Cord Organization ________________________________________________________________________________

Richard DeFano Adam Burke 

 

                 

 Cary Grove High School Engineering Design & Development  Mr. Naughton 

Table of Contents: Element A: Background of the Problem................................................2-4 Element B: Existing Patents and Products...........................................3-9 Element C: Consumer and Market Voice...........................................10-12 Element D: Design Brief......................................................................13-18 Element E: STEM Principals and Testing..........................................19-21 Element F: Consideration of Design Viability...................................22-26 Element H: Change Log......................................................................27-28 Element I/J: Evaluation of the Cord Tunnel.......................................29-30 Presentation:........................................................................................31-33 Engineering Panel Feedback:............................................................34-35 Element K: Design and Reflection Process .....................................36-37 Element L: Presentation of the Designer’s Recommendation........38-39

1

Element A: Background of the Problem Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Problem Statement:

In a study from 2005-2009, home electrical and lighting systems are the fourth leading cause of home fires. The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) claims the top 5 causes of electrical fires include misuse of cords and outlets, as well as faulty or frayed cords and outlets.

Introduction:

Many computer users have issues with the amount of wires behind a desk. Desktop users, or anyone with multiple devices, claim to have issues with the clutter behind the devices. This clutter can lead to fire hazards, the cords breaking, loss in the ability to transport or rearrange the devices, and many other issues. Many products on the market are cheap cord clips or ties that slightly lower the clutter, although still create a mess and are hard to remove and change.

Statistics and Validation of Problem:

Many sources including the National Fire Protection Association and the Electrical Safety Foundation have claimed unorganized cords to be significant causes of electrical fires in homes and other buildings, Including the fact that 11% of electrical fires are caused by problems in cords and plugs. On top of the life threatening risk of fire, tangled cords also pose a simple quality of life problem to desktop users, especially those who move their computers.

Survey:

We created a survey that asked people questions about their computer, the amount of cords they have, how much trouble they have with said cords, and lastly, what kind of solutions they currently use to handle it. The survey was distributed using Reddit.com, specifically on the Engineering, Laptops, and Computers subreddits. By posting to these subreddits, we are targeting the common users of these subreddits, which are people who own computers and have some interest in them. At this point, we have 24 responses. Using mostly Zip ties, velcro straps, extension cords, and USB hubs to solve the issue, 22

2

claimed they still had some issues and the “solutions” really didn't solve much. When asked on a scale of one to five(five being the most, one being the least), The average, and the most popular answer, was a three. This survey shows that most people have this issue, and find it pretty annoying with no easily accessible solutions, as one entry who built a whole custom desk to resolve the issue. This shows that an easily accessible, cheap solution is not out there.

Existing Patents and Products There aren't many solutions to the problem, but a few projects aim to solve this issue of tangled wires. Most are geared towards laptops, and only try and solve the issue pertaining mice, keyboards, phone chargers, and other extra cords.

Patent US602691A

Patent US602691A is a zipper bag with space to organize cords. The idea is to use this bag to decrease clutter with laptop power cords, usb cords, and headphones. The issues with this patent are the fact that it can't hold many larger cords, only works for laptops, and only hides the clutter. It is a good solution for the extras that plug into a laptop, such as USBS, phone chargers and headphones. It does not solve any large cords that need to plug in to two places, such as HDMI.

Patent US6766833B1

Patent US6766833B1, in our opinion, is the best solution to tangled wires that we found. A solution that is geared as an all around way to separate cords, it cleanly organizes the cords into one large segment to eliminate tangling. The issues we found with this product is that it is more for a permanent setup. Removing and replacing the sleeve to move cords is inefficient, especially for cords that need to be moved a lot, such as phone chargers/mice/keyboards. It also assumes all the

3

cords are going to similar destinations, as cords can not deviate away from the sleeve easily.

Conclusion:

Lack of organization of cords poses a potential threat to computer owners, as well as an inconvenience. Not too much has been done about this, and the solutions that have are not perfect end-all, be-all solutions that everyone must have to organize, for most people still don’t rely on products to organize their computers. According to online forums and our survey listed above, most simply use zip ties, or lay cords behind without regard for avoiding tangles. Computer owners everywhere would benefit from a simple, easy solution to tangled cords behind computers.

Works Cited:

● Electrical. (n.d.). Retrieved September 15, 2015.

○ http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics/fire-causes/electrical

● Holiday Data and Statistics. (n.d.). Retrieved September 15, 2015.

○ http://www.esfi.org/resource/holiday-data-and-statistics-359#FireRelatedSt

atistics

● 5 Common Causes of Electrical Fires. (n.d.). Retrieved September 15, 2015.

