Drink cooler opportunity

From DDL Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Executive Summary

In the second phase of our design process, we worked on developing a design concept for our drink cooler.

Market studies – user interviews, user observations and user reviews – on our competitor’s product, the Blitz Chiller, revealed several Product Opportunity Gaps for our drink cooler. Reducing the amount of ice, the time taken to cool drinks and the level of noise during operation were some common concerns raised by the users. Users also complained about messy leakages of water from the device.

The Product Opportunity Gaps enabled us to generate more than a hundred design concepts for our drink cooler. Our survey, which revealed that users prefer having drinks cooled to 35F in a cooling time of less than 3 minutes, enabled us to weed out some ideas from our initial list. Eliminating previously patented ideas brought us down to a manageable number of about 10 ideas.

Keeping our target group of working adults in mind, we generated a set of criteria to analyze our ideas. We found several innovative ideas such as vapor-compression coolers and coolant spray coolers lacking in important factors such as portability, cost effectiveness and team skill.

Since the innovative use of the Peltier cells to cool the beverage was rated highly in criteria such as cost effectiveness, portability, complexity, safety and team skills, it was selected as our design concept. The mechanics of this design concept is similar to our competitor’s product. However, instead of ice, our design concept uses Peltier cells to cool the water that flows over the beverage. The idea eliminates the major concern of ice usage that was brought up in our market research.

Though our future designs will revolve around the concept of Peltier cells, we will work also on improving the housing of the device in order to accommodate other concerns raised during our market research such as water leakages and excessive noise during operation.

Market Research

Market research was conducted focusing on the needs and interests of the users. The four methods used were: user interview, user observation, user reviews, and surveys.

User Interview

Users were interviewed to get a better understanding of their opinions on the product. The general consensus was that requirement of ice was a significant constraint to the usability of the product. Loading and changing ice into the device was time-consuming and clumsy. Also, a larger cooling capacity (multiple drinks at once) was desired. With the current one drink limit, this cooling method was not much more efficient than the alternative of an ice-water bath, which could be used to cool multiple drinks at once. The one drink limit also meant that somebody always has to constantly be operating the device in order to cool enough drinks. The noise generated by the device was also a problem. It made holding conversations in the same room as the device uncomfortable. The host has resorted to placing the device in another room when using. This is an idea that we hope to consider in our design.

In summary, the users felt that the current product had limited use. The requirement of ice and low capacity made it marginally better at cooling beverages than an ice bath yet more of a hassle. The noise didn't help. This made the device only practical for cooling 1-2 drinks at a time. One user suggested developing a product that doesn't need ice and marketing the product for a situation where users would not have access to a refrigerator.

User Observation 1

A mock scenario was developed that would imitate the typical anticipated use of the drink cooler. In this scenario, the host was having an impromptu gathering on a weekend night with 5-6 guests. Unfortunately, the host usually did not have space in the refrigerator to keep drinks cool at all time and only had access to room temperature beer. However, he did have the drink cooler and three trays of ice at his disposal. The observations are summarized below.

The drink cooler had a fairly intuitive design. The users had never used the device before and were able to use it within five minutes. Their first instinct was to pour the beer into the ice-water bath. However, they did decided to scan (not read) the instruction manual. This was sufficient to show them the correct way of using the device. Upon setting up the device, they realized that power cord was too short. The only flat surface within reach of the cord was the sofa, which was not a sturdy surface.

They then started to chill their drinks. However, this proved to be a slow process. People started to get restless waiting for their turn to cool their drink. This was especially a problem because most people preferred to drink the glass drink, which takes longer to cool. Eventually, people started just drinking warm beer. This problem could have been reduced had the users fully read the instruction manual. They consistently set their drinks to cool on the higher setting, which isn't necessary for most beverages. Four minutes would have been sufficient for the glass bottles two minutes for the metal cans. This information should be presented more prominently.

