Stow Away Proposal

8/8/2019 Stow Away Proposal

1/26

THE STOW-AWAY

Kyle ChenEric Coy

Ronak Patel

Jon Takosky

February 23, 2010

Team #1

Executive SummaryThe team set out to design a new consumer household product. The objective of the

project was to create a product that eliminated the everyday problem of can storage. The design

process described in this proposal involved gathering/interpreting consumer needs, concept

generation, concept selection, and product refinement. The consumer need analysis showed the

different problems presented in current can storage systems. The concepts created eliminated

many of these problems. The concepts were refined and screened using a series of matrices. The

final concept, The Stow-Away, combined all of the best aspects of the initial concepts. The final

product has three main parts; a well-built outside housing case, three sturdy steel sliding tracks,

and finally three strong and durable vertical drawers. The combination of the three main parts

creates a product that allows the consumer to store their cans in an easy to see manner. The

Stow-Away is a new product that eliminates a household problem that many consumers

experience.


2/26

Page 2 of26

Table of Contents

PageExecutive Summary1. Introduction 3

1.1 Background 31.2 Task Description 3

2. Problem Definition 33. Customer Needs Assessment 4

2.1 Gathering Customer Input 42.2 Weighting of Customer Needs 5

4. Engineering Specifications 54.1 Establishing Target Specifications 64.2 Relating Specifications to Customer Needs 6

5. Concept Generation 75.1 External Search 7

5.2 Design Concepts 86. Concept Selection 107. Final Design 118. Conclusions and Recommendations 129. References 13Appendices


3/26

Page 3 of26

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Stow- Away is an innovative can storage unit. Currently storing, finding, and removing cansfrom a cabinet is a hassle. People have to move, remove, and dig through stacked cans to find the

can they are looking for. However, the Stow-Away takes the current repetitive and inefficient

task and transforms it into a simple and efficient one. The problem of stacking, finding, and

removing cans is a problem that affects a wide range of people. Homeowners of any age,

restaurant owners, and nursing homes are just some of the places impacted by the problem. Thus,

a potential market for the Stow-Away is both residential and commercial locations. In addition,

the Stow-Away can appeal to anyone who is looking for an easy, efficient, and productive way

of storing cans.

1.2 Task Description

The task was to develop a consumer product that would appeal to households in the United

States. The objective of the project is to design a new product based on consumer needs.

Furthermore, the product should help homeowners by making an everyday task easier. It should

be designed to be affordable and successful in the current market also. Furthermore, there was a

specific design process implemented to achieve the desired results. First, the team brainstormed

ideas about what household task to improve. Next, the team looked at a couple of the best ideas

and voted on which idea to pursue. Once an idea was chosen, the customer needs were identified

and ranked in order of importance. Afterwards, a list of target specifications was created. Once

proper metrics and values were established we began concept generation. We began conceptgeneration by developing four different concepts. In addition, an external search was conducted

to find related concepts. Next, we began concept selection by running our ideas through a

concept screening matrix. The concept screening matrix was used to choose a final concept.

2. Problem Definition

Stow-Away addresses the problem of can storage because current methods for can storage are

inefficient and place an unnecessary burden on people. This problem was identified by looking at

different problems around the house. The team realized that time is wasted in the kitchen and

looked to improve a process within the kitchen. Instantly, the team realized people waste timestacking cans and even more time trying to find stacked cans in a cabinet. Once the team chose a

problem, a specific ideation method was used. First, the team looked over all the critical

customer needs and began to brainstorm. The brainstorm process led each team member to have

his own idea of what the solution should be. Thus, each member produced a sketch of what he

felt the solution should be. Each solution tried to remedy the overall problem, which was to make

storing and removing cans a more efficient process. In addition, the solution to the problem had


4/26

Page 4 of26

to satisfy numerous constraints. First, it had to be able to store cans of various widths and

heights. Next, there has to be clearance at the top and a lip on the sides to make sure cans could

be stored and removed easily. Moreover, the unit has to be able to store a sufficient number of

cans; not to mention the entire unit has to be able to fit in a broad range of locations. It is vital

that the solution meet the constraints because the problem impacts both residential and

commercial locations. Furthermore, a high quality solution to his problem will help both

residential and commercial locations by making their lives not only easier but more productive.