○ https://www.firerecruit.com/articles/1206100-5-common-causes-of-electric

al-fires

4

Element B: Existing Patents and Products Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Similarities: The patents listed share a similar goal, and most suffer from the same shortcomings and unsolved problems. Most of the devices that sort cords in casings and shells serve as complicated zip ties, where a consumer would spend $30 for the same result as using Zip Ties, velcro strapping, or taping cords together. Most of the products aim to hide the cord clutter from the user, while still containing a tangled mess hidden in a neat looking shell. To create a product that aims to solve this solution, we will need to deviate from any form of casing that just aims to hide the issue. Patent US6446898B1 is more routed to solve the issue than hide it, as it aims to make cords a customizable size based on individual need. Consumers want a quick and simple solution to the problem, not an over complicated design that costs very much. It is important that a good solution to this problem is simple enough to warrant a consumer buying and using the item, for if it is too expensive or too hard to use, most would simply deal with the cord clutter instead. Within our survey and around various computer themed forums, the phrase “out of sight out of mind” appeared very frequently.

Product Analysis and Reviews: Zip Ties and Velcro

With the survey we conducted, 15 out of the 25 people wrote that they try to use Zip Ties and Velcro straps as the common solution to solving this issue. Further in the survey, we gathered data on a scale of one to five(five being the most, one being the least) on how big of an issue it remains, even with their solution in place. Of those that said they used zip ties or velcro straps to solve the problem, 9 still claimed they had clutter issues on a scale of 3 or higher, even when paired with splitters and usb hubs. Velcro straps were noted as being slightly better, as the few people who used them over Zip Ties had twos or higher, although it was paired with splitters and usb hubs as well.

OmniMount OECMS Neoprene Cable Management

There are many negative reviews with this product, taken from the Amazon comments section. Most of the negative comments state that although it was a good idea, the execution was poor. Comments all range on the cumbersome

5

state of actually using the project, with the cords being hard to take in and out, the case being bulky and unable to hold many wires. Even in the higher 4 or 5 star ratings there are comments based around the lower functionality of the product, such as the holes being too small, and a small amount of cords fitting in the actual device.

Ikea Signum

The Ikea Signum has higher reviews than the other products listed below. While it is a more simple and more viable solution to the problem, and is generally liked, there are still many drawbacks and complaints about the product. The most used ones were the cost of the product($20-$30 depending on the website) as well as it not fitting surge protectors or large power cords. The other noted drawbacks from the consumer was the lack of true routing, as the product is very great for organizing, although it doesn't do anything with the excess cord mess. The main comment that stuck out to us as a problem that still needs a solution was a comment stating that the product “will do the job, but easily not the best option.”

Patent and Product Reviews: Patent US602691A

Patent US602691A is a zipper bag with space to organize cords. The idea is to use this bag to decrease clutter with laptop power cords, usb cords, and headphones. The issues with this patent are the fact that it can't hold many larger cords, only works for laptops, and only hides the clutter. It is a good solution for the extras that plug into a laptop, such as USBS, phone chargers and headphones. It does not solve any large cords that need to plug in to two places, such as HDMI.

Patent US6766833B1 Patent US6766833B1, in our opinion, is the best solution to tangled wires that we found. A solution that is geared as an all around way to separate cords, it cleanly organizes the cords into one large segment to eliminate tangling. The issues we found with this product is that it is more for a permanent setup. Removing and replacing the

6

sleeve to move cords is inefficient, especially for cords that need to be moved a lot, such as phone chargers/mice/keyboards. It also assumes all the cords are going to similar destinations, as cords can not deviate away from the sleeve easily.

Patent US6446898B1 Patent US6446898B1 is different in the other solutions, as it makes a simple machine to deal with the cord length. Instead of hiding the cord or binding it to some object or casing, this device winds up the cord to the user's desired length, and keeps the rest hidden in the device. The negatives that are created by this device still remain in tangled wires. While keeping the cord at a desired length, a user would have to buy many to attach to all sorts of cords. The device also would have to be changed to be compatible with various sizes and lengths of cords.

Patent US4705484A Patent US4705484A differs from the other solutions out there, as it is more of a combination of various products listed above. The use for this device is to wrap all desired power cords closely together, plug them all into one power surge, and cover the tangled wires and power surge in a protective and neat casing. While the patent is useful, it does not accomplish much more than a surge protector. A surge protector would give the same amount of organization, as well as offering an easier way to remove or add additional plugs. Surge protectors offer an easier way to move around products, as the device twists the cords and places a cover on it, not allowing the cords covered to be easily removed or relocated.