Several problems were discovered during the usage of the device. First, it was a very loud machine. People were forced to speak louder then usual and the television volume was had to be turned up. This is obviously not an ideal scenario. Second, the lid did not function well. On some occasions it would pop open while the device was running. Other times, it would take several tries to open. Third, the water proofing on the lid was weak as water dripped out constantly. A cardboard box had to be placed underneath to soak the water. Finally, changing the water was a hassle. This task is hard to do with just one person. The lid does not open fully, forcing the user to tilt the device at awkward angles to get the ice out. Pouring in new water is also a hassle for the same reason.

Image of struggles opening the lid.

Image of struggles pouring down drain.

User Observation 2

The scenario observed in this situation was slightly different. A couple users had just returned from the store having bought beverages on a weekend evening. They wanted to drink a beer each, but it was all at room temperature from the store. They used the drink cooler to cool two beverages for themselves. The observations are summarized below.

Setting up the device was easy. Ice was readily available. The device was started. Again, similar to the previous experience, the device was excessively loud. The two users had to raise their voices to communicate with each other. After usage was done, emptying the ice-water from the device was a hassle. People decided to leave it set up as it is. It remained on the table taking up space for some time.

User Reviews

The only site where we found reviews for the Cooper Cooler Drink Chiller were on Amazon. There were six reviews for the product that rated the product at an average score of 3.5/5.0. However, the results were slightly skewed. There were three 5's, one 4, and two 1's. The two users who had rated the product a 1/5 stated that the product simply did not work as claimed. One user had problems with the spinning mechanism. The user claimed that carbonated drinks foamed over significantly when used in the device. The other user said that the door would get jammed and that loading ice was a problem. We also experienced similar difficulties in our user observation, however none were sufficient to warrant such negative responses. It is possible that these received bad products. The three people who rated the product as a 5 all viewed the product as a luxury item. It was not a product that was necessary for their life. They enjoyed the overall experience they received from using the product.

Here are some quotes taken from the reviews:

"[User] couldnt wait to use it and he would actually not put his beer in the refrigerator so he could try the Blitz Chiller."

"Talk about cool stuff... It's maybe little noisy but I can live with that."

"This is my third cooler from cooper. I wore out the first two. I had each for years and was happy with them."

"First bottle we tried opened up losing half the beer [due to foaming]."

Survey

To understand if there indeed was a market for our product and in which direction to take the improvements we created a survey. The purpose of the survey was essentially to determine how cold people like their drinks, how they normally cool them, how they cool them in an emergency and at a social event how long they are willing to wait for their drinks to be cold. We distributed the survey at a social gathering and online and got over 45 useful responses.

We found that people like their drinks really cold and as seen in the graph above over 94% of the sample would like their drink to be under 40 Fahrenheit. We also found using a separate question that only 10% would wait more than 3 minutes for their drink to be cooled and only 30% would wait more than 2 minutes as seen below in the graph. This definitely showed us there is a market for ice cold drinks that need to be cooled quickly.

To see what we are dealing with currently we asked people how they cool their drinks given they have time and do not need to do it in a rush. We found that interestingly a majority of 62% would use a refrigerator however given an emergency where drinks need to be cooled quickly we found that over 50% now prefer a freezer. Hence clearly there is a need for a product that has to beat a freezer at quick and efficient cooling.

Summary

In summary, the three main problems with the current design were the excess noise, low capacity, and ice requirement. The combination of these weaknesses significantly limited the product's usefulness. We hope to design the product that addresses as many of these concerns. We also got a better idea of what consumers seek out of a drink cooling product. The biggest takeaways are that they prefer to have drinks at 35 degrees Farenheit and are unwilling to wait more than 3 minutes for a drink. Finally, the alternative methods most users turn to when they need to chill drinks rapidly is an ice-water bath.

Top Stake Holder Needs

  • Cool drinks efficiently
  • Require little setup and cleanup
  • Can operate unattended
  • Works on arrival
  • Look cool and contemporary
  • Does not require additional materials to operate


Value Opportunity Analysis

A Value Opportunity Analysis (VOA) was performed on the product. We tailored the chart to accurately depict the attributes that our user would find attractive. We then placed a value on each of them. This was later used to determine the categories and weight in the Pugh Chart.

