PERK Corp.

Classification Scheme

Pranav Pannala, Evan Colenbrander, Ryan Miller, Kaleb Ryan

Functions/Concepts Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3

Function A: Input Voice recognition Text-based Buttons

(microphone)

Function B: Output Movement based Text-based Text to speech

communication (speaker)

Function C: Rotational Arms and LCD Screen With Interactive Games

Interactive Head Detailed Faces /
Component expressions

Function D: Power Rechargeable battery Plug into the wall AA replacement

Source batteries

Function E: Shape Stuffed Animal Bodiless Robot (Plastic)

Total Concept I = A1 + B3 + C1 + D1 + E1
Total Concept II = A2 + B2 + C3 + D3 + E3

Option A1 is the most ideal input function because including a microphone will make the
product much easier to use. Option A2 could be a possibility but it would not be the ideal option
because this would require the user to put much more effort into using the product.
In addition to the microphone, option B3 will also be ideal because this option will allow
the inputs from the microphone to be outputted by a speaker. Similar to the input options, B2 is
a possibility but this option would still require more effort for the consumer.

1
 C1 will be the best interactive component because the movement of the arms and head
will allow the robot to have much more emotion and make it seem interactive for the child.
Option C3 would be the next best option because children also enjoy playing games. C2 would
most likely not be realistic because this option would be too difficult to work on based on the
resources available to our team.
For the power source options D1 and D3 would both be realistic. We believe that we
could easily incorporate either of these options into our design. These options also make it easy
for the consumer to recharge the product. D2 would not be the best choice because then the
product would not be portable and would need to be near a power outlet.
The shape of the RoboBuddy must be something that is appealing to children, and after
some market research, we have decided that option E1 would be a realistic shape. Our survey
results showed that many possible consumers liked the idea of having the product resemble a
stuffed animal. Option E3 also came up in our survey’s multiple times. Compared to the stuffed
animal, this option was not as popular but it is still a possible solution. Function E2 would not be
realistic because this option would give the consumer no way to connect with the product.

Possible Design Sketches:

2
Classification Scheme Feedback:

Our first take did not include any details on the possible shape for the product. Our new
revised classification scheme now addresses the shape of our product with three possible
options including a robot, stuffed animal, and bodiless box. Our original take also did not include
any design sketches. We have now incorporated design sketches into the classification scheme
to better visualize how the product will actually look.

3
Benefits of Mentor Insights:

To finalize our classification scheme we consulted our mentor Pieter Colenbrander. He

reaffirmed that our classification scheme will be an effective method because similar systems
are used in construction when designing building projects. Due to the insights of our
knowledgeable mentors, our group was able to better understand our product and adequately
prepare ourselves to enter this market. Equipped with the wisdom of industry professionals,
PERK Corp. is now properly prepared to take on the business world.