Ikea Signum

This product is one of the biggest products out there in terms of cord organization. It provides an under

7

desk holder for cords to lay out of sight. It must be bolted in, so it requires quite a bit of effort to set up, as well as only being compatible with wooden/plastic desks. It does hold cords nicely, but does not provide any routing, which still leaves room for the cords to become disorganized or tangled. Users have also complained that there is not room for most surge protectors inside it. All in all, it provides a convenient out of sight place to run your cords, but doesn’t provide too much in the path of keeping them from being tangled.

Zip Ties

These are the solution that most jump to when faced with cord organization problems. They are nice in bunching cords together, and can bind said cords to posts to route them as you wish. They are cheap and simple to use, but there are a few problems. Zip ties are permanent- the only way to remove them is by having them cut, so transportation of your computer is not an option. Also, zip ties do not manage excess cord, so if all of your cords are not a similar length, it will leave excess which can still become tangled. On top of this, survey results suggested that those who use zip ties still struggle a fair amount with cord clutter.

OmniMount OECMS Neoprene Cable Management

This product provides a sleeve for cords to route through, as well as many holes for cords to exit wherever rather than run through to the end of the tube. It provides some good routing, and even tackles the problem of cords having different destinations, but still faces a few problems. First of all, it’s felt structure with all of the holes does not look the the nicest. Many users have also reported the product being hard to use- especially when inserting the cords and getting them out the holes that they wish. This product would also fall under the permanent category, as it would be a lot of work for those who move their computers to deal with the setup of this multiple times.

8

Drawbacks and Future Knowledge: Many of the common drawbacks we saw in the products and patents here were based on usability issues. The cheap solutions like zip ties and velcro are by far the most common, even though they do not completely solve the problem. The other previous solutions suffered from being too expensive for the user to find worth it to buy. The consumers are adamant on cost and how easy it is to use, for it seems the most successful solutions are the most accessible ones.

Works Cited:

● Electrical. (n.d.). Retrieved September 15, 2015.

○ http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics/fire-causes/electrical

● Holiday Data and Statistics. (n.d.). Retrieved September 15, 2015.

○ http://www.esfi.org/resource/holiday-data-and-statistics-359#FireRelatedStatistics

● 5 Common Causes of Electrical Fires. (n.d.). Retrieved September 15, 2015.

○ https://www.firerecruit.com/articles/1206100-5-common-causes-of-electrical-fires

● www.reddit.com/u/CordOrganizationGuy

9

Element C: Consumer and Market Voice Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Introduction:

In our attempts to solve the problem of tangled cords found behind computers, we have set out to research the opinions of our target consumer. We found this using internet research, as well as a survey we created to collect the opinions of our market on various topics, such as the actual function of a solution we are to make, price, aesthetics, and permanence.

Target Consumer:

Our problem affects most computer owners of the US. Our solution will be specifically geared towards home and office desktop users. Our issue is the mess of cords behind a computer system, mostly at home or in an office. The issue does not only apply to a single computer, as most consumers have multiple electronics that add to the mess within the vicinity of the desktop setup.

Design Constraints:

● The product must not cost more than $30. According to the survey, 76.5%(1149 out of 1501) of people would not pay over $30 for the product. Although the other 23.5%(353 out of 1501) would not mind a product that isn't in between $10-$30, the majority of the market would not think to buy a product of that price. Keeping it simple and on the cheaper side is what the majority of the consumers will pay for.

● The solution must be completable by Friday, May 20, 2016.

Design Requirements and Market Voice:

These design requirements were taken from the market voice based on comments in our survey, as well as opinions posted on forums, amazon comments, and product reviews. The design requirements are listed from most important to least important.

● The product must solve the problem of tangled cords found behind and around desktop computers by giving easy access to well organized cords.

10

● The product must give easy access to the cords, allowing quick removal or additions(as quick as if the cord was alone), and not making anything difficult to get to. Anything that makes cords stuck in a permanent location, or does not allow easy movement will not lead to a functioning product, as it will cause more problems than solved. The cord should be as accessible as if it was singled out in an easy to reach location.

● The product cannot harm the cords beyond normal aging. The product needs to keep cords safe and in working condition, without damaging them through bending or tearing coating.

● The problem needs to have a solution that is aware of the fact that desktop setups almost always have other electronics in the general vicinity(TVs, gaming consoles, printers, chargers, etc.) According to our survey of the market, only 13.6%(204 out of 1501) had their computer isolated from other electronics. The product should be focused on solving the issue, including the other electronics near the computer.