Design Concepts

These main opportunity that these designs focused on was creating a drink chiller that did not require ice, while still maintaining cooling capabilities. The designs also should reduce the disturbance to the user caused by the device, both in terms of sound and in terms of actions that need to be taken for user operation, and maintain or reduce overall size of the design to retain or increase portability.

Design Concept 1: Peltier Cell Cooler


There are two major changes made in this design as compared to the original one. The first change is that the drain pipes carrying the water will be made slightly longer and more twisted allowing for the placement of Peltier Cells or other forms of thermo-electrics that function by creating a temperature differential when supplied with a voltage differential. The advantage of using this is that it will eliminate the need for ice by cooling the water in the pipes, which we found during out market research and Design for Environment to be a problem. The second major change is making the entire system more thermal efficient, preventing leaks and insulating the system more effectively. The way we intend to do this is to make a better mechanism for the lid that seals shut much more efficiently and having water intakes along the side with a salt intake as well. This will eliminate the loss of heat from the system.

Pros

  • It will eliminate need for ice, keeping the water level the same and hence eliminate need for removing water from system.
  • It will also work if there is no ice available hence increasing its functionality in several situations such as during camping or at the beach.
  • The lid mechanism will prevent leakages and make it more efficient hence requiring the water to require less cooling.
  • The possible use of added salts could reduce the freezing point of the mixture allowing for a cooler liquid without the generation of ice.

Cons

  • The use of Peltier cells will make the design significantly more costly to produce however we hope that the coolness factor will overcome this.
  • It will also be an issue to figure out how to exhaust the heat remove from the water by the peltier cells.
  • The design, in this current form, cannot cool several drinks at the same time and hence can be cumbersome to use for large parties.

Relevant Patents

  • Small Thermal cooler - (US Pat. 4581898): Cools beverages using peltier cells but by conduction
  • Beverage vessel holder - (US Pat. 6141969): Same thing as other one but directly for cans that are enclosed by peltier cells.

Design Concept 2: Wave Generating Cooler

The goal of this design was to create a cooling device that did not require access to electricity or ice. Two specific instances where such a product could be handy is a beach of camping trip. This design is basically a water bath that would get cold using a chemical reaction with a mechanical attachment that would create waves in the water to increase forced convection. The chemical reaction used would be the dissolution of ammonium nitrate, which is the same reaction used in cooling ice packs. The mechanical wave maker would be mounted on one side of the product and would generate waves in the ice bath using a gear/crank system that would have to be operated by the user. This design could be adapted to whatever size is desired.

Pros

  • Requires no access to electricity
  • Low noises levels do to lack of motor

Cons

  • High recurring cost due to replacement tablets
  • Requires input of human energy

Relevant Patents

  • Endothermic Beverage Cooler - (US Pat. 2008/0271476): Containers with walls made out of an endothermic reaction salt that can be catalyzed when desired cooling the beverages inside the container.
  • Self-Cooling Containers of Beverage and Foodstuffs - (US Pat. 6103280): A self-cooling drink container that is made out of an endothermic reaction salt. The reaction is catalyzed by the opening of the beverage due to the carbonation.

Design Concept 3: Single Phase Spray Cooler

In the Single-Phase spray cooler, liquid carbon-dioxide is sprayed onto the beverage through the spouts as shown in the figure. Since, liquid carbon-dioxide has a low boiling point of -70 ͦ F, its boils off on coming in contact with the beverage. The coolant absorbs the heat for boiling from the beverage and chills it instantly. The gas that forms can escape through the openings on the top of the device.Some of the gas may dissolve in the water on the beverage’s container. However, since the carbonic acid formed is not dangerous to consume, no health hazards are posed by the dissolution of carbon-dioxide in water.