3. Customer Needs Assessment

The Stow-Aways potential customers can be homeowners, restaurant owners, or anyone who

wants to store cans in a more efficient and productive way. The target age for the product ranges

from college students to grandparents because of the products ease of use. The customer needs

were gathered by direct observation and discussion in the team. Furthermore, discussion within

the team was carried out in an organized manner. Each team member listed four customer needsthat they felt were important, and then the team collaborated to combine similar needs and create

a hierarchy of needs. Primary and secondary needs were found by creating a hierarchy of needs.

3.1 Gathering Customer Input

The team gathered customer input to determine the quality of the idea and to determine the

potential market for the product. Interviews were the primary method used to gather customer

input. The interviewees included people from both residential and commercial locations.

According to Table 1 below, this product has a high potential to be successful residentially.

Nearly 75% of the people interviewed said that storing, finding, and removing cans is a hassle

for them. Of this 75%, 60% of the people said that they would buy the Stow-Away or a similar

product for their kitchen. 30% of the people said they may buy it, and factors like price were a

big influence on their decision. 10% of the people said they were content with the current

situation. The results show that over half of the people that are annoyed by the problem would be

interested in buying the Stow-Away to solve the problem. According to Table 2 below, this

product does not appeal to franchise restaurants. Franchise restaurants did not want to change

either their work environment or their training program. However, some local restaurants said

they would be interested in the Stow-Away as a means of improving productivity.

Table 1. Summarized results of residential interviewsQuestion Answer Percent of interviewees

Do you think it is a hassle to store, find, and removecans

Yes 75%

Are you interested in the Stow-Away Yes 45%

What do you consider the most important factor whenbuying a product like the Stow-Away

Price 35%


5/26

Page 5 of26

Table 2. Summarized results of commercial interviews

Question Answer Percent of interviewees

Do you think it is a hassle to store, find, and removecans

Yes 60%

Are you interested in the Stow-Away Yes 40%

What do you consider the most important factor whenbuying a product like the Stow-Away

Price 40%

3.2 Weighting Customer Needs

The customer input made it easy to weight the customer needs. It is very important to weight

customer needs. Weighting customer needs drives the concept generation and selection process.

Weighting the customer needs makes it clear which needs are critical and need extra attention.

Therefore, the team generated concepts and tried to guarantee that these needs were met. Not

only does weighting customer needs allow the team to create a product for the customers, but it

drives the selection process. Weighting customer needs is a critical part of the concept scoring

matrix. Overall, weighting customer needs is an essential part of a successful design process.

Table 3 below shows customer needs and their respective weighting values.

Table 3. Weighting customer needs by AHP method

Customer Need Weighing (from AHP)

Strength 17%

Durability 19%

Safety 33%

Storage Capacity 8%

Ease of Use 10%

Appearance 7%

Inexpensive 6%

The needs listed in Table 3 are specific to the product. First, strength means that the material of

product is strong enough to support the load. Next, durability means the product will not wear

and the shelves can open and close for many cycles. Safety means that the shelves will not come

out or topple over. Furthermore, storage capacity means that the unit can hold a sufficient

number of cans. Finally, ease of use refers to the fact that the product should open and close

easily, people of all ages can use it, and storing or removing cans should be an effortless task.

4. Engineering Specifications

After determining customer needs, the team turned the needs into engineering specifications. The

team did this by looking at each individual need and translating the need into one or more

metrics. The metrics were then assigned a corresponding value or range of values. Additionally,

if the product satisfied the established metrics and values, then it would satisfy the corresponding


6/26

Page 6 of26

need as well. The critical needs gave rise to the critical metrics, and these were the metrics used

in our decision matrix. These metrics are that the Stow-Away be easy to handle, easy to use, easy

to assemble, able to handle to a large load, durable, inexpensive to manufacture, safe, and able to

hold a large number of cans.