● As it is a product aimed at cleaning a disorganized issue, it makes sense that the product itself should not create a mess on its own or seem messy in its attempts to solve the issue. On a scale of 1-4(one being messy, 4 being as neat as possible) 74%(1111 out of 1501) were in the 3/4 range, while only 26%(390 out of 1501) were in the 1/2 range.

● Although most consumers did not have a preference on the materials used to create the product(65.4%, or 982 out of 1501), 28.6%(429 out of 1501) noted their dissatisfaction with past velcro products.

Conclusion:

While reaching out to the general public to get a market voice, the aim of the product becomes much more clear. Without the voice of the consumer, many of the requirements would not be known. Many of our first ideas for constraints are being proved wrong due to the data showing otherwise.

11

Survey Summary:

12

Element D: Design Brief Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Client:

Desktop computer users

Designers:

Adam Burke, Richard DeFano

Problem Statement:

In a study from 2005-2009, home electrical and lighting systems are the fourth leading cause of home fires. The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) claims the top 5 causes of electrical fires include misuse of cords and outlets, as well as faulty or frayed cords and outlets.

Design Statement:

Design, market, test, and mass produce a product that successfully solves the problem of tangled cords found behind desktop computers.

Constraints:(Disqualifiers)

● The product must not cost more than $30.

● The solution must be completable by Friday, May 20, 2016.

● The product must solve the problem of tangled cords found behind and around desktop computers

● The product cannot harm the cords beyond what normal aging would do.

13

Design Criteria:

● The product will give easy access to the cords, allowing quick removal or additions

● The solution needs to be aware of the fact that desktop setups almost always have other electronics in the general vicinity(TVs, gaming consoles, printers, chargers, etc.)

● The product must look relatively neat.

● We will not use velcro in our solution.

14

Survey Summary: Most of the questions asked in the survey have the data listed below. Not included are two questions that were based on non multiple choice responses, and varied from person to person.

15

Product Concept:

Under-desk Cord Tunnel

Product Description:

The product is a small tube in which cords can be tunneled through, yet release each cord separately. By placing it behind or under a desk or office station, cords are sorted and out of sight.

Operation:

This product will utilize adhesive strips on it’s flat side to hold it in place under or behind a desk. It will be a 6 inch segment that will be in two parts(12 inch total) so it can cover a variable distance and turn corners. The “Teeth” will be made of 60A Rubber that will hold the cords unless pulled on by the user. Being able to string cords through the whole body as well as pulling the cord out at the desired point will create a neat and easy way to diminish the cord tangling behind a computer. The adhesive will create a solution that does not need power tools or permanent setup.

Justification:

This product will allow users to feed their cords the their respective spot behind the display or peripheral on the desktop. The device is tailored to be simple and easy to set up, and cords can be clipped into it and taken out easily. It also has the ability to be connected to other tunnels so the user can use as many as necessary to solve the issue.

Comparison:

We looked at two other products that were heavy influences of our cord tunnel. The first, the IKEA Signum, is a small metal structure that hangs below the desk that you can run cords through, although it doesn’t hold them in as the cord tunnel does. The Signum seems to be somewhat large for the average consumer, and also requires an installation. It creates a project for its customers, and it renders it quite inaccessible to many people. The other product we looked at was the OmniMount OECMS Neoprene Cable Management Sleeve. This is basically a sleeve with holes in it, for cords to be pulled through to the desired exit point. This required some work to get cords in and out, and requires access to the ends of cords to get in and out. The Cord Tunnel, on the other hand, uses the good points of these products, while fixing many of the down sides that we recognized.

16

Product Concept:

Wire Winder/Shortener

Product Description:

A device that can collect excess length of wire, allowing one to set the desired length of the cord.

Operation:

The device is small, and easily attachable to sides/bottoms of desks, walls, PC cases, etc. The device will have an area for the desired wire to go in, and to come out. In between, the wire can be wound up to lessen the overall length, and neatly hide it inside of the machine. The device can be chained and hooked with multiple devices to reduce many devices being scattered all over a desk surface.

Justification:

Removing a cords excess length will lessen the ability for cords to get tangled. A cord set to the perfect length to reach its destination will not hang down or be loose enough to tangle with other loose cords, as well as making the cord easier to mount to a flat surface, as it is straight and not sagging. By removing the smaller sized cords(USBs, Headphones, etc.) and containing them inside the device, it will leave the area behind the desk clean and neat, as the small amount of stiff, thick cords behind will not tangle easily.

Comparison:

The product originally stemmed from the concept of extendable cords used for objects such as car stereos, selfie sticks, or a specific patent found on a wire wrapping device. By using a similar approach to computers, the product will eliminate the tangled mess at the source, thin long cords. While the products for extendable cords are out there, they cannot be used with existing products such as your mouse, keyboard, or headphones, as it is just two male ports. Our product will stand out by being compatible with the existing devices cords, and not just being a simple extension cord.

