Alex Checkley UCAS ID: 1543085808 Product Design Portfolio for the University Loughborogh designing and prototyping a product that will encourage children and adults to not travel short distances by car. Extracts from my GCSE DT Coursework. The full 30 page document can be sent if requested. I received 100 marks out of a possible 100 marks. Rotating Wheel Trucks Attach- ing System I initially designed a truck attaching sys- tem that required the user to push then rotate the wheels to lock them in place on the board. My first, most simple design was intended to prevent up and down movement when the wheels were in place. However, it did- n ’ t stop rotating movements which are guaranteed while skateboarding from steering. I was designing this to sit outside of the board. I revised the design, adding another lay- er. This was intended to stop the trucks being able to rotate. This design howev- er recreated the problem of up and down movement, it was also too many layers so would either be too thick, or not strong enough. Rectangular Wheel Trucks Attaching System I realised that the rotating problem I was having could be solved by using a non circular design. So I began creating a straight edged system on 2D Techsoft. I started very basic using simple shapes to cre- ate my first iteration of the new system. It worked as a proof of concept, however it was clearly flawed. It first seemed to have worked perfectly, the resistance between the cardboard kept the re- movable slider in place. But, when gently knocked or shaken it slipped down, this was partially down to the horizontal movement made possible by the corrugated cardboard (which wouldn ’ t be a problem when made from wood) but also because the resistance wasn't strong enough, and certainly wouldn ’ t be when scaled up. It needed a fixing method. Designing a fixing method I decided to explore current methods of attaching moving parts in other prod- ucts. The vacuum forming machine in our workshop used a simple lever based mechanism to hold the plastic sheet down. This lock was good because when closed it was very secure but also easy to open and close. However, it would protrude too far out of the board and would become a nuance. It would also be very difficult to manufac- ture. Developing Although I started by hand building mod- els to prototype my designs I quickly real- ised the time and lack of accuracy made this an illogical method. I instead opted for laser cutting cardboard as this would be the primary method of production for my final product. I decided to use corrugated cardboard to make my prototypes. This is because it is cheap and easy to supply, while also being strong enough to represent wood and function properly in moving parts. Development — Modelling Next I experimented with a flap design. It would have been cut all the way through the board so the flap could be pushed down from the top. This was one of my preferred ideas as it did not require any loose parts and could packed away to be flush with the board. The perpendicular orientation of the wood would have been ideal for strength and preventing horizontal movement. The primary issue I found with this concept was designing a way to secure the flap while skateboarding. It would be hinged on one side but needed something to hold it open or closed. I thought about magnets but decided they would be diffi- cult and unreliable due to the small size of the flap. Fixing the trucks in place The music stand style screw was the first design I tried . I used wing - nuts as a sim- plified handle. The major problem with this design is that it required the nut to be tight enough to secure the trucks. This was an issue as while skateboarding it could become loose, and frequent tightening and loos- ening could damage the wood. Along with these problems it also resulted in loose and moving parts which was something I wanted to avoid. The bottom of the bolts was protruding from the bottom of the slider. As a result it was impossible to fit it into the slot. To solve this I cut a small disc of the card from the bottom of the slider to represent countersinking the bolt. DESIGN 1 DESIGN 2 DESIGN 3 My third design was a development of the second design. Instead of a single small flap it would use a large flap. Due to the large size of the flap finding a way of securing it would be much easier. The hinges didn ’ t need to be strong as the only force acting on them is gravity and the weight of the flap. There are various benefits to this design over the others. It ’ s the most secure, simplest to operate and creates a more flush bottom to the board. This design was shown to the client. Not only did they like the initiative but they also said it looked very easy and simple to use. To make the flap easier to lift I added cut - outs at the two front corners. These were measured to 17mm which is the average fin- ger diameter. The curved shape allows for a comfortable and easy to grip hole. I initially had concerns