Design, Thinking, & Communication

Appendix B: Client and User Observation Summary

 

Interview Summary: Client Interview

 

Introduction

         Meetings were held to meet with the client and learn about the problems that needed to be addressed. Discussion revolved around the current composter and the user’s composting habits. Another point of interest was the user’s living space to better understand the requirements and scope of the project.

 

Methodology

         Two interviews were held with the client, one online, and one at the client’s house. Questions were asked regarding the ideal composter and issues with their current composter. At the house, special attention was paid towards the possible locations a composter could be placed and the current composter. The countertop dimensions and current composter dimensions were thoroughly measured.

 

Results

         The second interview with [Client] was an in-person observation in their home. We observed [Client]’s home for approximately an hour and a half. During this time, our team assessed possible locations of where the composter could be placed to be best suited for [Client]. For example, [Client] likes to cook. There is a specific place where [Client] has a cutting board. They like to place pieces of onion and various other foods into their composter to help with the composting process. We found that based on this information it would be most effective for the composter to be placed near the cutting board or where [Client] cooks.

         We learned that [Client] uses a soap and sprite mixture to attract fruit flies. [Client] does this because she wants to separate or keep the flies away from the composting process. The actual composter [Client] owns has a 20in width, 10in length, and 7in height. Their composter contains 3 holes, but only 1 is necessary according to [Client] (if the hole is large enough).

         We found that [Client] has a large amount of plants, approximately 10-15, each varying in size. [Client] adds the compost to most of their plants every other week, but it also depends on how the plants are doing/looking. For their main plant, [Client] applies castings 1-2 times a week.

         One of the main points [Client] stressed was that when mixing, they have to wait a few days until the castings can be removed. Additionally, [Client] wants an easier way to remove worm castings, as well as a better way for them to get a full “aeration” or for them to mix it.

​

​

Appendix C: Mock-up Feedback Summary

​

Introduction

         The purpose of meeting with [Client], and allowing them to observe and use our mock-up of our future composter was to receive feedback. We wanted to see how [Client] would react to our mock up in order to have more direction in the process of finalizing our mock ups before making a final design. [Client]'s interaction with the mockup served to  accentuate current problems, how to address them, and what to maintain. 

​

Methodology

         Our methods for receiving feedback from [Client] was having [Client] visit the workshop and interacting with our mockup. We introduced our mockup and described it and its functionality to [Client] then allowed them to interact with the mockup to see how they feel about factors such as ease of use and functionality. 

​

Results

         Following the meeting with [Client], we were able to conclude that they find the mockup very functional and realistic. They believe that it meets most, if not all of their requirements. We also were able to conclude that certain aspects of our mockup were unnecessary and overly complex. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

​

​

​

​

​

Discussion 

         We were able to conclude that the most unnecessary and overly complex aspect of our mockup was the attempted addition of gears in order to mechanically scrape and filter worm castings in order to facilitate worm casting removal. [Client]'s feedback informed us that worm casting removal was less of a pain point than we anticipated and understood and thus allowed us to arrive at a simpler method of worm caste filtering through the use of a lazy-Suzan type filter and worm casting scraper. 

         Another incorrectly anticipated pain-point was the issue of making the composter ‘cat-proof’ in order to avoid accidental spillage of the compost bin and its contents. After proposing the dimensions of the composter as well as the tucked in handle, [Client] informed us that the cats do not interact with the composter or the kitchen as much as we thought. 

         This interaction with our client was the most informative feedback we have received as well as the most consequential as we are designing our composter for them. [Client]'s reactions and usage of the mockup allowed us to discover flaws, think of solutions on the spot and propose them, and to find which aspects to keep for our final prototype. 

​

​

Appendix D: Background Research Summary 

​

Introduction

         The purpose of our research is to create a compact countertop composter that can house worms. This composter will hold up to 1-2 gallons of compost while also allowing aeration of the compost, mixing of compost, and an easy removal of worm castings. Through our research we will discover how to create a composter that does not require the consumer to put in extra and necessary effort for the composting process to maintain; our composter must be self sufficient. Unlike the popular composting bins and buckets, our composter will be square and tall, relatively thin in order to allow the consumer to place the composter on the countertop, under their kitchen cabinets. 

​

         How to Make Compost and Composting Process

Compost is organic material made up of food scraps and yard waste that can be added to soil to aid plant growth. Compost is made of three main components: browns, greens, and water. Browns are dead plant matter such as leaves, branches, twigs. Greens are living matter such as grass, vegetable waste, fruit scraps, coffee grounds. Water is the final component and to make proper compost it is necessary to have the right amount of water with greens and browns in order for compost to develop. There should always be an equal amount of browns and green Browns provide carbon, greens provide nitrogen, and the water provides moisture for the breakdown of the organic matter [2]. 

         The process for indoor composting is simple. A bucket or bin is required to hold the compost pile. In order for the composting to begin breaking down the organic matter, it is necessary to tend to the compost by maintaining the right amount of brown and green matter and water as well as composting the right organic matter. The breakdown of the organic matter should take two to five weeks. If improperly maintained, the compost pile will attract pests or rodents [2]. 

​

Bokashi Composting

         A popular method of composting is called Bokashi composting which is “an anaerobic process that relies on inoculated bran to ferment kitchen waste, including meat and dairy, into a safe [nutrient rich] soil builder” [1]. This method of composting also allows the use of worms as well as the composting of more versatile matter such as meat. 