17

Product Concept:

All in one I/O panel

Product Description:

A device that holds all inputs a computer needs(USBs, Headphones, Microphones, HDMIs/DVIs,Power)

Operation:

The device has all necessary ports sectioned off on to an easily mountable device. It essentially acts as a series of extension cords, housed within the panel. The face of the device has all the inputs, with the outputs being separated by type sorted in a single larger wire. These devices can be connected to each other for increased range. By containing the similar types of cords in one larger “wire”, the small cords will not have the opportunity to become tangled or knotted with other nearby cords. At the end, the USBs and AUX separate with just enough cord length to neatly plug into the panels of a desktop, without branching over other cords or creating a mess.

Justification:

By sending all cords needed towards one destination, there would be no tangling as they all go straight to where they need to go, without branching over others. It allows computer setups to be simplified into a single cord, making it look neat and keeping it tangle free

Comparison:

The design was a bit more open ended. The design for this product does not mimic many products that are already out there, as it's more of a combination of multiple. It relates some properties to the OmniMount OECMS Neoprene Cable Sleeve shown above, although the main body works as a surge protector/outlet, and a series of extension cords that are contained within the body to minimize the mess.

18

Element E: STEM Principals and Testing Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Science and Engineering Concepts:

Force of Adhesive:

The adhesive on the top of the body will need to be tested mostly for strength. The adhesive not only needs to hold up the body and any cords resting in it, but also any excess force applied to it through pulling the device, stepping or dragging of the cords, moving the desk, etc. We plan to test this by getting a sample of the material being used for the body, and testing various types of commercial adhesives to see how much the device can be pulled without wear on the adhesive.

Force and Elasticity of Teeth:

Similar to the tests on the force of the adhesive, we will conduct a test on the teeth attached to the body. The teeth need two tests, as they not only will have cords being pulled in and out of the gaps, but also being bent back and forth. While still being sturdy, the teeth need to have some elasticity, otherwise they will snap too easily while trying to pull cords through the device. We will need to see various rubbers and plastics to see what works best.

Material of Teeth and Body:

The material of the teeth needed is described above, as the material will be focused on the function to decide the best. For the material of the body, a focus will be on a sturdy structure that can handle everyday wear without breaking, while trying to remain as lightweight as possible.

19

Concepts In Practice:

Procedure #1, Adhesive Force:

For our first set of tests, we set up a horizontally placed wooden block in the tensile stress tester, and from it we hung a smaller wooden block with a hook to the testing arm. The two wooden blocks were connected via various adhesives and a velcro substitute. After hat set of tests, the wooden block on top was switched out for one of a desk material: pressed wood with an apoxy resin coating.

Data:

Adhesive Substance Wooden Block Test Desk Test Average

Command Adhesive 69 lbs 65 lbs 67 lbs

Command Velcro 10 lbs 11 lbs 10.5 lbs

UGlu 27 lbs 54 lbs 40.5 lbs

Scotch Double Sided 79 lbs 74 lbs 76.5 lbs

Results:

For the adhesive tests we tested each adhesive twice using a wooden block for the first test, and a portion of a desk for the second one. The first two tests were to just see the maximum force, in pounds, that the adhesive would hold without falling from the block it was stuck to. The results are listed above with the average weight held. The winner of the wooden block test was the Scotch Double Tape, which won by a large margin compared to the Uglu or Command

20

Velcro. The second material that the adhesives were tested on, which was a peice of an old desk made of pressed wood with an epoxy resin, had very similar results, except for the UGlu substance. The Scotch Tape was the strongest substance, although had one error. The Scotch was so strong, that the metal used to attach it to the device was bending noticeably before the double sided tape was starting to release from the block.

Pictures:

21

Element F: Consideration of Design Viability Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Introduction:

Although choosing a design and justifying it is a large portion of solving a problem, creating the physical product is its own process. Through market research, we needed to find out specific materials, where to buy them, what quality and quantity, and how to use these raw materials. For example, a certain kind of sheet rubber will be used, as well as molding either aluminum or sheet metal.

Problem Statement:

In a study from 2005-2009, home electrical and lighting systems are the fourth leading cause of home fires. The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) claims the top 5 causes of electrical fires include misuse of cords and outlets, as well as faulty or frayed cords and outlets.

Based on our survey, the data showed a stronger and more readily accessible market for products focusing on helping the consumer use the cords correctly, over trying to fix the health and stability of a misused cord. Due to this data, the product has been shifted to one geared more towards fire safety and health to common usage, while still keeping the safety and health in mind. Keeping an organized and healthy cord setup is one of the most consistent ways to protect from the fire security, as well as solving a consumer aesthetic problem.