that they might be hard to reach when wheels were fitted, how- ever when I tested with trucks in place I found there was enough coverage to easily reach them. I decided on securing the flap using integrat- ed magnets. I started with the idea that they could be attached to a metal plate on the base. I quickly changed my mind about this due to the difficulty of manufacturing it, and the lack of necessity. Instead I am going to use opposing magnets on the top of the board. A later development was as a result of difficulty gripping in- side the cut - outs. As a result I created a two layer design that allowed for hooking your finger around. Developing Design 3 Development — Modelling Compiling the Prototypes into One Design At this point I felt I was ready to try and compile the two mech- a n i s m s i n t o a ‘ real ’ size board. I used A4 sheet dimensions for each side which is the same as in my specification. This process was invaluable to my develop- ment of my product. Not only did it show potential and that my designs, although not perfect, could work; but it also showed some major flaws with my design. For one, the slider that I was using would need to be very strong. When scaled up it no longer felt as secure as my small models. From this I decided that I would need to make the slid- er as large as possible. I also found it impossible to line the parts up accurately when gluing. This was more of a problem for my design than it may be for other woodworking projects as a low tolerance connection between the trucks and the board was essential. As a result any misaligned layers made using the mechanisms impossible. This wasn't helped by the rough cardboard. By slightly re- ducing the slid- er size and mov- ing the trucks further up the board I man- aged to fit all the parts in. But not for long! When I decided I wanted to keep the classic curved ends of skateboards I fur- ther reduced the area I had to work with. My answer to this problem was to have the trucks overhang onto the board slightly. This way the cut out area of the truck locking mechanism could be kept minimal. This was my last prototype before I cut the real thing. I made sure every- thing lined up perfectly and that it all worked. I took the prototype back to my cli- ent. They were thrilled with how it worked. They said so long as it worked as the prototype does then they will be more than happy. Although some small changes were made during production, this proto- type was essential as if there had been an error then It would have been costly and time consuming to rebuild the part. This is the CAD drawing of the first compiled board. Development — Modelling Due to the small scale of my early truck mounting systems I had overlooked the actual size of skateboard trucks along with the ori- entation of their base plate. I thought the size problem could be simply fixed by scaling up the design. However this was a problem when I tried to fix the orientation. When the base plate was larger and length - ways the total area needed for the feature was considerably larger. This was limiting the space I had for the slider which ’ s strength was so crucial. During early testing I found that the cardboard models were sometimes difficult to slide into a bag. This was be- cause they sometimes gently caught on something which caused them to slightly open. As a result this makes sliding them into a bag much harder. To solve this I started to develop a locking system. Something that was on one or both sides and that when the board was folded could clamp or lock it together. I brainstormed a few ideas looking at a range of existing locks etc. A bolt seemed like the most straightforward method, how- ever it would have to be small. It would also be ugly and a protruding object from the An adaptation of a door handle would be interesting and could potentially be made smaller. How- ever conventional door handle mechanisms only prevent swing- ing and not ‘ opening ’. A gate hatch seemed like a poten- tial idea, with some kind of pin fitting with a spring driven ‘ hook ’. However this would have re- quired some pretty advanced me- chanics. The design which I ended up with was as a result of no particular product but did take some inspiration from them. The design would be approximately 25mm in diameter so compact but functional. Somewhere in the design a spring was needed to ‘ repel ’ the plunger. I wasn't sure where it would go so I started creating a 3D model. The spring would fit inside here. Ridges and in- dents for opti- mal grip. When I 3D - printed this a few issues were highlight- ed. The small bevels and ridges on the plunger were too small to have an affect on the grip. Instead they just made the print messy due to the large tolerance of the printer. The poor toler- ance of the printer also meant that the parts didn ’ t fit nicely, so much so that when I tried to remove the plunger it was jammed and From this I worked out that the maxi- mum ‘ resolution ’ of the printer was .4 mm so my model would need clearanc- es of that or larger. To determine the tolerance of the 3D printers I made a tolerance tester. It was based off one I saw online, howev- er the files for that cost £13! Each sec- tion has a gap between the centre, go- ing up in .1mm increments. If a section doesn't move the printer cant print that accurately. My revised design was much cleaner and worked perfect- ly. The plunger moved very smooth- ly and the spring fitted nicely. Due to my lack of experience with 3D printing there were a few issues with my design that I didn't pre - empt. The bottom section was filled with support material that was very difficult to remove and left a messy inside that the plunger got caught on. To solve this I removed the bottom of the design and added a circular plate that could be glue on as the base. The second problem was that I had overlooked how I was going to add the spring and insert the plunger compo- nent. To solve this I simply separated the ‘ lid ’ from the plunger and created a slotting cylinder for extra strength. I started trying to de- sign it on 2D Design but it was getting far to complicated. Development — 3 D Modelling Step Process Tools/Machinery Time Taken (Predicted) 1) Construct the Board a. Laser cut plywood/poplar Laser cutter 20 minutes b. Sand insides, sand edges and sand surfaces Belt sanders, sand paper, bobbin sander, orbital sander 55 minutes c. Glue together PVA wood glue, fast bond adhesive. 30 mins d. Insert dowel hole ‘ plugs ’ PVA wood glue 5 minutes e. Varnish and sand, repeat x4 Wood varnish, paintbrush, sandpaper 30 minutes 2) Attach components a. Glue in magnets Fast bond adhesive 10 minutes b. Countersink hinges Chisel 30 minutes c. Drill large pilot holes for hinges Hand drill, drill bit 5 minutes d. Screw in large hinges Screw driver, screws, instant adhesive 10 minutes e. Screw in small hinges Screw driver, screws, instant adhesive 5 minutes 3) Applying grip tape a. Fill magnet holes with wood filler and sand smooth Wood filler, scraper, sandpaper 7 minutes b. Roughly cut grip tape to size Ruler, pencil, scalpel blade 2 minutes c. Remove backing and stick in place N/A 5 minutes d. Mark edges and cut Screwdriver, scalpel blade 7 minutes e. Smooth edges Sandpaper 2 minutes f. Cut around hinges/ along centre line Scalpel blade 3 minutes 4) 3D printed lock a. 3D print CAD files 3D printer 10 minutes (plus approx. 3 hours printing time) b. Assemble parts and glue together Spring, fast bond adhesive 20 minutes c. Glue into board Epoxy glue 5 minutes 5) Assemble trucks a. Laser cut the plywood parts Laser cutter 7 minutes b. Sand the edges Belt sander, sand paper 5 minutes c. Glue the parts together Fast bond adhesive, PVA wood glue 5 minutes d. Mark and drill the bolt holes Drill bit, pencil, trucks as stencil, pillar drill, sacrificial wood 10 minutes e. Countersink holes Countersink bit, pillar drill 2 minutes f. Insert bolts, attach trucks and tighten bolts Electric screwdriver, bull - nose pliers 5 minutes TOTAL 300 minutes / 5 hours Plan of Manufacture The plan of manufacture gives me a clear idea of how long things will take. It should also make sure I don ’ t forget any- thing. During production I will use this as a checklist. The amount of time predicted is quite high, however that is ex- pected because this is a proto- type. If this product was to be produced on a large scale the production time could be greatly reduced. One way of reducing the production time would be using CAM or building in batch- es. I am expecting the production time to change. There will un- doubtedly be some unexpected mistakes or unforeseen prob- lems that I will need to solve and will take time. Testing My client said he found the turning really smooth and was very impressed that he felt absolutely no movement in the trucks even though they could be removed so easily. With my client weighing >80kg he said the flex on the board was very similar to that of a normal board. He said that “ even though the board is shorter than normal, the extra width means I can comfortably use it. ” The board coped very well with various stand- ard tasks and even some more adventurous ones! The grip tape is very tough and stayed ‘ grippy ’ when it rained. If I was going to commercially produce this I would ex- periment with the idea of creating the entire board out of metal. For example, the top layer, similar to how I picked ply for its strength, could be made of steel. To make all the 3 layers of steel would be expensive, heavy and unnecessary, an alternative would be alu- minium. Aluminium is light, but very flexible so would need the steel top layer. I would also experiment with carbon fibre. With more time I may have been able to develop a dis- creet handle that could be used to carry the board, folded and out of a bag. As well as investing in getting rubber nose and tail protector inserts. My client was very impressed with the mechanisms. They were able to