4.1 Establishing Target Specifications and Metrics

Figure 1 below shows the target specifications set by the team, the target specifications include

metrics and both marginal and ideal values for each metric. The values were determined by using

the customer needs, interviews, and personal experiences of the team members.

Figure 1. Target specifications for the Stow-Away

4.2 Relationship of Engineering Specifications to Customer Needs

Figure 2 below shows a QFD for the Stow-Away to describe the relation between engineering

specifications and customer needs. There are nine customer requirements that are related to five

engineering requirements. If the product met the engineering targets for the engineering

requirements, then the product would satisfy the customer requirements as well.

Metric

No.

Need

Nos. Metric Imp. Units

Marginal

ValueIdeal Value

1 1 Holds a certain load 4 lbs. >10 >15

2 1,2 Last for many uses 5 Cycles >10,000 >15,000

3 2,3 Side Lip 4 in. >0.05 >0.1

4 3Drawer stays incabinet 5 Binary

Pass Pass

5 4Volume of storagespace 5 Cans

12 16

6 5 Opens smoothly 4 Binary Pass Pass

7 5 Compatibility of unit 3 List

BaseCabinet

Countertop

BaseCabinet

CountertopWall

Cabinet

Refrigerator8 5 Installation time 2 Min.


7/26

Page 7 of26

Figure 2. QFD chart for Stow-Away

5. Concept Generation

5.1 External Search

The team conducted an external search targeted at finding existing solution to a similar problem.

The team put a heavy emphasis on this process as a means of understanding the current market

and competition, as well as giving the team a basis for benchmarking. The patents and literature

that were searched gave the team an understanding of the market. Afterwards, the team was able

to effectively benchmark.

5.1.1 Search PatentsThe team used a keyword search to look for patents. The team found that there was an existing

cabinet with vertical drawers. However, there were still numerous differences separating the two

ideas from each other. Other patent searches were conducted to see the different methods of can

storage that are patented. The results of the search showed various ways to complete the task but

EngineeringRequirements

Weightsu

pported

Lifetime

Sidelipheight

Cansstored

Cost

CustomerRequirements

Holds a certain load X

Last for many cycles X

Side lip to prevent fall off X

Holds drawers securely X X

Volume of storage space X

Opens/Closes smoothly X X

Looks good X XCabinet Compatibility X

Inexpensive X

Units

lbs

Cycles

in.

Cans

$

15

15,0

00

0.1 1

635

Engineering Targets


8/26

Page 8 of26

none of the ideas were that similar to the proposed design. Lastly, patent searches were

conducted to look for a sliding method to determine how the cabinet would open and close. The

results found were similar to the of the can storage methods. There are similar methods, but none

of the ideas were that similar to our idea. The results of the patent search gave us an idea of what

was protected. Appendix C has the cover pages of patents the team found valuable.

5.1.2 Search of Market:

The team continued with the external search by looking for products already on the market.

Webpages and catalogs were the primary methods used by the team to determine what products

are currently on the market. The can storage market is a competitive one. The concept most

companies used is one where cans are stored in a horizontal manner and similar cans are stacked

together in a row. Moreover, the cans are allowed to roll so the user could easily stack and

remove the can. Figure 3 shows an example of a current can storage unit on the market.

Figure 3. Can storage unit from Shelf-Reliance

5.1.3 Benchmark Products:

Benchmarking began once the team had completed searching for patents and current ideas in the

market. Currently, there are many viable solutions to the problem of can storage. On the other

hand, all the methods are similar and require users to stack similar if not identical cans together.