Pros

  • Reduction in noise and vibrations
  • Faster cooling mechanism
  • A‘cooler’ design concept
  • Can be used to cool open drinks

Cons

  • Complexity of the design
  • High costs of production and use

Relevant Patents

  • Beverage Cooler - (US Pat. 2025118): Cools drinks using carbon-dioxide in a refrigeration cycle.
  • Cooling Device for Beverages - (US Pat. 5201193): Cools drinks using a disposable compressed or liquid gas canister that is destroyed during each cooling cycle.

Design Concept 4: Vapor Compression Cooler

In the Vapor Compression Cooler design, water put into the machine is cooled by a vapor compression cycle and then sprayed over the rotating beverage to cool it. The main goal of the vapor compression cooler is to cool the water that would flow over the beverage to cool it without the use of ice or other disposable materials. The overall design and shape of the product will remain the same, but the internal mechanisms will change drastically. Water flowing through the device, once being forced through the pump, will pass over a U-tube array of a vapor compression cycle that acts as the evaporator in a vapor compression cycle. The water will be cooled as it flows over the tubes and approach 0 °C. The vapor compression cycle would be a closed loop with a compressor, condenser, and an expansion valve. The condenser would be air cooled on the outside of the device, much like a refrigerator.

Due to the increased complexity of the design and calculations and the increased costs of manufacturing and production, this design was not chosen for presentation or serious consideration.

Pros

  • No requirement to add ice or other special substances, only water
  • Simpler operation, only add water and operate
  • Closed vapor compression cycle would not need to be serviced

Cons

  • A vapor compression system can be costly to manufacture
  • Vapor compression cycles are complex to design and engineer
  • Difficult calculations and controls necessary to prevent freezing
  • High energy demand and increased noise from compressor

Relevant Patents

Portable Quick Chilling Device - (US Pat. 4711099): This devices utilizes a vapor compression cycle to chill a beverage via direct conduction with the can surface.

Design Concept 5: Six Pack Chiller

The Six-Pack Chiller will use the same basic operating principles as the BlitzChiller, in that a reservoir of chilled water will be sprayed on top of a beverage, which is part of a thermofluidic loop using forced convection to cool the beverages inside. The exterior will be of similar design, albeit larger. It will operate off of AC power. Up to six canned beverages are loaded onto a platform, which is then lowered into the reservoir. As the platform is lowered, soft rollers rise up to hold the cans separate from one another. An arm with six sprayers is lowered on top of cans, the lid is closed and cooling can begin. During cooling, the chamber with the beverages will be spun slightly off center from its center of rotation, using centripetal forces to stir the fluid inside the beverage without shaking it.

Due to the increased complexity of the design and calculations and the increased costs of manufacturing and production, this design was no chosen for presentation or serious consideration.

Pros

  • Potential for non-ice chilling solutions
  • Looks really cool. Makes user feel like a mad scientist.
  • Increased unit beverage chill rate. Since six cans can be chilled at once, six people can be served in the same round.

Cons

  • Will be costly to manufacture
  • Complex to design and engineer
  • Large number of moving mechanisms will create more points of failure.
  • Heat transfer is less efficient than in single chilling case
  • Less intuitive

Relevant Patents

  • Cooling Device for Beverage Containers - (US Pat. 4899553): A device designed to cool six drinks simultaneously using a shaped slab of ice.

Pugh Chart

The Pugh Chart was used to analyze the feasibility of 10 potential designs. Categories were chosen and weights were assigned to each category based on the VOA. Each of the potential designs was then assessed a score from -2 to +2 relative to the Cooper Cooler Drink Chiller. A +2 was the best and -2 was the worst. Only one competitor product was analyzed because the Cooper Cooler Blitz Chiller. This was the only product that targeted the ultra-rapid cooling of beverages on an individual scale.

The specific categories chosen based on the VOA were:

  • Speed of Cooling - How quickly will the design theoretically chill a beverage.
  • Portability - How portable will the design be.
  • Ease of Use - How complex or difficult to use would the design be.
  • Low Disruption - How loud would the design be
  • Team Skill - How does the team's skill set align with the product design
  • Team Interest - How does the team's interests align with the product design
  • Safety - How safe is the design's cooling mechanisms
  • Coolness - How 'cool' or cutting edge is the product
  • Complexity - How complex are the designs mechanisms

Based on these results, we chose to focus on five Design Concepts which we explain in more detail in the Design Concepts section. A brief explanation is given about each of the five designs that were not explained in the Design Concepts section.