assemble the board without any guid- ance within seconds. The only issue is they tried to put the trucks in the wrong way at first. Although they would have realised as they wouldn't fit, a guidance arrow might have been a good idea. My client was thrilled with the design and style I had created for the board. They said the tie - die grip tape created the flair they wanted. He pointed out that it was kind of metaphorical for the board .... Looks like a boring block of wood at first, but when its opened up it shows its true colour! A working skate- board! He thought that the rounded edges were exactly what he want- ed — It looked like a skateboard but was still functional. We tested whether the board fit into my clients bag on the busiest day of his week. It slid in nicely between two tight books. The trucks fitted securely in the side water bottle pockets or could have fit on top of the books. Extracts from my A - level DT Coursework. The full 60 page document can be sent if requested. designing a roof mounted bike lock. Function and Performance Requirements If I end up locking around the top tube of the bicycle then I will need to consider the diameter of the bike frame. The largest standard size bike frame top tube is 38.2mm but whilst looking at bikes on the market I found a couple that were up to 50mm. Because of this the lock must be suitable for frames up to 50mm including room for movement and slight size changes. I will design the lock to fit a bar of 55mm. As many outbuildings have sloped roofs my lock will have to function when mounted at an angle. My clients garage roof is at 35 ° however, in order to make the lock work for different loca- tions I will design it to work at angles from 0 ° up to 55° Performance requirements It is important that the bike can be easily lifted to the ceiling/roof by any able adult. MountainTreads.com reviewed 345 mountain bikes and found the heaviest bike was 17.0kg. To account for possible extra weight from bags, water bottles etc. I will design the pulley system to be comfortable to lift a 20kg bike. Using a 2 to 1 me- chanical advantage pulley system means that the highest weight the user will need to pull down is a little over 10kg, in reality for most bikes it will be far less. The pulleys must also be weight rated to more than this for safety reasons. They should be able to safely lift up to 40kg. Aesthetics As my earlier questionnaire found, peoples preferences for the colourway were very varied. As this is a premium product it would be reasonable to offer a number of different styles/finishes so customers could choose which they want. To re- duce the costs a cover could be designed that means most parts can be the same and only the cover has to be a different colour. The lock must look secure because the perception of security is just as important as actual security when preventing theft. If a would be thief thinks they will not be able to steal the bike they won ’ t try which reduces the risk of damage. This is the same principle as CCTV cameras which are usually expected to deter crime rather than catch the crime happening. Using a warning sign similar to the signs used to alert people of CCTV would also act as a deterrent. Aesthetics, Ergonomics and Safety Anthropometrics/Ergonomics When considering the anthropometric aspects of my design it is important to take account of how much contact the user would have with the product. The bike lock and raising system will be mounted to the roof/ceiling and after that the user shouldn't have much contact with them, therefore the arthrometric requirements are minimal. The method of attaching the bike will be used for a short period of time so aside from being usable, the use of them does not have to be comfortable. Anything that requires the user to take the weight of the bike (e.g. a winch handle) will need to be comfortable for the user and have a good gripping properties as it would be dangerous if the user could easily let the bike fall. I will consider the height of operators, hand sizes, strength and more during my designing and research however it is not necessary to conduct this research at this early stage. Safety To make sure my lock and lifting mechanism are safe during operation it is important that they are securely mounted to the roof/ceiling and there is a minimised risk of the bike falling and hitting an operator or on - looker. Using long, heavy duty screws and bolts with a maxi- mum load far exceeding the possible weight of the bike and mechanism will achieve this security. I will make sure there are no unfinished edges that could cut the user and having a suitable mechanical advantage will prevent injury through strain from having to lift the bike. Making the lock easy to fit will reduce the time the user has spend at the top of a ladder, this will reduce the chance of an accident. Function Environmental and Sustainability issues Ecoizm.com is a retailer of eco - friendly products, they have a set