wishes of sorting mail for the customer, at the very least, we could provide them with a snapshot of the contents. This provides the user with additional information, which equates to additional decision making power. Now not only will the user know whether or not mail is present in their mailbox, but they will also have a general idea of the type of mail and whether or not it is urgent enough to deserve a trip to the mailbox. For the users whose mailboxes are feet from their door, this feature is not as advantageous, but for users who have a lengthy want to the curb or community mail cluster, this feature is essential. The critical characteristics of the camera module were low cost, high reliability, and reasonable capability. The last aspect of the camera module is the flash feature. This is necessary due to the expected low level of lighting inside a closed mailbox, when we foresee the photo will be taken.

51

For this flash component, we chose to use cell phone camera technology (see Figure 28). It is relatively inexpensive, technologically proven, and will get the job done sufficiently.

Figure 28. iPhone 5 Camera and Flash Components

In order to know when to take the photos with the digital camera, the mailbox has to be smart enough to know when mail has been deposited. That leads us to the next essential component which is a sub-module of the camera module, since it will always be included when the notification system is selected by the customer. There are several ways to accomplish the task of detect the presence of mail, many of which were initially thought up early on in the conceptual design phase. There were several that we felt were the most practical and easily implementable in the Go Postal system:

1. Micro Switcho Advantages: This technology is advantageous from a power saving standpoint

due to the nature of its functionality. It is also relatively low cost. o Disadvantages: The micro switch would activate the camera module each time

the mailbox door is opened. 2. Infrared Sensor

o Advantages: Can be set up such so that only when an object is placed INTO the mailbox will the sensor be triggered; therefore, opening the mailbox alone will not trigger a false alarm.

o Disadvantages: Requires installation that is more precise and is more expensive.

3. Motion Sensoro Advantages: Can be set up such so that only when an object is placed INTO

the mailbox will the sensor be triggered; therefore, opening the mailbox alone will not trigger a false alarm.

o Disadvantages: Requires installation that is more precise and is more expensive.

4. Electric Pressure Mato Advantages: A weight sensitive mat placed at the floor of the mailbox will be

the most effective way to sense and alert the user of mail. There is also a potential here to quantify the amount of mail currently in the mailbox.

o Disadvantages: This technology is potentially the most expensive, and it would require additional programming of the processor and connectivity with the phone app.

52

Figure 29. Sensor Options

Next, we dove into the details of the anti-theft mechanism. For the initial conception of this idea, three different locking options were considered. The first is having no lock. This would reach out to users that already have a locking mechanism on their mailbox, but would like to add a notification system. The second configuration is a traditional lock and key. The third configuration is a keyless fob. Both the traditional lock and key and the keyless fob would also be controlled by your smartphone, enabling the user to lock and unlock the mailbox remotely. We further analyzed the two locking options as follows:

1. Traditional Lock & Keyo Advantages: Low cost and low complexityo Disadvantages: Less attractive and less secure (locks can be picked relatively

easily)2. Keyless Fob

o Advantages: More secure and more futuristic which would appeal to more tech savvy customers

o Disadvantages: More expensive and will draw additional power

Figure 30. Locking Mechanism Options

The third and final customer selected module is the power module. It was decided there could be two available methods of powering the device. We could offer a direct power option, providing users with virtually limitless power to the device; this would most likely include apartment complexes or community mailbox clusters who want to power many of the devices at the same time. For single mailbox households, we decided on a battery powered module in lieu of other standalone renewable energy options such as solar or wind. We felt that the amount of power required for a single system would be low enough to have battery systems suffice. As for the type and size of the battery system, those details will be discussed in the next section after

53

other component choices have been finalized and total power requirements can be taken into consideration.

Now that all of the customer selected modules have been analyzed, there are a few remaining major components that will be common throughout all options. These are the wireless transmitter and the microprocessor. Much of the decision making for these components was fairly straight forward as the options were limited. For the wireless transmitter, the only reasonable technologies for the given function were Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. All other wireless technologies would be overkill. Due to the limited range of Bluetooth technology, Wi-Fi was the logical choice. We were initially concerned with the limited range of a Wi-Fi system, as well, and we will touch on that in our later iterations of the design. With respect to the microprocessor, there was only one technological option available to fulfill this function and the specific component selection will be discussed further in the next section.

Lastly, it is important to note that the camera module, the microprocessor, Wi-Fi transmitter, and power module will all be contained within a single enclosure housed in the back of the mailbox. The final major decision of the preliminary layout for the Go Postal system is how to mount the electronic enclosure to the mailbox. The concerns here are with theft, environmental protection, cost, effectiveness of the securing mechanism, and ease of installation. Here are the options we contemplated:

1. Stick Pado Advantages: Depending on the quality of the brand, could provide a long

lasting jointo Disadvantages: Prone to environmental degradation

2. Velcroo Advantages: Very inexpensive and very easy to installo Disadvantages: Easily detachable therefore more prone to theft

3. Mechanical Bracketo Advantages: Provides the longest lasting and most reliable attachment and if

designed correctly could reduce the chance of theft.o Disadvantages: More expensive and more difficult to install (drill holes)

Up to this point, we have discussed the physical (hardware) aspects of the Go Postal system in a fair amount of detail. The notification system is the information delivery end where the user collects the mailbox information. Initially we considered an e-mail notification system the easiest and least expensive method. However, we quickly realized that an e-mail only platform would not allow the user to communicate back to the device quickly and intuitively in order to capitalize on the remote locking feature. Therefore, the only remaining choice was to develop a mobile application to pair with the mailbox. The great thing about mobile applications is their inherent open architectures and limitless flexibility and mutability. As additional physical features of the Go Postal product hit the market, updates to the mobile application can roll out, as well. The initial layout of the mobile application is listed below and a sketch of the various screens is shown in Figure 31.

54

Mobile Application Layout:

1) Title Screen Includes the name of the App as well as a menu consisting of five options the user

may choose. When clicked, the App will send the user to the appropriate screen All sub-menus will have the option to go back via the arrow on the top left corner

2) Status This menu shows the user his current status of the mailbox, whether is locked,

unlocked, opened or closedo Locked – the mailbox is closed and locked. Access unavailableo Unlocked – the mailbox is unlocked per schedule or manual, and can be

openedo Opened – the mailbox is currently openedo Closed – the mailbox was closed but remains unlocked

Users have option to have the mailbox opened manually or automaticallyo Automatically will run via schedule programmed by the usero Manual will let the user opt to lock or unlock the mailbox

3) Schedule This menu shows the seven days of the week along with a bar separated into small

sections. Each section represents an hour of the day between 7 AM to 7PM Gray sections indicate the mailbox will remain locked for that time period. Red

sections indicate the mailbox will switch to an unlocked status Users can switch from gray to red and back to gray by simply clicking on the section

4) Log In here, the user will find a log of past activity of the mailbox

5) Options This menu shows the settings users can customize to their preference. This includes

sound level, to be on or off line, and language preference

6) Camera Whenever the camera takes a picture of the mail, the camera will start blinking,

letting the user know he received a photo. In this screen, a picture of the mail will be seen. Swipe or use the arrows flip to other pictures.

55

Figure 31. Preliminary Sketches of App Graphical User Interface

56

5.2 – Improve Concept, Simplify, and Maintain Flexibility

As was mentioned in the previous section, Go Postal comprises of several module subsystems. These include the anti-theft system, the camera notification system, and the power system. This section, as well as the previous, discusses the team’s analysis of the “Design for X” principles of the embodiment design phase. Several of the traditional design considerations include expansion, creep and relaxation, corrosion, wear, ergonomics, aesthetics, production, assembly, maintenance, recycling, risk, and technical standards. While we will not go into an in depth analysis of all of these considerations, we did at the very least consider each one and either incorporate it into our decision making process or write it off as non-applicable.