Market Analysis: For products to help this issue, the market is large. There are many products out there that attempt to solve the issue, but with varied results. One of the main issues we noted with other products through reviews was a large margin of inconsistency, as well as the product not easily completing the task that it is advertised to complete. One of the strongest reviewed counterparts, the OmniMount OECMS Neoprene Cable Management, has mostly positive reviews. Although mostly positive, even the 4/5 star reviews note that the product is harder to use than expected, being too difficult or time consuming. What we have noticed about the market is that the products out there are not simple enough, or do not solve the task without creating other issues. We believe we have created

22

a product with minimal drawbacks, that is simple enough to use, while also completes the task it is assigned.

Pricing and Reviews of other Solutions:

Ikea Signum

List Price - $31.95 Amazon Price - $31.95 Being almost identical to the 2-Way Cable Corral listed below, it comes with many of the same pros and cons. The Signum only works with surfaces that can be drilled or screwed into, and has no way to attach to any side walls or glass. The body was noted as being too small to hold a surge protector, and bending under the heavy weight of one, even though it is advertised to do so. The material given (steel with a pigmented powder coating) has been noted to chip or peel away easily, causing a mess and deteriorating over time. The lack of adaptation leaves many users to not be able to use the product, if their desk space is too small, or cannot be drilled into.

TechDek 2-Way Cable Corral List Price - $36.96 Amazon Price - $36.96 Although being slightly above the price range, this product is very well reviewed through the comments on both Amazon and from the original company. This was one of the closer designs to what we are envisioning for our product. The self assembly and ease of use is near what we are aiming for, although the versatility is lacking. Without screws(a self assembled permanent solution), there is no way to lock this device to anything. It comes with vertical sticky pads that suction onto glass or granite, although most will be against wood or drywall. One concern is the limited space between the rack and the bottom of a desk.

23

JChannel Cable Raceway List Price - $33.12 Amazon Price - $16.95 Out of the four products listed, the JChannel Cable Raceway has the best results. One of the only products listed that does not require assembly or drilling/screwing. One con of the adhesive is that is placed at the top of the design, while all the weight is at the bottom. This leads to the adhesive peeling off very easily, as the force of the weight will pull it off the wall. The glaring issue with the product is the fact that you need to cut it with an exacto knife to get it to the length you want. Without having openings, a user would have to cut openings as well. The product sells at its $16.95 price for one 48” tube. The assembly recommends multiple tubes to use the product correctly, skewing what the true price would be.

Gadko Surface Mount Cable Raceway List Price - 78.59 Amazon Price - $42.21 The list price for, what is essentially a long rubber tube, is insanely high. Most consumers from our survey stated a price range around $20/$30, not $42(with memberships) up to $80. Another issue with the product, that ours hopes to solve, is the accessibility. In order to turn, curve, or stop the cords, the product needs to be cut, changing the shape forever. Due to the hinge mechanic on our prototype, the user can turn/curve/stop where they please, without altering the permanent shape of the device. The simplicity and functionality of the design are similar to our product, and align with what the consumer looks for in a product like this.

Prices were taken off of Amazon, where there is a list price and a price Amazon would sell for (mostly with deals or an Amazon Prime membership)

Market Research:

We conducted a survey through reddit.com to research our market. The survey asked about what the consumer would like in terms of how they would like the problem to be solved, portability/accessibility, price aesthetics, and material. The results are shown below.

24

We were lucky to get so many responses, and this helped us make a few conclusions for our current project as well as the future of it. Some of the biggest conclusions from this showed 1) A large portion of this audience would not like velcro used in the solution. 2) The product should remain relatively neat, as 73.8% of submissions gave a 1 or a 2 out of 4 on the scale of how much they prioritize aesthetics.

25

3) The product should not cost more than $30, because even at $30, only 23.7% of respondents would purchase the solution. Although, the majority of people would still pay for a product around the $25 price range.

Solution Manufacture and Distribution: Our solution consists of two materials, the plastic used to make the body, and the rubber used to make the teeth. On top of the cost of running the machinery to make the product, our only production costs would fall under the packaging, the plastic, and the rubber.

Pricing for Aluminum: Using Aluminum prices from VincentMetals.com/Daily_Aluminum_Prices, the price of raw aluminum would be around $0.67 per pound. Using the volume of the product listed through inventor, we are allowed to calculate how many pounds the product will be, which comes out to around 0.4819 lbs for each part. The whole product will be 0.9632 lbs, which would only cost us the $0.67 for one pound.