of guidelines that should be followed to ensure a prod- uct is environmentally friendly. I have listed an addressed the relevant points below: • Durable, easy to repair, so it can serve its owner for a long time, without needing to buy a new one, or throw it away (not only for nature ’ s, but also for our own good!) Damaged parts will be able to be easily replaced by pro- ducing the product in multiple parts and having the consumer assemble the product. Using high quality materials and careful manufacturing techniques will increase the durability of the product, long life is inevitable in a high end security product. The product will also reduce the number of bikes stolen each year, many stolen bikes are dumped when the thief is unable to sell them, this should be reduced. • No pollutant is created while using it. By having no single use parts and no components that should need replac- ing I can prevent any pollution after production. • It does not require an external power source if possible, or it saves energy compared to other similar products. Whilst it is possible that the lock may require a power source I will endeavour to only use energy saving compo- nents. • Made from recycled materials. Recycled material is often less attractive than newly produced material, but this shouldn't be an issue as my project is going to be designed for outside use and one of the important features is a low profile so the aesthetics are second to being environmentally friendly. Minimising the materials used will also reduce unnecessary material usage, and reduce costs. • Reusable (for the same or other purposes). I will use standard bolts and screws where possible so they can be sal- vaged and reused. With the correct tools the lock should be easily removed and moved to a different roof/ceiling allowing the product to be reused. • Recyclable as a waste. Avoiding painting and using recyclable materials will reduce the non - recyclable waste pro- duced at the end of this products lifecycle. I will also need to consider the environmental costs of recycling certain materials. For example, although nylon is recyclable, it ’ s a complicated and expensive process so it is often just sent to landfill. • No hazardous waste is formulated at the end of its lifecycle. Using biodegradable plastic where possible will re- duce the hazardous waste produced by this products disposal. Companies such as Apple and Nike allow customers to post their unwanted products into the company where they are either refurbished or dismantled and recycled. Offering a scheme like this would ensure my product is always disposed of in the most environmentally friendly way possible. • The packaging is minimal and natural if possible. As the product will be made of high quality, hard and stiff mate- rials the packaging can be limited as damage during postage is unlikely. There will be no need for single use plastic packaging, however biodegradable plastic may be used to contain bolts, nuts and screws. • Can be purchased as locally as possible, saving the large energy consumption of transporting. Initially my product would only be available in the UK where it would be produced. Even if it was eventually posted worldwide the car- bon footprint of transporting would be far less than producing abroad (e.g. China), then importing to the UK where it would be distributed worldwide. The key criteria for the materials I will use is that they are high quality and materials used in the lock are strong enough that they will keep the bike safe and secure. Lock materials: Boron Carbide — One of the hardest known materials, behind cubic boron nitride and diamond, used in tank armour and bulletproof vests but also in padlocks. Manufacturing requires sintering at 2,000°C under a pressure of 5800 psi, it is extremely expensive to produce and buy, so if I was to use it as my bolt I would have to buy a pre - formed bar. Hardened Steel (High/Medium Carbon Steel) — One of the most common material for padlock/lock bolts. It has high hardness and tensile strength. It is very difficult to weld so manufacturing would have to be considered. It is susceptible to rust so would need to be protected. There are services available that could laser - cut sheet steel to any desired shape. Stainless Steel — Stainless steel is an inexpensive material with high corrosion resistance and has great tensile strength. It is also very attractive as a mirror finish can be achieved. Other Components: Kevlar Cord — If my design requires rope of any kind Kevlar would be a suitable choice. It is fairly cheap and has an excel- lent tensile strength. High Impact Polystyrene — This plastic is cheap, impact resistant and durable, this makes it suitable for weight bearing or moving parts. Nylon — I will undoubtedly have moving parts, any of those that could create friction could be made from nylon as it has a low coefficient of friction. Materials and Key Elements Key Elements: The key components of my product