Here is a more in depth analysis of the preliminary layouts of the subsystems we outlined in Section 5.1 and the final configuration decisions. It will become obvious that the major driver behind our decision making was maintaining a modular, customization, and flexible product:

Camera Module ConsiderationsThe picture the camera will be taking does not need very high quality or need to contain

vibrate colors; therefore there is no reason to over specify the technical requirements of this camera. That being said, rather than limit all customers to one low resolution choice, we have decided to offer several resolution options to the customer based on the customer’s budget and preference. The standard option will feature a 2 megapixel camera, and alternate options will increase from there.

Camera Details: Camera Resolution: 1600 x 1200 (number of pixels on the horizontal axis and

vertical axis and when the numbers are multiplied it will equate to the number of megapixels on the camera) > 2 MP Camera

Electronic flashes sole purpose is to emit a short burst of bright light when the camera is activated. This illuminates the area in front of the flash for a fraction of a second.

A basic camera flash system has three major parts:o A small battery which is the power supplyo A gas discharge tube which produces the flasho A circuit which connects the power supply to the discharge tube

Typical camera battery only offers 1.5 Volts

Sensor Sub-module ConsiderationsAfter analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of the various sensor options and

weighing the various “Design for X” considerations mentioned above, we decided to move forward with the micro switch technology. The main rationale behind this decision was the low cost, low power consumption, and reasonable performance. While maximum performance is always desired in all aspects of a design, financial constraints force good designers to make tough decision about what is “good enough.” In this case, we decided that sacrificing a calculated level of accuracy was worth the cost savings, because the consequence of false data provided to the user was nothing more than a minor nuisance.

57

Micro Switch Details: Excellent video to explain how a micro switch works

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6nP1FjxAMU A micro switch (snap-action switch) is essentially an electrical component that

quickly changes the path and direction of power between two different electrical devices attached to it. A spring loaded arm is moved back and forth to initiate the switch between one pin to another. Each pin is connected to a different electrical device thereby drawing power as needed. It has three components namely, the common connection point (labelled as C), the N/O connection point, and the N/C connection point.

Anti-Theft Module ConsiderationsIn order to maintain a flexible and customizable design for our customers of today and of

the future, we decided to keep all three options on the table through our final design. In sticking with the customizable theme, a luxury afforded by our module system architecture, we once again decided that keeping all three of our initial anti-theft layouts would reach out to the maximum market segment for a relatively minimal cost in upfront engineering and production inefficiencies. The market segments that we feel benefit from each of the three options were highlighted earlier in Section 5.1.

For this module, the no lock option and traditional lock and key option were relatively straight forward and did not require much additional thought or fine tuning. The keyless fob and the remote activation capability were less obvious. Some research was conducted and the highlights are outlined below.

Keyless Fob Details http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_keyless_system A keyless fob or remote keyless system is essentially a way to access something

with an unconnected portable remote. It’s an electronic locking mechanism that works based on proximity to the device. They interact via radio signals that are transmitted to and from the remote upon proximity to the device.

Stepper Motor Details http://www.solarbotics.net/library/pdflib/pdf/motorbas.pdf A stepper motor is a mechatronic device whose objective is to convert applied

electrical pulses to mechanical movement of a shaft. The movement takes place in steps (hence stepper motor) or angles. In other words, for each electrical pulse, the center shaft moves a certain angle (usually a right angle). Other parameters such as length of pulses, sequence of pulses, etc. determine the amount of mechanical movement of the motor. Because of the precision in movement, the stepper motor is generally used in engineering systems that require precise and controlled movement. Thus, this is the perfect system for our remote locking feature.

Battery Module ConsiderationsThe first and final customer customization option is the method of powering the device.

We decided to go ahead and design, develop, and offer to our customer a direct power option and

58

a battery powered option. The apartment complexes or large community mailbox clusters who can more easily afford the added installation costs would be able to address the power to many of the devices simultaneously. For single mailbox households, the battery powered module would be more appropriate and financial viable. Once we knew all of the other power demanding components in the system, namely the key fob, stepper motor, micro switch, microprocessor, and camera module, we were able to appropriate select and size our battery power. The battery power options we researched were standard alkaline (AAA/AA) batteries, Li-ion, or lead acid. Right off the bat, we realized that lead acid batteries are not practical for this low power system. Li-ion batteries are proven technology that can come in very compact packages; however, size is not the most significant driver here. In order to continue to keep the cost down for our customers we selected he traditional alkaline battery packs for our design. While this power may not last as long, we feel that battery replacement will be relatively easy in this case and the mailbox can communicate with the user when the battery is running low to ensure power failure is not commonplace. As the product line grows and adapt to market changes and technological progression, we can certainly change out the alkaline battery pack for a Li-ion battery if more power is needed.

Wi-Fi Transmitter Detailed AnalysisAlthough the decision to proceed with Wi-Fi wireless transmission as opposed to

Bluetooth earlier on in the design, the details of Wi-Fi technology and how it influenced our total system design was critical. Additional research was performed to gather detail information about the theory behind Wi-Fi incorporation. To address the range issue associated with especially long driveways (one of our stronger target markets), we decided to offer discounted deals on Wi-Fi repeaters to be installed at the home for increased mailbox communication range.

Wi-Fi Details: A computer’s wireless adapter translates data into a radio signal and transmits it

using an antenna. A wireless router receives the signal and decodes it. The router sends the information to the Internet using a physical, wired Ethernet connection.

The process also works in reverse, with the router receiving information from the Internet, translating it into a radio signal and sending it to the computer’s wireless adapter.

The radios used for Wi-Fi communication are very similar to the radios used for walkie-talkies, cell phones and other devices.

They use 802.11 networking standards

Attachment Mechanism Considerations

At first, when the team considered Velcro as an attachment method, we didn’t take it seriously as a viable option. After a bit of research and some reflection of personal experiences, we realized that this was the perfect solution for Go Postal. As a matter of fact, based on the advantages and disadvantages outlined in Section 5.1, Velcro is the obvious solution. The concern that Velcro technology would not hold up to the outdoor elements and life cycle that we were hoping for was exaggerated. Velcro technology has come a long way since the day of children’s shoes. Take, for example, the attachment of an EZ-Pass to the windshield of a car. The

59

Velcro used in EZ-pass systems is extremely reliable and consistent. Many removals and re-installations later and the Velcro still sticks like new. This is less expensive than the more obvious mechanical connection and more reliable than the adhesive pad. As for the theft protection concern, our product already covers theft protection, and with the Velcro technology, the entire electronic module is enclosed in the mailbox structure, as opposed to the mechanical option where a fastener through the mailbox presents a potential security breach. For the reasons outlined, the team decided to move forward with Velcro as an attachment mechanism for the electronic enclosure.

In summary, the Go Postal system will consist of a camera module with customization resolution levels, a micro switch for mail delivery detection, three possible anti-theft options, a Wi-Fi transmitter, a microprocessor, and a battery pack to power the system. Figure 32 shows a basic electrical diagram for the electrical system architecture for the full solution option (camera and fob activated locking mechanism).