Pricing for Rubber: The rubber class we are aiming to use will be 19D, which would be around the hardness of a windshield wiper. For the price of rubber, we found it to be around $0.57 a pound. The amount of rubber needed for our product would be 0.102 lbs, which would cost around $0.06(5.84 cents) of rubber for each product.

Conclusion:

Based on our market research, our solution has a specific niche which no other products have yet filled. Also, our calculated price of 73 cents per unit in raw materials alone sets us well on the course for our price criteria of keeping the solution under $30. The only additions to the cost that have yet to be figured is the manufacturing, packaging, and distribution.

26

Element H: Change Log Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Initial Prototype:

Change Log:

1. The product will be in two separate pieces connected via hinge, instead of one long cage. The decision was made to create functionality around turns, and be able to have function on a desk that is smaller than the length of the product.

2. The “Teeth” will be made out of 60A Rubber, instead of the same material as the body. This was the material tested that found the most consistent results and hardness to contain wires, while still being flexible enough to allow wires in and out.

27

3. The “Teeth” will only be lined across the bottom of the product, instead of on the top and bottom. The top part will be completely closed in, and will be part of the main casing. The teeth on the top did not function correctly, the product would sag and not be tight enough to hold wires.

4. The bottom will have a larger base to mount the rubber on, for stability and ease of creation.

5. The body will be curved on the edges, to eliminate sharp/dangerous corners, as well as ease of production. This was brought up to us by the manufacturers at Kenmode.

6. After various ways of connecting the rubber to the body, we have settled on a rivet system, as our previous attempts(a back panel to squeeze rubber in between, and melting the rubber, and adhesive/glue substance) all gave us less consistent results.

7. The hinge will be attached on to the back, and not built in to the product, for ease of manufacturing. This change was brought up by the manufacturers of Kenmode,

8. HDPE Polyethylene will be the material for the product, as it is cheaper, not as conductive, and easier to manufacture than the original metal idea.

9. Screw holes will be added under the adhesive for any consumer that wants to opt out of the adhesive attachment, or is looking for a permanent solution. This was brought up

10.The hinges have been scrapped, as they did not add functionality to the product for the cost being added.

28

Element I/J: Evaluation of the Cord Tunnel Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Adam Burke Richard DeFano

Introduction:

We presented our design process and final product to a panel of engineers and other spectators of our science-fair type presentation. We received many useful insights and other feedback from those watching our presentation.

Engineers:

Timothy Stoll Vice President and Controller Armin Tool & Mfg. Co. 1500 N La Fox St. South Elgin, IL 60177 Mark Brierton 847.550.7924 Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC Three Corporate Drive Lake Zurich, Illinois 60047 Mark.brierton@fresenius-kabi.com Sean Pedersen Associate Scientist Abbott Steven T Thompson Woodstock High School Title : Career and Technical Education Division Head

29

Poster for Panel:

The Poster touched on our Problem statement, Function and justification of the cord tunnel, our prototyping process, materials used as well as existing products. This gave enough information for those walking around to understand and provide feedback to our product. While we didn’t receive any recorded feedback or names during the science fair portion of our presentation, we received much positive feedback about the simplicity and effect of our design. Some of the engineers even helped us work out the final manufacturing process, saying that we might want to pursue extrusion rather than Plastic injection.

30

Presentation for the panel portion:

31

32

33

Engineering Panel Feedback:

34

Reflection of Feedback:

The Engineers seemed mostly impressed with our product, however some did criticize constructively. One engineer noted that the problem was not fixed, it was simply pushed downward. While this could be argued simply because there is no definite point of having “solved” our problem, the Cord Tunnel does provide tautness to the cords wherever the tunnel is placed, and routes them to above the computer. Even though it leaves excess cord, it still pulls it out of the way of interference, thus allowing it to avoid being tangled. We got many other positive feedback points about our survey, cost analysis, and material evaluation.

Conclusion:

From our presentation, The panelists and spectators were of great use to us. There was much positivity about our Cord Tunnel, which made us confident in our ability to pursue the final steps of patenting and manufacturing on our own in the months following this class.

35

Element K: Design and Reflection Process Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Element A: Background of the Problem For Element A, we did not have a strong idea on how to be concise. Our problem statement started out very vague, and did not point to a set in stone problem. As we did research this evolved to a more concise and better one. If we were to redo the class, one of our main focuses was putting more effort into brainstorming and searching, as we were trying to get a problem created more than we were trying to brainstorm a problem, which left things very vague.