​

         Reasons for Composting

Composting is important because it can lessen the environmental impact of food waste and excessive food production and the harmful processes which it implies. Composting works to enrich soil and thus reduce the possibility of plant diseases and/or harmful pests and insects. Composting also works to decrease the use of chemical fertilizers because its organic matter allows the plant to take in all the nutrients it needs while also providing some nutrients to the plant themselves. Composting also produces bacteria and fungi which break down organic matter into a nutrient rich soil-like material which is another way it can be used to lessen the need for chemical fertilizers [2]. Composting is also popular among gardeners because composting is easier and more cost effective to maintain their plants by using compost than going out and buying necessary fertilizers for their plants. 

​

Current Designs of Popular Composters 

         There are many existing designs, but the majority are for large, backyard designs which encompass the majority of traditional composting methods. Compost tumblers are not designed for worms, and they are large and often have two compartments. They often have around 50 gallons. There are also standing composters which are similarly sized. It is effectively a bin for holding compostable materials which break down over time thanks to microorganisms. Most of these make contact with soil; soil microbes help break down organic materials. Both of these designs rely on aeration to speed up the composting process and to avoid anaerobic decomposition, which does not allow for composting [6]. 

         Vermicomposting involves composting using worms. The worms consume organic matter and expel castings which is the compost. One of the most popular vermicomposting designs is called continuous flow. Its principles are to create minimal disturbance in the worm habitat, and to perform it you create a stack of trays with mesh bottoms which worms can move through. The bottom tray accumulates the oldest compost and the top tray is where you place the newest organic materials. The worms naturally move towards the new material which they consume, and oftentimes the bottom trays have little to no worms left so it is not difficult to remove fresh compost.

         Electronic composting also exists in either very large industrial scales or small countertop scales, but it is generally much more expensive than either vermicomposting or traditional composting.

​

Vermicomposting

         Vermicomposting refers specifically to using worms to break down food waste. There are many more restrictions on this form of composting, such as the types of food waste that can be disposed of and the environment needed to support the worms. The environment is very important to the productivity of the compost, as worms will die if the environment is not properly monitored and taken care of. Most species of worms thrive around 55-80 degrees, and work more slowly in colder temperatures. It is also important to moisturize the area properly, as worms will suffocate with a lack of water. Another important thing to monitor is the amount of food. Different people claim that their worms can eat different amounts of food, but a general guideline is that worms can eat about 50% of their body weight a day. This means that one must own thousands of worms for even a small composting bin. This is made simpler by the ease of reproduction for worms, as a thriving worm population in a controlled environment can double in a matter of months [7].                  

         Additionally, due to the requirements of both green and brown food, the maximum amount of food waste a worm owner should compost is a lot less than they may think. Contrary to popular belief, it is much better to underfeed a vermicompost than to overfeed it. If the worms are unable to break down the food fast enough, it will start to decompose on the surface, releasing harmful CO2 and heating up the environment. This is one of the leading causes of mass worm deaths in a compost. For worms that die naturally, however, the compost takes care of itself. Worms are made of about 70% water, and they simply are absorbed back into the environment with little issue [9].

​

Limitations of Current and Mainstream Composters 

         Many limitations of current composters are that they are either expensive or difficult to use. Additionally, many potential users are put off by the idea of having worms in their home, or by potential smells. Current methods of disposal for popular composters require extra effort and cost. Some common methods include taking the compost to a community garden, trading the compost bucket with an empty bucket at a Farmer’s Market for a price, or a method similar to waste collection done by companies such as GROOT which collect household garbage weekly. 

​

​​

Appendix E: Design Review Summary 

​

         In our design review presentation, we discussed our two main designs and which one we concluded we will pursue as our final design (see appendices G and H). First we discussed our initial design and its shortcomings and why we decided to change it to make a better final design. For our initial design we expressed the improper implementation of the lazy susan inspired filter which seemed to overcomplicate the composter and threatened to cause potential issues for the client such as odor and messiness. We used this talking point to transition into our current, final design which addresses the main issues brought up by the initial design. The main aspects which we stressed are the mechanics of the crank which the client would use to spin the lazy susan filter in order to scrape the worm castings into the drawer below. These changes negated our concerns with the initial design. 

        We finally discussed our materials and got a lot of feedback from shop professional Scott. Scott informed us that the materials we were considering would have made our prototype hard to build because we were mixing plastics, pvc, and galvanized metals together. This would have forced us to work around problems that the mix of materials would create such as building extra mechanical parts rather than using simple adhesives or chemical solutions. Following Scott’s advice, we were able to more concretely decide which materials we wanted to use and allowed us to send out order information. 

         The categories for the feedback we received were mainly usability and functionality of the composter. The biggest concerns were with the accessibility of the crank and the filter as well as how the filter system will actually function, if at all, in the way we expect it to. There did not seem to be any greater concerns beyond those two categories. 

​

Main Categories: Usability and Ease 

Sub/Small Category: Design 

 

 

 

​​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

Conclusion

         We discussed the feedback we received after our presentation and were able to conclude that we wanted to change our materials so that it would be easier to make the smaller components within the prototype and easier to address any issues that would result through the making of the prototype. Our initial plan of using galvanized metal already brought issues with concerns over screw placements, welding, and how to implement components within the composter itself if it were made out of galvanized metal. We also wanted to change the size of the food opening and its location. This was mostly due to the fact that it would be easier to cut the opening in our new material, PVC, if the opening was wider. This change solves two problems: food opening size, and the implementation of an opening. Another issue we discussed was the bearings that we needed to hold our filter mechanism together. Although we have already made changes to our initial methods for the filter mechanism, we believe that we must have further conversations with the shop professionals in order to better understand the best method to maximize the long-term functionality of our filter and design overall. ​​​​​​​​​​