Figure 32. Electrical System Architecture of Go Postal

The rough sequence of operation is as follows:

60

1. Either mobile application signal or fob signal will unlock the mailbox, otherwise it stays locked

2. Microchip will alert camera to take picture once a certain predetermined time has passed (time to insert mail and shut mailbox door)

3. Picture is then sent to the Wi-Fi transmitter and then sent to the user

61

5.3 – Review Against Requirements List

The review against the requirements list during the conceptual design served the purpose of compared two final concepts for proceeding to the embodiment design phase and as such was a high level look at the concepts check against the requirements list. Here we have dove deeper into our requirements list to be absolutely certain that the final Go Postal product will meet or exceed at least the majority of our demand requirements and ideally several of our wishes. We have broken down each of the requirement categories and checked the Go Postal system against them.

Geometry of the Mailbox:Unintentionally, the team met the wish requirement for the geometry of the mailbox. We

wished to provide a mailbox that was a customizable shape. In reality, the Go Postal system doesn’t provide any mailbox at all, but that is the beauty of it. The user determines exactly what type, size, and quality of mailbox they want. If they feel they need to accommodate packages into their mailbox system, there are several package receiving systems on the market (basically oversized mailboxes) already. If they want a mailbox that only accommodates moderate sized letters, Go Postal will work there as well. The team considers this requirement to be a check in the box.

Kinematics:The kinematics category was dedicated to the locking mechanism. Once again the Go

Postal system satisfies both the demand and wish requirement here. Aside from the no lock option, which is a customer based decision, the other two locking options both include remote locking capability, and therefore, the wish requirement was met here as well.

Forces:Similar to the first requirement category, this requirement is highly dependent on the

users existing mailbox or the mailbox that the user decides to purchase in conjunction with the Go Postal system. Regardless, the key is that none of the Go Postal components or features will require additional force to be used to open or close the mailbox. All the Go Postal systems are non-invasive to the opening mechanism (except the locking mechanism of course but this is intentional and desired to keep potential thieves out of the mailbox).

Energy:This requirement was touched on in Section 4.7. Unfortunately, the Go Postal system as

it currently stands does not meet the wish requirement for sustainable energy/power. That being said, the battery powered option for single mailbox users does meet the demand requirement in this case. We feel the fact that the large cluster or apartment unit systems which opt for the power option are making a deliberate financial decision to provide a grid power feed to the system. The fallback option would be for each individual mail user in the cluster or apartment to provide its own battery power, which once again meets the demand objective.

Materials:

62

The materials section of the requirements list concentrated on capability to resist various environmental factors. All of the electronic components will be housed on the interior of the mailbox and therefore will be protected from the elements. To further ensure that this demand requirement is met, the user manual included guidance on how to weatherproof an existing mailbox. All of the technologies currently utilized in this initial Go Postal model have been proven through prior usage to function throughout a wide range of temperatures; however, we did not meet the wish requirement of sustaining operation between -50°F and 130°F. If customer feedback demanded greater temperature range requirements, we could easily add an additional heating/cooling element to the electronic enclosure in a later model of the Go Postal system.

Safety:There were no inherent safety hazards associated with the Go Postal system design.

Alkaline batteries are possibly the safety battery available. The only protruding objects are the fob sensor or the key insert, both of which are installed nearly flush with the mailbox. There are no automatically closing door mechanisms that could present a potential pinch point hazard. In sum, the system meets the safety requirements set forth in the requirements list.

Operation:All four of the operability requirements have been achieved in the design of the Go Postal

system. This is possibly the most critical requirement of all, because it is directly related to our initial market research and the current market demand signal. Once again, the first requirement of protecting mail from the environment was achieved through the decoupling of our system and the pre-existing mailbox.

Maintenance:The initial goal of having the product last for ten years without repair or maintenance was

somewhat aggressive, and unfortunately, the team fell short of that goal. That goal was shortened to two years towards the end of the design process in order to more realistically set a goal to shoot for. We feel we are confident that all components can meet the two year requirement, with the exception of the battery pack which may require replacements that are more frequent.

Cost:The rough cost assessment is shown below in Table 9. The total price of the major, high

priced times came out to approximately $82. By factoring in an additional $10 for miscellaneous parts such as Velcro, fasteners for key and lock installation, electrical wiring, etc. the total system cost is around $92. This is for the full product option, our most expensive unit. Obviously, this limited cost analysis does not factor in Non-Recurring Engineering (NRE), testing, assembly, overhead, shipping, and other non-obvious costs. That being said, it also doesn’t consider the advantages of economies of scale and mass production which will drop the unit cost down significantly. For simplicity purposes, we have considered these two opposing cost factors as negating each other. We would assume that we would be able to produce our product for under the $100 wish set early on in our requirements list. Recalling our market research, the majority of crowdsourcing feedback stated that they were willing to pay no more than $70 for a mail notification and theft protection device. We feel that, with a combination of further engineering development, clever marketing, and strong business relationships, we can drive our sales cost within that $70 threshold.

63

Schedule:While we have not fully developed our product through full P&B design process (the

detailed design phase was not fully completed), we believe that we have appropriately developed a marketable, technologically viable solution within the schedule constraints brought on by the project timeline, which meets this requirement demand. In today’s world, it is not unreasonable to think that project development cycles are on the order of months as opposed to years in order to address the rapidly changing marketplace. Unfortunately, due to schedule and funding constraints, we were unable to produce a physical proof of concept of our product, which is to be discussed further in Section 5.4.

Table 9. Component Financial AnalysisComponent Micro Chip Micro Switch Camera and Flash Wifi Transmitter Keyless Fob Stepper Motor

Product Cost $9 $10 $15 $20 $14 $14

Specifications

PCB ANT; Data Rate Max:250Kbps; Frequency Min:2.4GHz; Frequency

Max:2.483GHz; Sensitivity dBm:-94dBm; Supply

Voltage Min:2.4V; Supply Voltage Max:3.6V; Module

Interface:4-Wire - SPI ;RoHS Compliant: Yes

9.0 to 13.0 oz of force, 15A

current rating2 Megapixel max

802.11b/g/n 2.4 GHz WiFi

module, with 12mA power

rating

2.4 Ghz frequency

56 oz of holding torque, 3.4V DC

Product lifeDepends on the product but typically last several

years

Depends on the product but

typically last more than a year

5+ years with moderate use

2 years with manufacture

warranty

Comes with 90 day warranty,

typically last for 5+ years by

itself, 3 years battery life

Quite durable since it has

minimum contact brushes

Assembly Requirement Moderate Easy Difficult Moderate None Easy

Table 10. Requirements Analysis Summary

Requirements Analysis SummaryGeneral Requirement Achieved? Demand or Wish?Geometry Yes WishKinematics Yes WishForces Yes DemandEnergy Yes DemandMaterials Yes DemandSafety Yes WishOperation Yes WishMaintenance Yes DemandCosts Yes Wish

64

Schedule Yes Demand

65

5.4 – Prototype (Physical or Virtual)

Going Postal set out to design and prototype a “smart mailbox of the future.” It was noted earlier that creating a physical prototype of the product was a wish on the Requirements List in Table 4. Unfortunately, Going Postal was unable to reserve the time, funding, or access to resources to develop a phyical non-working or a physical fully functioning prototype. If we were able to produce a physical prototype, we would have almost certainly used 3-D printing technology to do so. We already created the 3-D CAD models shown previously, which could easily be used to support implement 3-D printing. We also would have procured a standard mailbox to show how the Go Postal system would have been installed and to address any phsical configuration issues.

The advent of 3-D printing has enabled small businesses and educational entities to rapidly prototype design iterations and even to manufacture products on a small scale. Eventually, it is believed that 3-D printing technology will advance to the point where it rivals traditional manufacturing techniques on larger scales. This eliminates many of the traditional barriers to entry for small time inventors and manufacturers. For Going Postal, a combination of crowdfunding and 3-D printing could be the difference between an educational design project and a successful entrepreneurial endeavor.