Element B: Existing Patents and Products

For Element B, we focused heavily on Patents. We did not focus heavily on the existing products, which we would have done differently. We studied products to make sure our idea wasn't existing, and then heavily studied the patents to see if parts of it were out there. We should have swapped that, as patents were not as important than the consumer feedback on to existing products. Later in the year we focused on consumer feedback on products out there, but we should have done this much earlier in the year.

Element C: Consumer and Market Voice

For Element C, we were very happy with the consumer survey we put out. It gave us a large sample to base our ideas against, as well as giving us feedback on the existing ideas. What we wanted to differently if we were to redo it was get more feedback from outside sources, more than online forums that focus on computers. The survey could have been more diverse to other kinds of people, less focused on hardcore desktop users.

Element D: Design Brief

We created our design brief based mostly off the feedback we received in our survey. We closely analyzed the common themes of people's responses and based our constraints from that. I feel that our design brief was very suitable to our problem and we followed it through nicely. One thing we could have added as criteria, which we later realized we must focus more on, was the simplicity of the product in order to please our market.

36

Element E: STEM Principals and Testing

Element E was a little bit underdone in hindsight. At the moment, we couldn't really figure out what else needed to be tested using stem principles, so we simply tested the adhesives, which did end up benefitting us greatly, but perhaps if we were to do this again we could figure out more to test, as much of our product was created by a guess and check strategy, such as the size and material of the product itself.

Element F: Consideration of Design Viability

Element F set us in motion towards the prototyping process quite well. It summarized the market research we did in the past, from our existing solutions to our survey conducted on Reddit consisting of 1500 responses, which helped us considerably in knowing what our market was looking for in a product like ours. There is little I would have done differently in this element as it sent us into prototyping with full steam.

Element H: Change Log

Despite believing that our product was in good shape entering the prototyping process, we found many changes that we required along the way, and each one pushed us closer to our goal of effectively solving our problem. Our first big change came from the inability to actually make our initial idea, due to the rounded set of teeth. Other than that, our changes came from various uses of our product and different thought experiments and ideas to help us further please our market. I would consider our prototyping largely successful, but I feel that more official and recorded testing could have been accomplished.

Element I/J: Evaluation of the Cord Tunnel at final presentation

We feel that the feedback we received for this element helped us immensely with the final evaluation of our product. As we wrapped up our project and summarized it all for the engineers, then heard comments on our summary, it tied up loose ends and seemed to pull our project to a close. We will, however, most likely pursue the next steps in production of our product. All in all, our project was largely a success, seeing that we did effectively solve the problem at hand, adhering to all of our constraints, and ended up with a product that many are positive about. The next steps for us will be to start the patenting process, and find someone who will make and package the Cord Tunnel for us while the patent is pending. If all goes well, our product will end up on the market and hopefully sees success.

37

Element L: Presentation of the Designer’s Recommendation Preventing Tangled Computer Cords

Cary Grove High School Richard DeFano Adam Burke

Reflection: Due to various experts, as well as the engineering panel, we have gotten a clear look on what the future of the project would look like. The results of a few different mentalities are listed below.

Recommendations:

Devin Bright:

Mr. Bright focused on two main details of our product, which was the cost and the functionality of the product. For cost, he talked about how vital cost minimization was, which was part of the reason we switched from a metal body to the HDPE Polyethylene. He believes we have diminished many of the costs that weren't necessary(such as the hinge mechanic), although believes there is a better solution than the adhesive to apply the rubber to the body. Following his feedback and the similar feedback of others at the panel, we will be looking into a more machined process than the adhesive. For functionality, he believes the product is a good upgrade from the prototyping, although he doesn't know if the demand will be high enough as there are many “good enough” options out there, although through our survey answers we disagree.

Engineering Panel:

The panel at the final presentation was very positive towards our solution. They agreed on the main points of simplicity and cost, while still having functions that the other products on the market could not accomplish. Steven Thompson is an EDD teacher from a different school, and believed our prototyping to be very complete and well tested, and mentioned a concern to the rivets, while saying maybe closing the plastic on the edges and using a different style of back plate. Sean Pedersen commented on the adhesive as well, which made us look into a different type of connection for the rubber as it was a complaint from many. Overall they both gave solid reviews and gave confirmation that our product had higher versatility and usability over the competitors.

38

Future Changes and Development:

The final materials used for the product will be:

The future and changes of the product mainly involve the manufacturing and mass production of the product. The plastic body will be either extruded or through plastic injection molding, whichever is cheaper, as explained to us by the experts at the panel. The rubber would be a simple rubber stamping process, through something like water jet, to cut out the shape. The main issue we have going forward is connecting the rubber to the plastic, as explained by the panel. A more mechanical solution will be more efficient, easier to make, and more reliable.

39