Controlled environment module Redesign

Redesigning a Controlled Environment Module to improve user interaction

Duration: 17 weeks

Year: 2025

Execution: Graduation project

Focus: User-centered design, from problem identification and user validation to the development of the final design.

Main challenge: Improve the user experience of the controlled environment module (CEM)

Subchallenges:

Enable easier handling of the crops
Design for safe opening and closing
Increase cleanability and ease of cleaning
Improve energy efficiency by reducing energy loss

Design Challenge: Container and crop reachability

The raised edge complicates working with the crops
Current design risks damaging the tops of the crops

User trying to reach for the crops

Overview of the old design where the raised walls created operational challenges

Design Challenge: Ensure safe access to the irrigation system

There is no safe climbing option to reach the irrigation system
Foldable legs are used by users as a temporary workaround

Users utilizing flodable legs as climbing aid

Overview of the previous design showing how the user attempts to access the irrigation system

Design Challenge: Ensure easy cleaning and maintenance of the cultivation container

Challenging to access for cleaning
Walls are not designed to withstand impacts
Exposed PIR insulation and small edges or crevices present a potential hygiene risk

Wall construction susceptible to impacts

Small crevices and edges leading to significant dirt accumulation

Design Challenge: Ensure safe operation when opening and closing the container

The electric lid presents a possible risk of entrapment
The existing rail system can lead to derailment of a fully loaded crop container

Potential safety risk during closure

Derailment of the container caused by issues in the foldable leg mechanism

Design Challenge: Reduce energy loss

Current design results in 100 W heat loss per °C of indoor–outdoor temperature difference
A significant portion of the loss is caused by thermal bridges in the current design

Benchmark assessment of energy loss

The bottom of the crop container, which suffers significant energy loss to the external environment because of the thermal bridges in the previous design

The Final Design:

A comprehensive redesign of the controlled environment module that solves all the aforementioned challenges efficiently and conveniently.

Manual operation for opening and closing enhances safety
Improved crop accessibility
Minimized energy loss
Facilitated safe operation and access to the irrigation system
Enhanced ease of cleaning and hygiene maintenance
Reduction of thermal bridges through a new construction approach in which the climate-controlled chamber fully envelops the crop container

How to open the CEM?

Manual opening
Gas springs facilitate opening and support of the hatch
Designed for safe overhead clearance and accessible handle operation

Reachability, clearance and closing of the hatch

Opening the Controlled Environment Module

Introduction of the trolley

To allow users to work all around the container and transport crops for off-site tasks like evaluation, inspection, or disposal, a trolley has been implemented.

The trolley gives the user the opportunity to take the crops elsewhere

Easily accessible crops

Attaching the trolley to the machine

Various application scenarios for the trolley

Relocation of the irrigation system

Facilitates access from a kneeling position
The revised position improves ease of transporting water and fertilizers by removing the need to pump dirty water upward

Designed for improved cleaning

The climate chamber is equipped with its own drainage, facilitating easy cleaning and rinsing.
The wall construction ensures there are no edges where dirt can accumulate and shields the insulation material from damage.

Wall construction for better cleanibilty and impact protection

The smooth floor and walls, together with a drain, make it easy to clean the climate chamber by brushing or rinsing

User-based verification using virtual reality

To evaluate the improvements of the new design within the limited timeframe, user tests were performed using virtual reality. Afterwards users were asked to grade the old design and the new design based on user experience. The new design was given a 7.5 on average compared to a 5.3 on average for the old design.