66

5.5 – Crowdsource Feedback from Prototype

If we were able to develop a physical prototype of the system, we would identify the last few design issues prior to locking down the final design. Physical prototypes reveal issues with interferences, component fit up, and weight concerns. We could then implement another round of crowdsourcing. This could come in multiple forms.

The first is a market research information dump whereby we send photos and videos of our device and mobile application out on social media sites requesting feedback for the attractiveness and practicality of the design as well as any recommended improvements and user price points. Obviously, we would not be looking to make any significant design changes that would cause us to get back to the drawing board; however, minor tweaks, such as color schemes or mobile application features could be made prior to formally finalizing the design in the detailed design phase.

If there were a few physical constraints that had us stumped, we could post the specifics of the problem of technical websites requesting solution proposals with the winning solution being rewarded financially. This type of crowdsourcing is becoming very popular with larger R&D organizations, but isn’t necessarily restricted to pure R&D efforts. Its popularity stems from the relatively inexpensive means by which design entities can solve some of their most challenging problems.

67

5.6 – Definitive Layout

After much deliberation, compromise, tradeoffs, and ingenuity, we arrived at our definitive layout, or final design. The final design is both well defined, and flexible enough to provide customization for our customers and able to adapt to the rapid changes in the market. Ultimately, we have decided to provide three options for the customer: a level of anti-theft protection, a camera quality, and a power source.

The locking options are:1) No locking mechanism2) Traditional lock & key3) Key fob

The camera quality options are:1) 2 MP2) 4 MP3) 6 MP

The power options are:1) Battery2) Direct power

The camera is equipped with flash capability which is adjustable through the mobile application. The camera is activated by a micro-switch which is trigger by the opening and closing of the mailbox door/lid. A stepper motor is coupled into the lock and key rotation mechanism to support fob and remote locking/unlocking capability. A Wi-Fi transmitter sends information between the mailbox and the user. Standard AAA batteries are used to power the device, which requires a low level of maintenance on the user’s part. Finally, a microprocessor is used to control the various electronic inputs and outputs and interpret and information coming from the transmitter.

We felt the above architecture would lead to a very successful mail solution for the tech savvy future of mail users (just about everyone). More and more of society’s everyday objects are joining the “connected” world and there is no reason why a mailbox should be any different. The Go Postal system is the total package (pun intended). It solves the user’s most passionate problems the mail system, while allowing customers to keep their existing mailbox if desired. This is probably the most unique and effective aspect of the final design. It allows our product to maintain relevance in an increasingly changing world.

Figure 33, Figure 34, Figure 35, and Figure 36 are high resolution renderings of the various Go Postal options as well as a bare imagine of the Go Postal components and how they interact and orient with one another. Obviously, the exact dimensions and layout is dependent upon the mailbox itself, but ample materials will be provided to ensure all mailboxes are compatible.

68

Figure 33. Final Rendering of Full Option (bare system)

Figure 34. Final Rendering of Full Option

69

Figure 35. Final Rendering of Camera Module (no lock)

Figure 36. Final Rendering of "Dumb" Lock and Camera

70

In Figure 37, several screen shots of each of the mobile application itself are visible. As shown, the user has a home screen, a minte by minute status of their mailbox, the ability to set a schedule of lock and unlock periods throughout the day based on the mail delivery schedule, a log of prior dropoffs and pickups, an options menu for fine tuning your system and setting preferences, and finally a screen shot of the inside of the mailbox. The final screen is where the user gets real bang for it’s buck. The image of the inside of the mailbox provides the user with a higher level of information than over systems on the market. Not only does the user know if mail is present, but it also have an idea of the type of mail, such as coupons, personalized letters, bills, or packages.

Figure 37. Screen Shots of Mobile Application Graphical User Interface

71

6 – Detailed Design

6.1 – Drawings, Technical Documentation, etc.

At this point in the design, all of the component decisions have been made. This includes the parts, materials, fastening, and connections. If we had additional time, we would have also produced one or several working prototypes and continued to fine tune the design. The detailed design is dedicated to developing the various drawings, technical documentation, parts lists, logistical documentation, and disposal information. Once again, due to schedule and manpower constraints, we were unable to develop all of the desired technical documentation and plans, but were did develop a preliminary parts lists (see Table 11) to shown what it would ultimately look like.

Table 11. Parts List

Quantity Part No. Description Matl Matl Spec Unit WT (oz) Tot WT (oz) Remarks1 1 Camera N/A N/A 14 14 Megapixles vary1 2 Bulb (flash) N/A N/A --- ---1 3 Wi-Fi Transmitter N/A 802.11 b/g/n 10 10 2.4 GHz, 12 mA1 4 FOB Sensor N/A N/A 8 8 2.4 GHz1 5 FOB Key N/A N/A 2 2 2.4 GHz1 6 Motor, Stepper N/A N/A 14 14 3.4V DC1 7 Switch, Micro N/A N/A 10 10 15A 1 8 Micro Processor N/A N/A 6 6 2.4-3.6V DC1 9 Lock CRES ASTM 3 31 10 Key CRES ASTM 1 1

AR 11 Plate (elect enclosure) Aluminum ASTM 8 8 Cut to suiteAR 12 Cable, power Copper IEEE --- --- Cut to suiteAR 13 Cable, signal Copper IEEE --- --- Cut to suiteAR 14 Velcro, high strength N/A N/A --- --- Cut to suite3 15 Screw CRES ASTM 1 36 16 Battery, Alkaline N/A N/A 0.5 3 AAA

Parts List

A user manual is an essential part of the detailed design phase, especially with this type of unique, modular, customizable system. If we developed a full user’s manual, it would contain the following type and level of information:

a) System overviewb) Installation instructionsc) Parts listd) Troubleshootinge) Maintenancef) Disposalg) Technical support contact information

72

6.2 – Field Implementation

This is one of the additions to the Pahl and Beitz design process that our team made at the onset of the project. We felt that the design process does end once initial units are produced with open engineering systems because the system will be under a continual product improvement process. That product improvement starts with customer feedback from the initial field implementation. One issue that field implementation would address is the environmental performance of the Go Postal system. Many design factors can be verified through bench testing, such as battery life, but only time in the field will definitely conclude whether or not (no pun intended) the Go Postal system can withstand the test of Mother Nature.

Also, the user friendliness of the mobile application is essential to the success of the Go Postal system. The great thing about software is how quickly it can push updates to the user, without any effort on the user’s side. We would have a team dedicated to responding to customer feedback from surveys, online reviews, blogs, and social media. This is yet another example of the power of crowdsourcing.

73

7 – Remaining Future Work

Unfortunately, Going Postal was not able to see this design project through the full design cycle due to the limited length of the class and the time commitments of the team members including other classes and/or jobs. Given additional time, Going Postal would have liked to further develop the Go Postal mailbox notification and security system including creating a working prototype of both the hardware and software of the system and carrying out a proper crowdfunding campaign with the goal of product creation and distribution in mind. Also, Going Postal would have considered developing some of the more aggressive, complex mailbox design concepts that were discussed during the conceptual design phase.

To develop Go Postal to a place where we could create a functioning prototype and present it for crowdfunding would involve several extra steps. We would need to acquire the necessary electronics, wiring, housing, etc. needed to make the prototype. Then, the microchip would need to be coded to be integrated with the Wi-Fi transmitter, camera, sensor, and fob/lock. The corresponding mobile app would also need to be developed to communicate with device, which is a task that none of our team members has much experience in doing. The app would need to be developed for the two market dominant mobile operating systems Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android OS. Once we assembled the prototype and software, several rounds of testing would be needed. On the financial side of the project, we would need to look further into how much our components would cost at wholesale prices, what our supply chain would look like, and how we could assemble the product in mass.