The team proposed a new solution to this existing problem. The proposed solution would allow

the user to stack and organize cans in the conventional method while eliminating the problems

associated with it. Nonetheless, the team decided that the principal competitor would be Shelf-

Reliance [ref 9 ]. Currently Shelf-Reliance has released many units for can storage that are either

free standing or can be placed in a cupboard, pantry, or cabinet. Thus, using Shelf-Reliance as a

benchmark drove concept generation for the team. The team tried to make sure the design would

not only match but exceed the both the features and quality of Shelf-Reliance products.

5.2 Design Concept

Upon completion of a detailed external search, the team came up with possible solutions to the

problem. Three of the feasible concepts are shown below in Figures 4-6. To generate the concept

each team member drew up what he felt would be the best solution while keeping the benchmark

in mind. The team used individual concept generation followed by a team meeting as the primary

ideation method. Appendix D shows a table of advantages and disadvantages for each concept.


9/26

Page 9 of26

5.2.1 Design Concept 1:

This concept has 3 sliding drawers. Each

drawer comes equipped with 2 shelves.

Moreover, each shelf has a side lip to preventcans from falling off the sides. The material

used will be a strong, durable plastic for the

shelves and overall casing while a metal will

be used for the rails. The unit will ideally hold

8 cans in each drawer allowing for a capacity

of 24 cans. The unit will be able to be stored

in various locations as well.

Figure 4. Design Concept 1


This concept has 2 sliding drawers. Each

drawer comes equipped with 4 shelves and each

shelf has a side lip as a safety measure. The

material used will be composite wood for the

whole unit expect for the rails that are metal.

The unit also has a side shelf to store bigger

objects and non-canned objects. The unit will

ideally hold 12 cans in each drawer allowing for

a 24 can storage space. The unit is meant to be

stored in cabinets.



This concept is one large sliding drawer with 4

shelves. The drawer allow cans of various sizes

and heights to easily sit on the shelf. The

shelves would be made of plastic, overall casing

would be made of wood, and rails would be

made of metal. The unit will ideally be able to

store 4 cans in each shelf allowing for a total of

a 16 can storage place. The unit can easily be

stored anywhere because it is narrow.



10/26

Page 10 of26

6. Concept Selection

After the concepts were generated, the next step was to screen the concepts using different

matrices. The first matrix used a reference concept to rate the concepts. The designs were then

ranked it and the team decided that three of them should be continued. The three that were

continued are shown in the concept generation part of the memo.

Figure 7. Concept Screening Matrix

These three concepts were then put through a concept scoring matrix. The scoring matrix was

made up from the consumer needs and weighted scores. The scores were weighted based on

what the team found was most important to the consumer. The three most important selection

criteria are safety, durability, and load capability. After the designs were rated by the matrix,

they were ranked. This ranking was then used to decide which of the products to develop

further.

CONCEPT VARIANTS

SELECTION

CRITERIAA B C D E (REF.)

Ease of Handling 0 0 0 0 0

Ease of Use 0 - + + 0

Ease of Assembly - + + - 0

Load Handling 0 - - + 0

Load Capability 0 + 0 0 0Durability - 0 - + 0

Manufactoring Cost 0 + 0 - 0

Safety + 0 - + 0

PLUSES 1 3 2 4

SAMES 5 3 3 2

MINUSES 2 2 3 2

NET 0 1 -1 2

RANK 3 2 4 1

CONTINUE Yes Yes No Yes


11/26

Page 11 of26

Concept

1. Three rows,Two shelves

2. One row, Fourshelves

3. Two rows, FourShelves

SelectionCriteria Weight Rating

WeightedScore Rating

WeightedScore Rating

WeightedScore

Ease ofHandling 5% 3 0.15 2 0.1 3 0.15

Ease of Use 15% 4 0.6 3 0.45 3 0.45

Ease ofAssembly 10% 2 0.2 3 0.3 3 0.3

Load Handling 10% 3 0.3 2 0.2 3 0.3

Load Capability 20% 4 0.8 2 0.4 3 0.6

Durability 15% 3 0.45 3 0.45 3 0.45

ManufacturingCost 10% 3 0.3 3 0.3 3 0.3

Safety 15% 4 0.6 3 0.45 3 0.45

TotalScore 3.4 2.65 3

Rank 1 3 2

Continue? Yes No No

Figure 8. Concept Screening Matrix

As it is seen in the matrix above, concept one received the highest total score with a score of 3.4;

concept three came in second with a score of 3; and concept two came in third with a score of