are: A system to raise and lower the bike to and from the roof/ceiling - this will need to be safe, easy to use and relia- ble. Ideally it will not require electricity. A way off attaching the bike to the lifting mechanism that is secure and doesn't damage the bike. A lock that can secure the bike to the roof/ceiling - ideally this lock will not require electricity. It must be easy to fit, secure the bike against theft and look smart. Something to lock and unlock the lock. It must be small and easy to carry around or store. Design Brief • Purpose of the product The product will be a bike winch and lock that can be mounted to a high ceiling or roof. The purpose of this prod- uct is to provide extra storage for bikes that doesn ’ t use any ground space. • Needs of Client My client needs the bike to be secured from opportunistic theft which includes the use of bolt - cutters, a crow- bar, screwdrivers or other hand tools and anything that is found within the proximity of my clients garage. Adam needs the lock to be discreet both when it is empty (so it isn ’ t an eye - sore) and when it has a bike in it (to avoid unwanted attention that could encourage theft). I will keep it discreet by ensuring the lock has a small profile and that it is made with a dark colourway. There cannot be any required bike attachments so that my client can store any bike in the lock. Equally, the method of mounting the bike cannot damage the bike in any way. Speed is also a large consideration as Adam frequently needs to store or access his bikes within a short timeframe. • Needs of Target Market The bike lock would discourage theft if it looked professional and obvious that the bike was secure. This means all components should be covered, materials should be of a professional standard and the bike should be visibly behind a thick piece of metal. The lock must be mountable and must function at an number of angles including horizontally. It should be able to be fitted by the consumer with either tools provided with the product (such as: a nut setter to be used with the con- sumers electric screwdriver or a wrench). The required bolts, screws, nuts etc. will also be included. • Wants of client My client is aware of the current problems with climate change and expressed enthusiasm towards the idea of using eco - friendly, recyclable materials. Adam would be happy to pay £140 for this bike lock on the market, but obviously as this is a prototype, the cost will be higher. • Wants of target market The lock would be useful if it functioned when mounted vertically such as on a wall. • Values Now more than ever it is important to be as environmentally friendly as possible. Products with parts from the UK are also increasing in popularity so where possible these should be used. • Market size 53% of bikes that are stolen are taken from ‘ semi - private ’ areas such as a garage, shed or hallway. The majority of which would not have been secured, or at most with a simple bike lock. Many of these thefts could be prevented if the bike owner had a fast and affordable way of securing their bike that didn't take any floor space. In 2018 the global bike lock market was valued at $1.072bn - this doesn't show the demand for a product like this, how- ever it does show that bike security is a valuable market to be in. Market Analysis The global bike market is fast approaching $80 billion in revenue with a compound annual growth rate of 4.2% as of July 2019. This number is grow- ing so rapidly due to increasing health concerns for consumers; intensifying traffic congestion and fuel prices; and an effort to encourage eco - friendly transportation to reduce urban carbon footprints. 53% of bikes that are stolen are taken from ‘ semi - private ’ areas such as a garage, shed or hallway. The majority of which would not have been se- cured, or at most with a simple bike lock. In the UK alone, each year almost 400,000 bikes are stolen, or roughly one every 90 seconds. Bike theft is particularly common in densely populated cities where storage space is limited so bikes are left unlocked or secured using a simple chain bike lock. The most common tool used by bike thieves is bolt cutters. Having a solid bar of metal larger then 8mm x 8mm will likely pre- vent thieves from stealing your bike. Scale of production: According to the Office of National Statistics Britain has over 10.6 million garages and countless more outbuildings. Of thes e 10.6 million garages nearly half (4.6m) are no longer used to store cars but rather for storing household items. These are al l spaces where my product would be suitable for use. More research into demand would have to be conducted, but the scale of production would be batches of around 1000 units. Price When considering the price of my product I will look at what my client would be willing to pay, what existing products cost, and the savings that a customer could make by using my product. Bikes prices can range from as little as £50 all the way up to £10,000+ however the expected bike price for someone using this lock is between £200 and £2000 as any lower and theft is less likely, and any higher a more secure lock should be used. The product will be very durable, hopefully a one time purchase, therefore it can be expected that multiple bikes will be use d in this lock during its lifetime. Existing heavy duty products: Hipolok AirLok - £149.99 Oxford Products Docking Station - £99.99 Cycloc Solo - £64.95 ABUS GRANIT EXTREME 59 - £165.99 Kryptonite New York Fahgettaboutit Chain Lock - £115.99 Original Linka Smart Bike Lock - £106.00 None of these existing products have the same functionality as my product will so their prices can only be used as a guide. Taking into consideration the demand for a product like mine and the cost of replacing a stolen bike my product will be priced between £100 and £200. I will tell my client that this is the range that I am expecting and see their opinion on it. If they would like the product to be considerably cheaper then I might have to rethink the complexity of my product. Design Specification Function The bike lock can be fitted, and is functional at angles up to 55 ° , this will allow it to be used on a range of pitched roofs. The lock should work for bikes with top tubes up to 50mm diameter. This means it will work for almost all commercially available bikes, including larger mountain bikes. The pulleys should be attached to the bike without causing any damage. The bike should be perpendicular to the roof when in its storage position, this is so the bike is as high as possible so out of the way and harder for a thief to access. Performance Requirements The pulleys must have a 2 to 1 mechanical advantage which would make the maximum required lifting force around 10kg total which is completely feasible given the short distance the user has to move the bike. The pulleys must be able to safely lift up to 40kg, which is a 20kg+ excess of most commercially available mountain bikes. The bike should be safe from opportunistic theft using either standard tools, or items often found inside a home, garage or other outbuilding. As that is what most thieves use and with enough determination they can get through anything. Any electrical components must be encased and the lock should function in the event of power failure. Standards BS EN 10111:2008 covers the technical delivery conditions of low carbon steel sheets and goes into detail about require- ments, testing and welding. Steel is one of my proposed materials. BS ISO 8502 - 15:2020 details the requirements and standards for preparing steel for painting or coating. There are no British standards relating to bike locks specifically however there are a number of independent review compa- nies (e.g. Sold Secure) who can provide testing and an analysis for the security of a bike lock. BS ISO 155:2019 contains details on belt drives and pulleys. Aesthetics/Form A dark colourway to avoid unnecessary attention and avoid being an eyesore. The profile of the lock must be smaller than 500mm height, 200mm width and length so it is discreet and the bike is high enough to be out of harms way. The lock must look secure by looking professional, appearing to be made of high quality materials and there must be a visi- ble large piece of metal preventing theft of the bike. This will all deter would be thieves from even attempting to steal the bicycle. Anthropometrics My product must be suitable for adults in the 95th percentile. This will be explored in more detail as my product develops so the research can be as useful as possible. Environmental impact All materials used to produce the product must be recyclable and if possible be already recycled material. The parts will be produced in the UK which will reduce the carbon footprint. If the product is damaged, either by the user, an accident or an attempted theft then the damaged part must be easily re- placeable or repairable this will increase the lifetime of the product. The minimum amount of material possible should be used. This reduces wasted material and also reduces costs. Materials Materials I will consider using include hardened steel and stainless steel because they are corrosion resistant, durable and abrasion resistant making them hard for thieves to cut. I will also consider nylon for any moving parts as it has a low coefficient to friction and is resistant to wear so will stay in good condition even with lots of use. Processes For lots of my prototype I will use the 3D printers and laser cutter as they are available and can be used to rapidly proto- type a component. I might use welding to create the lock however this adds lost of cost to production. Commercial Components In order to minimize the production costs I will design my product to use as many standard parts as possible. This includes bolts, screws and nuts. Scale of production — Cost effectiveness Only one prototype will be made, this is very