As of the end of the class project, Going Postal has no plans of pursuing the Go Postal concept further. Given the fact that all team members are either in school, working, both, or already committed to start a job, not enough members are able to devote the time and effort it would take to cultivate this idea and bring the product to fruition.

74

8 – Conclusion

8.1 – Openness of Design

When we began our design project, we had already had several weeks of course work on what defined an open engineering system and the importance of designing one to create a robust engineering solution. From the first steps in the design process, our team kept OES in mind. Through our market research and literature reviews, we tried to gain insight into what consumers wanted and where relevant technologies were headed, now and in the future. Creating a design that is open to change and that will remain competitive is much easier when you have a basis for anticipating what changes may occur. Our initial conceptual designs lined up with OES design philosophy with varying degrees of success. As discussed in Chapter 4, one of our main tools for eliminating design features and entire concepts was determining whether or not said ideas were appropriate for an OES. Our most promising OES design, a modular notification and security system, became our principle concept which we developed further again keeping in mind to keep and/or add features that allowed for key characteristics of OES such as the ability for continuous improvement, longevity, and mutability.

Going Postal performed the trade-off studies, asked the what-if questions, and found a range of flexible solutions during the task clarification and conceptual design phases of the design process and in doing so, created a suite of modular smart mailbox technologies to accommodate the various users of today and near tomorrow. Additionally, the overall architecture remains open enough to rapidly adapt to changing market demands of the future. While many of the product features could have been designed more optimally as integrated units, we made sure to keep functions clearly defined and separated in order to ensure that future subcomponent upgrades would be feasible and inexpensive.

Coming into the class and the project, most of our team had never heard of an OES. While approximately half the group members had taken Dr. Schaefer’s ME6101 Engineering Design course at Georgia Tech and therefore, had some experience with systematic design, no one was familiar with what it would take to design with OES philosophy in mind. With our prior design knowledge, we were used to thinking about designing for X philosophy where X could be sustainability, manufacturability, assembly, life cycle, etc. However, we discovered that designing a product which fit the category of an OES was quite a different challenge, but one that was worth enduring.

Designing an OES provides several benefits left out of many other design processes. One of the benefits is that the process emphasizes the early parts of the design phase where ideas are often bandied about without the proper framework by which they can be captured, characterized, and evaluated. Another benefit is that the OES philosophy places a premium on flexibility of design throughout the development stages so that external changes that occur in such as areas as material availability, government regulations, and technology become minor hindrances instead of major obstacles to product realization. These considerations allow for changes earlier in the design process where they are less costly in terms of money and time.

75

8.2 – Mass Collaboration

Globalization allows for an unprecedented amount of communication between individuals, companies, communities, and nations. It partly stems from improvements in communication and internet technologies, advancements in education globally, and the extensive use of the English language. With these communication opportunities available, companies, governments, and academic institutions are collaborating from dispersed locations with speed and efficiency never before seen in human history. To be able to thrive in the post-globalization world, engineers must know how to utilize mass collaboration.

As would be expected, our group members had varying levels of experience with mass collaboration. A few members had worked on projects in Dr. Schaefer’s Engineering Design class with distance learning students, and therefore, had some understanding of the type of collaboration our team undertook. A couple of members had worked in industry after receiving their undergraduate degrees and had collaborated with colleagues in different areas of the U.S. and different countries. However, as one member noted, his collaboration was mostly limited to e-mail and phone calls, and therefore, he had little experience with the type of mass collaboration we would be attempting.

As noted previously, our group utilized Google Drive, Google Hangout, and Google Docs as well as traditional e-mail. One thing that we found particularly difficult was getting all group members to be able to meet at one time, whether in person or virtually. In fact, we never had a meeting where all group members were able either to be present physically or on Google Hangout. We worked around this by keeping meeting minutes (see Appendix E), assigning roles and tasks to those who weren’t present, sending out post-meeting updates, and communicating liberally by e-mail threads on which all members were copied. We also had a hard time with keeping our project and our virtual workspace organized. We appointed an organizational subcommittee to keep us more focused and moving forward, which was especially important since our project time was so limited.

An important lesson that we learned from our experiment is mass collaboration is that, in order to work as efficiently as possible, all group members must feel engaged in the project and invested in its success. When members cannot all be present for a meeting, they must still feel valued and given responsibilities that move the project forward. Another lesson that we learned was that it is important to setup members in a managerial role as soon as possible. We lost some valuable time by waiting too long to establish roles and to get organized.

In future ME6102 classes, we would suggest that some class time is spent on large group project management skills in addition to covering the globalization and mass collaboration phenomenon.

76

8.3 – Pahl and Beitz Design Process

As mentioned previously, approximately half of the group members had already taken ME6101 prior to enrolling in ME6102. That previous experience provided those members with ample exposure to systematic design practices and processes, primarily in the form of the Pahl and Beitz process. These members were vocal advocates for utilizing that process for the mailbox of the future problem assigned. For the members of the team who had not been exposed to the Pahl and Beitz design process, there was a learning curve that was evident as the project began and progressed. Members familiar with the process were using a lexicon and design framework that was foreign to the other members. However, all members were patient and humble in their willingness to teach and learn from each other, which allowed the team to employ the Pahl and Beitz process as smoothly as possible.

Our group took the standard Pahl and Beitz process and adjusted it based on our previous experiences, perceived needs, and design goals. We followed that modified process very closely, although we did have to hold ourselves when we noticed that we were trying to skip steps unintentionally. The process allowed us to set milestones and deadlines to keep the project moving forward. The phase on which we spent the most time and enjoyed the most was conceptual design phase, which was also the phase in which our modified design process proved most valuable in structuring our ideas and our work.

While we were happy with the outcome of the project as a whole, were we to do it again, we would make a few minor changes in the way that we carried out the process. We would structure the project so that more work could be done in parallel. With more people working concurrently, we would be able to generate a larger, richer design space where team members were all being employed to their maximum potential. As we executed the project, there were multiple times where members were left with little to do. With better planning, all members could have been completely valuable parts of the design process without having to depend on what others were doing.

77

9 – Learning Value

Learning value is realized by comparing the utility of the given exercise by the amount of time and energy required for that exercise. In the case of Going Postal’s design project, we unanimously agree that the learning value approximately equals to one. In other words, we felt what we had spent in time and energy we had gained in experience and learning. Each of the team members set learning objectives prior to the design project began and each of us have met at least some of those objectives through this experience. Some of those objectives were to improve personal accolades such as communication, collaboration, or information/data processing skills. Others objectives included greater comprehension of certain design and engineering concepts such as open engineering systems, design methodologies, systems engineering, and social product development.

Overall, we have learned to communicate more effectively as a group, even as many of us were located in different states and in some cases different time zones. While this was challenging and at times frustrating, it prepares us all for the future of design. One of our mutual objectives was to consistently utilize the design paradigms outlined at the onset of this report, such as open systems design, mass collaboration, and social product development. We certainly felt we opened up our design project to the masses through several instances of data calls on various social media sites. Team Going Postal itself is a microcosm of mass collaboration considering the geographically dispersed composition of the team and our use of collaboration sites such as Google Drive and Google Docs.

Right away, we learned each other’s strengths and weaknesses, which allowed us to effectively assign tasks. By collaborating and sharing individual reconstructions of the Pahl and Beitz systematic design process, we have been able to develop a joint tailored Pahl and Beitz design process that applied directly to this design endeavor. Deciding on a project proposal early on forced the team to frame and to limit the design problem, providing us with a common goal and a direction to achieve that goal. Developing the Gantt chart forced us to consider all phases of the project and how long each phase should take, which was a critical step for meeting our schedule and cost (manpower) constraints.