2.65. These statistical numbers make sense based on the way the matrix was weighted. With

load capability weighted the highest, it makes sense that concept one scored the highest and

concept two scored the lowest. Although the team decided that concept one would be the one

that the team continued and felt that some of the features on other concepts should be included in

our final design. The team looked at each of the concepts and combined the features into the

best possible combination.

7. Final Design

For the final design of the Stow-Away, the group looked at each of the concepts and collected

the best aspects. The final design implements these aspects in an aesthetically pleasing design

that is both strong and durable. The product is designed to hold 24 average sized soup cans. Thedesign also has the ability to hold larger cans. The final concept has three main parts; the outside

housing case, the sliding shelf, and the sliding track.

The group decided on a 16.75 by 17.25 by 16 plastic housing case. The housing case

consists of four sides and a back to hold the vertical drawers. The case is constructed out of a

strong plastic that is able to hold the weight of the cans and shelves. The back of the case

includes built in screw holes. These screw holes deal with safety concerns. The holes allow the


12/26

Page 12 of26

product to be attached to the back wall of a cabinet to prevent the unit from falling out of the

cupboard.

The steel sliding rails/tracks are attached to the top and the bottom of the housing case.

Steel was used in order to make a strong product that is capable of holding the weight of the

cans. The sliding rails allow the vertical shelves to smoothly slide out of the case making all the

cans visible. The smooth sliding action was designed with ease of use in mind. The team also

had safety in mind when designing this product. Each of the sliding rails has a stopping

mechanism that prevents the shelf from sliding entirely out of the case. Each of the rails also has

a mechanism that prevents the shelves from sliding out when not in use.

The shelves were designed to be made out of a see through acrylic. The clear acrylic will

be strong enough to hold the weight of the stored cans. The acrylic also gives the consumer the

extra benefit of an unobstructed view of the cans. Once again, the team wanted to create a safe

product, so a small lip was implemented on each side of the shelves. This small lip will prevents

the cans from falling off of the shelf. Each shelf was designed with extra room above the cans,

making the cans easy to remove.With the final concept decided on, the team began to figure out the building cost. The

team started by looking at the price of plastic sheets to make the outside housing case. After

searching the internet, the average cost for the case was found to be ten dollars. The acrylic

sheet for the shelves ended up costing five dollars. The final part of the design, the sliding rails

were found on average to cost seven dollars. The cost of production and labor was estimated to

be eight dollars. In total the cost of making one unit was an estimated thirty dollars. In order to

make a profit the product has a selling price of thirty five dollars.

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

The Stow-Away has a large audience that would greatly benefit from the convenience and

functionality of the storage system. The final design differentiates itself from other products by

strongly focusing on making canned food storage more efficient. The Stow-Away appeals to

customers by recognizing the inconvenience of traditional storage methods. The Stow-Away

implements three vertical drawers, giving the consumer the ability to pull out entire columns of

cans with clear visible access to every can. The final design also stresses the importance of

safety by utilizing stopping mechanisms and side lips. Safety was stressed due to the large

number of canned foods bought by families with older members [ref 1]. The safety features

along with other innovative features sets our product apart from the competition. The originalideas in the Stow-Away are not found in any other product on the market. These unique aspects

along with lack of competitors create a product that will be able to be patented. This new design

in can storage will be very successful in the consumer market. The low cost of thirty five dollars

will appeal to a large demographic. This low price along with the innovative, durable design will

produce a successful product, generating a large profit margin.