  • Original Design with Chemical Cooling: Same mechanical set up as the original product but will us an ammonium nitrate reaction tablet to cool the water bath. A new table will have to be used each sitting.
  • Single Chamber with Evaporating Fluid: A coolant fluid would be sprayed onto the container and would evaporate quickly while cooling the drink at the same time.
  • Single Chamber with Two-Stage Cooling: A liquid coolant would be sprayed onto the drink, which would cool it. Then water would be sprayed on to the drink to remove coolant from sides.
  • Original Design with Vapor Compression Cycle: Same mechanical setup as original product but would incorporate a vapor compression cycle to cool the water bath, eliminating the need for ice.
  • Conduction Chamber: A metal chamber that would be designed like a spiral such that it can fit snugly around a drink. The metal would have wires inside the metal that would cool the metal.
  • Mass Cooling with Nitrogen: Time released nitrogen would be sprayed into an air chamber surrounding a large liquid storage device, such as a keg. This would ideally keep the drink sufficiently cool. After many uses the nitrogen would have to be refilled.

Gantt Chart

In the subsequent phases of our project we will start designing the product and constructing prototypes of the product. With tight deadlines in place, we need to ensure that we have the rest of the semester is planned out in order to keep pace with the intensive half of this project.

The Gantt Chart is a useful tool to plan schedules. The Gantt Chart outlining our schedule for the rest of the semester has been attached below.


Team Member Roles

The team worked together effectively in carrying out the tasks. We all scheduled weekly meetings where we would report our findings from the previously assigned tasks and divide new tasks to be completed by each individual for the next meeting. This approach seemed to work well for our group and we plan on using a similar approach as we go forward with the project.

Everybody contributed evenly towards the 100 ideas and the 10 design concepts. The rest of the work was split up evenly as follows:

  • Market Research Leader - Dhruv Swaroop
  • Pugh Chart Leader - Ojas Mainkar
  • Gantt Chart Leader - Arvin Joseph
  • Design Concepts Leader - Charlie Munoz
  • Presentation Leader and Compiler - Pat White

Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on our Pugh Chart analysis of our 5 designs which incorporated the results from the Market Research and the Value Opportunity Analysis, we determined the the Peltier Cell Cooler is the concept which is most recommended to be pursued for the rest of the semester. The design will allow for a small, portable product which does not require the use of ice or any additional chemicals. Calculations are needed to determine whether or not the Peltier Cell Cooler can be economically engineered to chill multiple beverages, but the opportunity exists with this design. The ultimate product can retain a sleek, hip look due to the simplicity of the design and the introduction of Peltier Cells does not introduce any new or special safety risks. Finally, the principals behind Peltier Cells are well understood meaning that the focus of this product design can be on design and implementation rather than simply proof of concept. For these reasons, the Peltier Cell Cooler is the concept which is most recommended to be pursued for the rest of the semester.

User Scenario

Jake is a your typical young urban professional worker. He is 27 years old and lives in New York City. He recently received a job promotion and lives a comfortable life. He has a stressful corporate job and often enjoys drinking a cold beer to relax when he gets home from work. Sometimes, he will even have an impromptu gathering at his house for his colleagues after work. In addition, on weekends he often has 5-6 of his close friends over to watch the NY Giant's football game. With his busy schedule, Jake often forgets to plan ahead for these gathers and is left with no cold beer to serve. He needs some way to cool a small amount of drinks (<6) in a very fast time (<5 minutes). He has a good amount of money, which he isn't afraid to use for his comforts.

Appendix

We used the Product Opportunity Gaps Analysis to come up with our 100 ideas. The image below shows some of the results from our analysis. The table below that shows a complete list of the generated ideas.


Personal tools