While we were unable to produce a physical prototype, obtain significant funds through crowdsourcing or other financial means, or begin to produce the final design, we feel that the knowledge, experience, and design know-how that we have gained through the project is invaluable to our futures as engineers of the mid-21st century. Going Postal has a total appreciation for the effectiveness and criticality of designing open engineering systems as opposed to traditional engineering design. Taking a product development effort from cradle to grave with openness at the forefront of the design methodology is the most effective way to comprehend and truly grasp open engineering systems. Regardless of what future projects or work we partake in, the lessons learned through this project will stay with us and guide us through our future decision making. This makes each of us more marketable as engineers.

78

On a general engineering note, we have gained additional experience in problem solving, critical thinking, teamwork, communication, and collaboration. Design teams comprise of various personalities, levels of competency, and motivations. The larger the team, the more difficult it is to work collaboratively and efficiently. This exercise was also excellent experience in that respect.

79

References

Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2013). Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Journal of Business Venturing.

Kuppuswamy, V., & Bayus, B. L. (2013). Crowdfunding creative ideas: the dynamics of projects backers in Kickstarter. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2010). An empirical analysis of crowdfunding. Social Science Research Network, 1578175.

Mass collaboration. (2014, April 18).Wikipedia. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_collaboration

Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1-16.

Simpson, T., Lautenschlager, U., & Mistree, F. (1998). Mass customization in the age of information: the case for open engineering systems (pp. 49-71). Ablex Publications, Greenwich, Connecticut.

80

Appendix A

6102 Team 2 Charter

Mission Statement:To design, engineer, and possibly prototype the “smart mailbox of the future” using cutting edge collaboration and social product development tools with the goal of gaining a better understanding of a product creation enterprise in the post Globalization 3.0 world.  

“Design the intelligent secure parcel delivery collection system of the future, which will be scalable and modular, for high density population communities.”

Our mission is also to get an A.

Weekly Team Meetings:Wednesday 8:00PM

Meeting minutes will be recorded during each meeting by Meeting Administrator, Dorian Henao, and will be sent out to the team less than 24 hours after the meeting.  

If one cannot attend the meeting, that person should contact the designated meeting administrator 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Deliverables:Project Presentation: 4/24/2014Project Report:      5/1/2014 Updated: 4/28/2014

Team Decision Making/ Team conduct:If the team cannot come to an agreement, a simple majority vote will be used to make the decision.  

Team Documentation:Google Drive/Docs will be used as the primary form of documentation creation, real-time document editing, and document storage.

Disciplinary Actions:a. If a deadline is missed, that team member will send out an emailed explanation of why that deadline was missed. A reminder will be sent out by Meeting Administrator Dorian Henao to that member. They will then have 48 hours to complete the assignment.  

b. If assignment is not completed by the 48 hour extension, the professor will be notified.

c. If the team decides that too many deadlines have been missed by a single team member, the team will decide with a majority vote on whether or not that member will remain on the team.

81

Appendix B

Mock Crowdfunding Website Screenshot

Figure 38. Mock Crowdfunding Website Screen Shot

82

Appendix C

Market Research - Individual Interviews

Interview #1

Tell me about your mail situation. Residential House. Mailbox located on sidewalk, and only a few steps away. Checks the mail every time he comes from work. Mostly bills and packages. Daily mail. Heavy use of eBay and Amazon

What do you like about your mail receiving capabilities? Proximity.

What frustrates you about mailing and receiving packages? Receiving wrong packages. Time wasted to return such items. Personal experiences

Do you think mail will be exactly the same 30 years from now? Heavily believes paper mailing will be lost. No reason with e-mails and paperless billing. Mailboxes might be obsolete. Mailing packages only

Interview #2

Tell me about your mail situation. Lives in a community apartment with about 60 to 70 units. Mailbox located in the middle of the community. Cluster boxes side by side. Checks every other day. Mostly receives bills and advertisements.

What do you like about your mail receiving capabilities? Ability to have main office store bigger packages.

What frustrates you about mailing and receiving packages? Having to walk to the middle of the community for mail. Lives on the third floor, therefore it is annoying to get keys with purse and carry mail.

Do you think mail will be exactly the same 30 years from now?

83

Yes. Believes the post office will be able to bounce back. Uses paper bills and likes traditional methods. Also, points out that postcards still need to be mailed.

Interview #3

Tell me about your mail situation. Big residential house. Mailbox on door step. Never checks (has maid). Daily mail. Variety of mail.

What do you like about your mail receiving capabilities? Nothing in particular.

What frustrates you about mailing and receiving packages? When mail is not delivered on time. Hopes mailing becomes faster, particularly packages.

Do you think mail will be exactly the same 30 years from now? No, it will evolve to somehow embrace the technology that will exist then.

Interview #4

Tell me about your mail situation. Residential house Mailbox next to door, only 2 steps from door to check for mail or put letters to send Doesn't check daily Usually receives bills and junk mail Lots of big packages

What do you like about your mail/package receiving capabilities? Enjoys the close proximity

What frustrates you about sending/receiving mail and packages? No complaints

Do you think mail will be exactly the same 30 years from now? Believes mail will change eventually Believes post office is not doing well financially - USPS may cease to exist as is Notes there is less personal mail and business mail due to email and online pay Thinks that the future of mail will rest mostly with packages Would like to have smart notifications to devices when important mail arrives, or

deliveries and what they are

84

Interview #5

Tell me about your mail situation. Residential house Mailbox outside front door Attached to home Lots of packages

What do you like about your mail/package receiving capabilities? Proximity

What frustrates you about sending/receiving mail and packages? The box is physically too small. Clips not as functional as they could be for sending mail. Material selections lead to rusting and make it look ugly.

Do you think mail will be exactly the same 30 years from now? Does not think mail will be the same. Thinks there will be many more private delivery companies. Fewer delivery days in the week OR ROBOTS. More community mail instead of boxes at doors. Would like to have a larger sized drop box for fitting packages and stuff.

Interview #6

Tell me about your mail situation. Residential Cluster mailbox within a community Shared with 10 to 15 houses Doesn't check every day, once every 3 to 2 days 75 paces from front door Receives lots of packages

What do you like about your mail/package receiving capabilities? Likes that packages go into separate secure boxes where a key is left in the letter mailbox

to access the package It encourages walking the dog more

What frustrates you about sending/receiving mail and packages? The inability to send packages, only envelopes without going to the post office It is away from the entrance, thus takes extra time to check or send

Do you think mail will be exactly the same 30 years from now? Believes mail will be nearly the same 30 years from now because a lot of houses already

have individual mailboxes, the infrastructure and the system for delivering directly to the homes already exists.

85

Believes there will not be any further advancement in the mail delivery, unless they can beam mail like they do people in Star Trek.

Interview # 7 - 24 year old male, grad student

Mail situation Shared house Mailbox on front of house (attached to the house) House receives mail 6 days/week House receives lots of mail for people who used to live there Receive packages every other week or so Note is left if packages require a signature Package is left on front porch if no signature is required

Likes Functional - never lost expected package or letter Delivered consistently (days and times) If residents put special instructions, they are followed

Frustrations Can’t un-request a signature on a delivery if the sender requests it (residents aren’t

always home at convenient times to receive packages)

Future predictions Rural delivery decreasing (off days and closed offices) Centralized pickup locations for consumers to retrieve mail

Ideas A receptacle where anyone could insert packages, but the receiver would need two-factor

authorization to retrieve his/her package

Interview # 8 - 21 year old male

Mail situation Apartment (mail center for each apartment building within the complex) Key to open box (typical size - fits letters and small packages) Larger packages must be picked up at the front desk (note is left in mailbox) Office is only open 9 AM - 6 PM on weekdays Typically gets 1 package per month

Likes Convenient - delivered to him Doesn’t have to pick things up somewhere else

Frustrations

86

US Mail doesn’t come on Sundays Lack of tracking ability with regular mail

Future predictions Going towards all electronic mail Packages only being deliveries

Ideas The ability to sort mail as it comes in, similar to Gmail (personal, bills, solicitations, etc.)