13/26

Page 13 of26

9. References

[1] Buzby, Jean C., and Biing H. Lin. Canned Fruit and Vegetable Consumption in the

United States. Rep. no. AP032. United States Department of Agriculture, Sept.

2008. Web. 21 Feb. 2010.

.

[2] Day, Jennifer Cheeseman, Projections of the Number of Households and Families in

the United States: 1995 to 2010, U.S. Bureau of the Census,

Current Population Reports, P25-1129, U.S.

Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1996

[3] Eskin, N A M. Food Shelf Life Stability. Web. 21 Feb. 2010.

Catalog Number: 000410

[4] Heenan, Jane. Can Your Kitchen Pass the Storage Test. Web. 21 Feb. 2010.


[5] Janson. United States Patent 6,231,138

United States Patent and Trademark Office, May 15, 2001. Web. 21 Feb. 2010.

.

[6] Kirwan, Mark. Food Packaging Technology in the United States. Web. 21 Feb. 2010.


[7] "Marry Anne Beecher."APT Bulletin 32.2/3 (2001): 27-37.JSTOR. Web. 21 Feb.2010. .

[8] Rau. United States Patent 4,140,223

United States Patent and Trademark Office, Feb. 20, 1979. Web. 21 Feb. 2010.

.

[9] Shelf-Reliance, 2009 ShelfReiliance, LLC, Web. 21 Feb. 2010.

.

[10] United State Patent and Trademark, Web. 21 Feb. 2010. .

[11] Weng. United States Patent 6,238,031

United States Patent and Trademark Office, May 29, 2001. Web. 21 Feb. 2010.

.


14/26

Page 14 of26

[12] Wright. United States Patent 5,226,714

United States Patent and Trademark Office, Jul. 13, 1993. Web. 21 Feb. 2010.

.


15/26

Page 15 of26

Appendix A

Interview Demographics

Table A.1. Residential Market Demographics

AgeRange MaritalStatus Children # ofPeople # Interested in Stow-Away

17-24 Single 0 6 3

25-35 Single 0 4 2

Married 0-3 4 2

35-45 Married 0-3 2 1

45-55 Married 0-3 2 1

55+ Married 0-3 2 0

Table A.2. Commercial Market Demographics

RestaurantType

# ofLocations

# Interested in Stow-Away

Local 3 2

Franchise 2 0

Interview Questions

1. Do you store cans by stacking them in a cabinet?2. When you try to find a can in the cabinet do you usually dig around to find what you are

looking for?

-If answer was no, skip to question 5-If answer was yes, continue to question 3

3. Does the process of trying to find a can annoy you?4. Do you think the process of trying to find cans a waste of time?5. Would you be interested in a new way of storing cans?6. The Stow-Away is a new way to store cans. It allows you to stack cans in vertical

drawers. You are able to pull out one drawer at a time and look at 2 shelves each

containing 4 cans to find what you are looking for. Therefore, you never have to dig

around or waste time looking for cans. The Stow-Away can be put on your counter, in

you cabinet, or in you refrigerator. Is this something you would be interested in?

7. What do you feel would be the most important factor when purchasing an item like theStow-Away?


16/26

Page 16 of26

Interview Input Data/Quotes

I would not buy it because it would not fit in with the work environment. There are set locations

for where everything is, which is explained in employee training. The Stow-Away means we

would have to re-construct our training program, which I do not want to spend time doing

-Vina Patel, Manager of Subway Restaurants

I think that this is a great idea. I would buy it to make things easier to find and put away. As a

realtor I notice there are some kitchens make it difficult for the homeowners to use their cabinets

easily. Not to mention some homes do not even have enough cabinet room. The Stow-Away

would really help these people make the most of their kitchen space.

-Paula Takosky, Mother

The Stow-Away would definitely make our apartment a lot cleaner. When people look for cans

they throw cans around until they find the can they are looking for. The worst part is instead of

restacking the cans; they leave the cans all over the place. The only time the cabinet is clean iswhen we run out of cans and have to buy more groceries.

