1 of 13

DAQ DE-TRASH

Miles Bhattacharya, Riley Callahan, Axel Wolfe

2 of 13

Element A: Justification of the Problem

pictures, graphs, etc

  • There is too much trash on the streets
  • Public streets are used by virtually everyone
  • Cleaner streets lead to a cleaner environment
  • Cleaning up trash usually requires the time and public service of others (Continuous littering, continuous cleaning up)
  • This is not efficient and is a waste of time and resources
  • The global waste management market size was valued at $1.29 trillion in 2022 and is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 5.4% from 2023 to 2030[1]
  • As consumer culture grows, trash grows
  • We have not found a mentor yet, but are actively emailing people and organizations for money

Figure 1

Figure 2

3 of 13

Element B: Documentation of Prior Solutions

  • Currently the only options for trash collection that sees use is trash bins, roombas, and garbage trucks
  • Trash cans are important to trash collection, however they rely on humans to reliably throw things away only into trash cans
  • Trash cans are not always available
  • Trash can fly out of trash cans
  • Roombas are vacuums and are dumb
  • Garbage trucks only pick up what’s in trash cans

Figure 5

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 6

4 of 13

Element C: Design Requirements

  • Safety. We need to make sure this doesn’t cause any harm and can safely cross the street, avoid humans, and avoid obstacles.
  • Functionality. We need to make sure this is functional and actually does what it’s intended to do, so picking up trash on the streets.
  • Maintenance. We want to rarely have any maintenance, so making sure it’s waterproof, durable, and easy to access.
  • Ergonomic. We want to make sure this doesn’t cause more human difficulty than it’s supposed to, so we need an easy to use GUI and driving system.
  • Appearance. Don’t make it look worse than the trash it’s supposed to be picking up.

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

5 of 13

Element D: Initial Design Brainstorming and Final Design

Figures 15&16: Final design CAD model

Final Design:

  • Scoop design
  • Flag
  • Estimated cost of 582.80 USD

Initial Brainstorming:

  • Scoop & Double scoop design
  • Claw design
  • Flag
  • Street sweeper
  • Ads
  • Flamethrower

Initial Design Concept:

  • Double scoop design
  • Omni wheels
  • Flag
  • Ads

Figures 10, 11, 12: Initial brainstorming concepts

Figure 13: Initial design

Figure 14: Final CAD design CAD model 3D video

6 of 13

Element E: Applications of STEM

  • SWAP (Size, Weight and Power)
  • Rotational Forces
  • Electrical Energy
  • Torque

  • Equipment/Technology
    • Raspberry Pi
    • Python
    • Hand and Power Tools

Figure 17: SWAP Diagram (MpDigest 2017)

Figure 18: Raspberry Pi (PiShop 2024)

7 of 13

Element F: Design Viability

  • Device comparisons
    • Trash cans
    • Garbage collection services
    • Prison trash collection
    • Our autonomous robot
  • Our autonomous robot differs significantly
  • We will distribute directly to consumers

Figure 19:

Trash Can

Figure 21: Prisoners picking up trash off of the side of the road (Cullman sheriff 2021)

Figure 20: garbage truck collecting garbage

(Waste Advantage Mag 2015)

8 of 13

Element G: Construction of a Buildable Prototype

  • Tools/Equipment
    • Drill/driver
    • Allen Wrenches
    • Vex Motors
    • Breadboard
    • Arduino
    • Rivets and Rivet Gun
    • Screws/Nuts
    • Vex Metal Pieces
    • Vex Gears and Treads

Reflection:

Available materials led to the introduction of tank treads.

Figure 22: Materials List

Figure 23: Improved tank tread design

9 of 13

Element H: Prototype Testing and Data Collection Plan

Criteria:

  • Quantitative: Collect 24.5 square inches of trash per minute(Lee,2020)
  • Qualitative: Move autonomously to locate trash(Shamima Hossain, n.d.)
  • Qualitative: Deliver collected trash to designated receptacle(Snider, 2023)

Figure 24-25 Testing Procedures.

10 of 13

Element I: Testing Data Collection and Analysis

  • Our device did not meet our high expectations, however, was not a total fail
  • Mentor feedback- “Looks like a solid design, but looks like it didn’t meet expectations. Add a trash bag on the inside to hold the trash and make sure the trash cannot fall over the back. Improve the speed of the robot and the scoop to pick up more amounts of trash. Other than that looks solids just improve efficiency and internal elements”

Figure 26: Table of results from testing procedures

Figure 27: Final prototype in action

11 of 13

Element J: Documentation of External Evaluation

  • General feedback was positive with various great suggestions
  • Suggestions:
    • Improve metal fabrication
    • Make it more visually appealing
    • Improve scoop
    • Better internal trash storage
  • Mentor Feedback- “It’s crazy how you guys were able to put this all together in such a short amount of time. Even though it didn’t meet all your criteria you guys still made a function robot that works. It is a great concept that just needs some tweaking to be able to be more widely produced.”

Stakeholder Feedback:

Figure: 28 Stakeholder feedback from google form

12 of 13

Element K: Reflection on the Design Process

What We Would Plan to do Next: We would create a new design using improved design concepts given through our stakeholder feedback. We would use more consistent and stronger material to create a more durable device.

Changes Needed for Mass Production: Make the design more consistent that is fully measured and durable to make the device easy to mass produce.

What We Need to do for our Device to be Successful: We need to work fully together to produce a full device in a timely manner. We also need to have a good understanding of all the concepts required to build our device.

13 of 13

Citations