87

Appendix D

Working Principles Brainstorming

Table 12. Working Principles Brainstorming

What is an innovative way to secure mail and packages?

What is an innovative way to notify people that they have mail

in their mailbox?Put it in a safe Skydiver parachutes to your

current GPS location, and hands you the package. The skydiver must be wearing a black tuxedo.

Proximity sensor like rfid tag which can be provided by the mailbox and attached to package. Or a weight sensitive platform which makes an alarm sound and triggers a camera if the package is removed.

If close to house a visual light (red no mail green mail) when mail is sensed inside. A sensor could text owner when mail is present.

I think the best way would just to have some kind of locking mechanism on the mailbox that could only be activated by either the mail delivery person or the person who that mailbox belongs too. This could be done by making use of RFID technology.

1) Having some kind of sensor inside the mailbox that basically scans the entire mailbox for any kind of material. If there is material, the user gets a notification on their phone.

2) Using a piezoelectric pressure pad (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2RyiVPYfDE)

This is Dorian by the way. This may be a dumb idea, but what if you had a placemat or platform that the package was set on. It can be activated by the delivery person with a word or a button that you step on. The owner can un-activate the platform with voice recognition, this phone, etc. If the package is taken without inactivating the platform, it will send a signal to a camera that will take a couple of pictures of the person taking the package and activate a loud alarm. This picture will be sent to the owner and they can then send it to the police.

The latch that keeps the mailbox door shut can work as a switch. When the mailman opens the door of the mailbox, it will use an optical sensor to detect if mail is being deposited. Once the door is closed, the mailbox will automatically lock and send a text/email to the members of the household. There will also be a button on the mailbox that can be pressed to send out a text if a package arrives.

Utilize a combination lock that has a universal combination known only to mailmen, or something similar with key locks

Utilize a weight sensor to detect when mail has arrived, and use that to send a signal to an Arduino to send a text/email to the user to indicate that something has arrived

Hold packages in a large, secure store room and upon arrival, the package is fetched and passed through to the intended recipient by an automatic/robotic system. Similar to a package vending machine.

Text or email is the most convenient and reliable method. I don't think there a need or room to

88

innovate a new communication protocol.

Have a door that you open and when the door is opened, a divide comes up so that new mail can be put in, but old mail cannot be taken out. Then have a magnetic lock that can be unlocked through either an RFID chip that the owner has, or a key.

Have a magnetic strip on the lid of the mailbox that, when broken, will send a notification. This will let the person know that their mailbox has been opened and, presumably, had mail deposited.

Alternatively, you could use a lock or some kind of electronic recognition that would be really expensive.

text messages, vibrating panties

Increase the size of the mailbox large enough where it can receive packages and mail in two separate enclosures. Rather than the mail and packages being delivered and retrieved from the same end, have them delivered from the front and retrieved from the back via key or pinpad. Similar to how USPS mailboxes work.

First, you need to ensure the mail and the packages are held in separate enclosures due to their large different in weight. Install and scale of the correct sensitivity on the bottom of each enclosure. When the scale reads a threshold weight, it sends a notification, via Wi-Fi, to the user as either a text message, an e-mail, or both.

The Queens Guards Fireworks... lots and lots of fireworks.

For packages, we may utilize a flexible, expandable bag. This bag can be weather proof to prevent damage to sensitive materials due to weather conditions, as well as contain steel meshing to prevent theft of packages by cutting the bag open. When not in use a soft storage mechanism will be able to be stuffed back into the mail box portion intended primarily for letters to thus conserve space.

From Jonathan Go :P

Notifications of mail received could be made more specific by not only telling the recipient that they have mail, but also what the mail is. If important letters or packages contained RFID information or QR codes to scan text messages or emails could be sent as notifications and not only alert the arrival of mail but also important mail.

Jesse Caldwell - retractable mailboxes that go underground Push messages through app.one way door build it in the grounduse as much high tech as possible, sell for $20

but really, don't overcomplicate. simple mechanical mechanisms.one way door,

Blue’s Clues mail songvibratory mechanism that finds harmonic in house to create localized earthquakemailbox makes you mac and cheese. that way, have mail and mac

Finger swipe or 4 digit passcode while mail carriers have the key to manual open the mailbox in case of expensive or special packages

If the user demands, one can link his or her mobile carrier service to their mailbox and have the mailbox notifies them when mail arrives.

In order to not compromise the accessibility of larger packages, I believe a duo lock and key system will work. The mailman will have a master key for the front lock, and consumers will have their key for the back door.

For the environment issue, aside from the fact that owners usually pick up the mail when the weather conditions are favorable, is to include disposable Ziploc bags on a clip.

Every time the front door is opened, a notification will be sent through a transmitter to the owner via email/text. Such notification will alert the owner the door is opened, whether is mail or tampering.

A good way to secure packages is to incorporate the package drop box into the house, such that the package delivery person can open a

An idea that is following the trends of today (and tomorrow) is having

89

door and insert the package into the space then close the door. This will be secure in two ways: 1) it will not be visible to other people and 2) the system will not allow packages to be removed the room via the entry door, only from the inside of the house.

Compare this to the system some pizza places use late in the night for security, and with the system used in vending machines.

an app on your phone that interacts with the mailbox, call it MyMailbox. This type of app is very popular nowadays and more and more items are becoming "smart." Smart thermostats that can be set through the app, smart TV's that can be controlled through the app, smart cars that can be started via the app, etc.

The app would notify the user that a package has been received, but could also have other capabilities such as locking/unlocking the mailbox or others.

1: Have a foldable drawer attached to the panel outside of a house in the same style as this: http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51G3vYzKJ7L._SY300_.jpgbut with a better soft material, and a lid with a lock. The front end of it could blend in with the panel of the house.

2: Using a wrapping security device like this: http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NDUwWDUyMw==/z/7gwAAOxyRNJSg9mU/$_35.JPG?set_id=880000500Fhttp://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/US20070101775A1/US20070101775A1-20070510-D00000.png

Leave a camera in there, and every time the door opens, it records a short video of what is being put in there. The data would be automatically uploaded to an app you can monitor from your phone or computer. That way, you can track how many times the box has been opened, and sort of see what your mail looks like. You can set your notification settings to "Notify every time the mailbox opens" or to no notifications at all and you can still go to the app and look at the activity log.

In order to secure mail from theft, an automatic fail safe lock system can be engineered into the mailbox. The system essentially works like a home alarm system. The mailbox only opens to a certain alpha-numeric code as entered and set by the user. Upon three unsuccessful tries the mailbox seals itself and contacts the owner regarding potential theft attempts.

Insertion of a magnetic bell system in the mailbox can be a great way to notify people of mail in their mailbox. A bell essentially works with an electromagnetic system. When you press the button for a bell, the electricity induces a magnetic field which pulls up the hammer on the bell and then once the button is released the magnetism dies, releasing the hammer on the bell causing it to resonate at a certain acoustic frequency. A similar system can be inserted in mailbox such that upon dropping the mail or a package in the mailbox will press on a button that triggers an electromagnetic induction reaction that upon release will cause a bell to ring notifying the user of incoming mail or packages. Brushing over the button will hold and release it for the bell to be triggered.