cost ineffective however, I will consider the processes and cost effectiveness of producing batches of between 500 and 1000 units. This would be a starting order that could be increased depending on demand. Cost/Price As this is a prototype the cost will be significantly more than the RRP. My client said that a retail price of £140 would be suitable, justified by the price of existing products and the value of the bikes that would be protected. The cost of the prototype will be kept low by using substitute materials and processes that wouldn ’ t be suitable for mass production. (e.g. 3D printing parts instead of injection molding them.) These substitutes may affect the function of the pro- totype. The prototype cost must be under £200, not accounting for the cost of research, development and labour. Ergonomics At each stage of my design I will consider how operators will use the product and how I can make that experience as easy and comfortable as possible. Moral and Social Issues My product will decrease the number of bikes stolen which is a very positive effect on society. Consideration of historical and cultural influences This product solves a modern problem, historical factors will not have an influence on my final design. Equally, given the simplicity of the task my product will solve and the desired low profile aesthetic, it is unlikely that I will have any cultu ral influence, nor will my product cause any offence. Safety issues It is important that the pulley system in my product cannot fail as there is a high risk of injury if a bike were to fall. I considered using one rope as it would be the most simple mechanism and as a result the cheapest and easiest to manufacture. I would need to consider how the rope is attached to the bike frame. When the bike reaches the top the saddle hits first and could be used to pivot the bike to the correct angle. I would need to consider how to prevent wear to the soft leather saddle. The handlebars eventually rotate up to the roof where they can secured in place or the central bar could be locked. This is something I will need to explore further. One problem that occurred was that as there was only one point of attachment the bike was able to rotate whilst being raised. This would make locking the bike more difficult as there is a high likelihood that the bike would not be correctly aligned when it reached the lock. I considered using a sloped ‘ hopper ’ to align the bike, in most scenarios whilst testing this worked, however it would re- sult in extra wear to the bike and wasn ’ t 100% successful. It also feels like a bad so- lution given this is a premium product. I knew that I would need to use two points of connection to solve the rotation prob- lem I had discovered earlier. In an attempt to maintain simplicity I con- sidered the possibilities of using two points of connection with only one rope. This particular design worked great. The first pull of the string raised the bike to the angle of the roof. This needed to be pre - set when setting up the pulley system. The issue came when trying to lower the bike again. The slack in the rope produced by the angle never corrected itself as all the weight was now on the one rope. This also highlighted an issue with this de- sign. By not using pulley wheels for my model and using stretchy wool as the rope I was not able to replicate scaled up phys- ics. This meant the models were harder to use and certain designs didn ’ t work where they might in the real product. From this modelling I realised I needed two points of contact to prevent rotating. I also realised my modelling would need to improve to include pulley wheels and a heavier ‘ bike ’. Although my pulleys could have been CNC milled from a solid block of steel, a far cheaper and logical method is to use sheet metal. I researched the bend allowance and K - factor for 4mm steel sheets and inputted my findings into the SOLIDWORKS sheet metal fea- ture. This ensured that my design would function if it were pro- duced in real life. Rather than having two parts per pulley as I initially designed, I in- tegrated the rope to ceiling mount into the main unit. This reduces the number of holes that are needed to attach the pulley wheel, increases the simplicity of manufacture and reduces the cost of production. For the pulley with the two wheels I centred the rope con- nection to prevent the rope that is pulled rubbing on the axel. I also offset the position of the axel to under only the front wheel so the rope wasn ’ t twisted unnecessarily which would misalign the bike as it enters the lock. I couldn't find a 3D model of the specific lock nut I needed. So, using the dimensions given by RS compo- nents and the standard thread specification I pro- duced my own model. The curved section on the inside of the pulley wheel has a slightly larger radius than the 2mm radius the Kevlar rope has. This is to re- duce wear on the rope and ensure it fits in the groove even if the ro