-Eric Webb, College Student

I am not interested at all because I do not want to change or build anything. I rather leave things

the way that they are.

-Jane Chen, Grandmother


17/26

Page 17 of26

Appendix B

AHP Matrix

Table B.1. Actual AHP Matrix for Stow-Away

Strength Durability Safety StorageCapacity

Easeof

Use

Appearance Inexpensive

Strength 1/1 1/2 1/3 2/1 3/1 4/1 3/1

Durability 2/1 1/1 1/2 2/1 3/1 2/1 2/1

Safety 3/1 2/1 1/1 4/1 3/1 3/1 4/1

StorageCapacity 1/2 1/2 1/4 1/1 1/2 2/1 2/1

Ease of Use 1/3 1/3 1/3 2/1 1/1 2/1 2/1

Appearance1/4 1/2 1/3 1/2 1/2 1/1 2/1Inexpensive 1/3 1/2 1/4 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/1

Table B.1 shows the actual AHP matrix used to determine the weights of the various customer

needs.


18/26

Page 18 of26

Appendix C

Figure C.1 Cantilevered Pull-Out Shelf System


19/26

Page 19 of26

Figure C.2 Sliding Track Assembly For Drawers


20/26

Page 20 of26

Figure C.3 Pivoting Drawer Slide System


21/26

Page 21 of26

Figure C.4 Tierred Rotatable Spice-Cans Storage Unit


22/26

Page 22 of26

Appendix D

Concept 1:

Pros Cons

Three easy to see rows Holds cans in an easy to see manner Not too tall Fits in the cabinet and various other

places Safety lip prevents the cans from

falling off Durable outside case Strong shelves that support all of the

weight Strong post that hold up the shelf

A lot of moving parts Each row only has two shelves May not hold enough cans to be

completely practical Inconvenient if placed below the line

of sight May be hard to see everything if

placed in the corner of a cabinet No handle to grab

Concept 2:

Pros Cons

Two rows with four shelves Ability to hold a good amount of cans The side shelf also helps with storage The easy to grab handle makes it easy to

open Nice decorative wood finish The height of it makes it easy to see if

placed in a lower cabinet Track allows the rows to slide out

easily.

Tall and may not fit in too manycabinets

Due to the type of material might notbe the best option for the refrigerator

The height may cause problems ifplaced in a higher cabinet

May not fit in too a basic cabinet if theshelf isnt taken out

May be hard to use if it has to beplaced against a wall

Concept 3:

Pros Cons

One row with four shelves Compact design makes it convenient to

place in different places The sliding rail makes it easy to slide in

and out of the case The durable design makes it a strong

product The stopping mechanisms on the rails

increase the safety aspect of the design Can easily go into a kitchen corner Can go in to a lower cabinet due to the

height

Tall and may not fit in too manycabinets

The lack of size will decrease thevolume of cans it will be able to hold

The height may make the removal of acabinet shelf a necessity

May have troubles putting the productin the refrigerator

The lack of a side lip may allow thecans to fall of the sides of the shelves

If placed in a higher cabinet the cansmay be too hard to reach

The lack of a handle may be ahindrance


23/26

Page 23 of26

Appendix E

Figure E.1 Dimensioned (in.) isometric view of the outside housing case.

Figure E.2 Dimensioned (in.) front view of the case.


24/26

Page 24 of26

Figure E.3 Dimensioned (in.) isometric view of the shelf

Figure E.4 Dimensioned (in.) front view of the shelf.


25/26

Page 25 of26

Figure E.5 Dimensioned (in.) top view of the shelf

Figure E.6 Dimensioned (in.) isometric view of the sliding track

Figure E.7 Dimensioned (in.) side view of the sliding track.


26/26

Figure E.8 Dimensioned (in.) front view of the sliding track.

Documents

Stow Away Proposal