90

91

Appendix E

General Team Meeting Minutes

Meeting Minutes for 2/12/2014

1. Team decided to use Google Docs as a means of document storage. An invitation was sent out to everyone on the team. If you have not received the invitation, contact me.2. Team charter was drafted (see following link): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QuTWUvDSiYGm-qWQ3tmULuSD1q7SaN2IJcfdBmp3iMM/edit3. It was decided that general team meetings will be held weekly on Wednesday 8pm EST. Contact me if you cannot attend these meetings.

Goals for Next Week:

1. Find one reference relating to either current mailboxes or any existing “smart mailboxes”. Add Reference to Google Doc folder in "Mailbox Research - Initial” document

2. Project question has been added to the Google Doc folder. Please read and start thinking about how to modify that question. For example, should we focus on a specific market or region?

Meeting Minutes 2/19/2014

1. Discussed problem. Came to the conclusion that package delivery will be more useful than paper mail in the future

2. Split up into sub committees within market research.Creating Surveys - Chris, Tapan, Fabien Lit Review - Mike (michael.sanantonio16@gmail.com), Dustin, AreejeCreating Interview Format - Jesse, Sergio, JonathanOrganizational Team - Dorian, KynamCrowdfunding Research - Garrison Hoe, Siddharth Gadepalli, Bryan Jones

Goals for Next Week:

1. The surveys should be done by Saturday night 11:59 pm. At this point, they should be sent out to the team to approve.

2. Interview team should have interviewed format by Saturday night 11:59 pm. Minimum of 3 people should be interviewed before next meeting.

92

3. Literature Review - Each member should find minimum of 5 relevant articles

Meeting Minutes 2/26/2014

1. Team further discussed problem2. Lit committee update - Discussed security, parcel dropoff, and communication to person who receives parcel.3. We redefined the problem. “Mailbox of the future” is today, we are building a mailbox for today, but can be adapted for the future.4. Mailboxes in apartments are a big issue we can focus on. Central office makes it difficult/annoying to receive packages

Goals for Next Week

- Brian and Tapan to create a document for requirement list- Michael and Jesse to start paper- Dorian and Fabien to start function tree - Dustin to figure out whos in 6101 to consolidate their information- Chris to post survey in social forum and email survey out. - Lit review on community mail solution - Areeje- Crowdfunding - Fabien to change setting on survey- Areeje to create template for design matrices and analyze data from surveys

Meeting Minutes 3/5/2014

1. Discussed customer research2. Created the initial requirements lists

Goals for Next Week

1. Everyone contributes an idea for a notification system, a security system, and environmental system by Saturday night 11:59 PM + 1 minute

● What is the meaning for environmental system? - Tapan ● Environmental systems are some way to protect mail/packages from the weather or

environment. So something like rain protection, snow protection, etc.2. Fabien and Chris to work on survey part 2 3. Dorian, Fabien, and Areeje to work on function model and analyzing surveys 4. Working on Requirement list Brian, Tapan, and Kye-Nam to be completed by Sunday at 11:59 PM + 1 minute5. Michael and Jesse to continue working on paper 6. Dorian, Jonathan, Kye-Nam to work on organizational stuff

93

Meeting Minutes 3/12/2014

● Approve requirements lists○ semi approved. Look at any week

● Break into subcommittees with task leaders○ Design tools team - Areeje, Kynam, Fabien, ,Chris, Dorian○ Video/presentation team - Bryan, Dustin, Jonathan○ General organization/ management team - Jonathan, Dorian○ Paper organization team - Jesse, Mike○ CAD/Prototyping team - Sergio, Tapan, Brian○ Crowdfunding - Sid, Garrison, Bryan

● Discuss each groups tentative deliverables for next week● Discuss crowdsourcing progress if subcommittee member attends● Discuss product solutions● Determine top solutions● Discuss availability for next meeting.

Goals for Next Week

CFT - Pitch for crowdfunding, also overlaps with potential video ideaCPT/DGT/PMT - Meeting to make progress on design?DGT- Complete Graphics/ChartsPMT- Complete SchedulePMT- Reorganize foldersPOT - To add recent completed work to paperDTT & CAD - Complete design documents and come up with concepts

94

Meeting Minutes 03/19/2014

Thursday night - 6pm @ MRDC - Areeje, Kynam, Fabien, ,Chris, Dorian, Sergio, Tapan, Brian

● Discussed deliverables from last week● Went over final concepts (see Design tools/matrices_Final Concepts)

Goals for Next Week

● Design/CAD team - use discussed concepts to create a concept evaluation matrix and choose final concept by Monday night.

● Video/Presentation Team - Develop tentative script for video presentation● General Organization Team - Keep things organized :)● Paper team - Add pertinent information to the paper. Reach out to other subcommittees if

necessary● Crowdfunding team - Work on pitch.

● Just as reference- Current Subcommittees○ Design tools team - Areeje, Kynam, Fabien ,Chris, Dorian○ Video/presentation team - Bryan, Dustin, Jonathan○ General organization/ management team - Jonathan, Dorian○ Paper organization team - Jesse, Mike○ CAD/Prototyping team - Sergio, Tapan, Brian○ Crowdfunding - Sid, Garrison, Bryan

Meeting Minutes 03/26/2014

1. Chose to focus on packages for houses for packages. This means we won’t be looking into large apartment centered solutions. We will focus on one of the smaller package designs. We will also move forward with Fabien’s concept, which is a small device you can put into your mailbox and sense mail. See concept 3 in link below. https://drive.google.com/?tab=mo&authuser=0#folders/0B-oNrfUNzxqAUThWeXFJS3BFU2s 2. Jesse and Michael worked on paper3. Dustin talked about video - decided to create a mock infomercial for video. Will speak with team leaders to start video :)

Goals for Next Week

1. Video team to discuss with team leader to work on video2. CAD/ Design team to start CAD-ing chosen solutions and finalize all of the design matrices. Should be posted on the website for the paper team to use by Monday night.3. Paper Time - Write the paper :). 4. Crowdfunding Team - Meeting to discuss

95

Meeting Minutes 04/02/2014

Goals for Next Week

1. Basically finalize all of the video script, paper structure, and CAD before next week

Meeting Minutes 04/09/2014

Meeting Minutes

Video Team Update: Dustin is filming Mon and Wed: 11pm - 2:30 pm and after 4:30pm. Make yourself available soon.

Goals for Next Week

Paper Team: Keep working :)

CAD – Continue working the rendering of near final design

Crowdsourcing Team - Put information into the paper folder

Meeting Minutes 04/16/2014

Goals/Plan for Next Week

CAD Team Meeting Tomorrow at 12 pm● Need to work on Embodiment Design and formatting for design paper section

○ More design specifics ie what camera? what sensor? ○ Material Selection○ Financial Analysis○ Maybe 3D print a mock up if we have time. If not, some super bad ass renders

needed

Meeting in library multimedia studio (if you’re in Atlanta) or Google Hangout Sunday Night 8 pm to tie up all loose ends

Saturday at 3:30 pm meet at Jesse’s house to film-1252 Francis St. NW, 30318

96

Appendix F

Mass Collaboration Photos

Development of the Morph Chart

Development of Morph Chart (2)

97

Google Hangout Video Session (1)

Google Hangout Video Session (2)

98

Google Hangout Video Session (3)

Design Team Meeting (1)

99

Design Team Meeting (2)

Weekly Team Meeting

100