Product Design & Development — QuickPark

Product Planning

Product planning established the foundation for the entire design effort. The team began with a market analysis benchmarking four competing solutions — Park Plus / Wohr automated systems, LAZ Parking's app-based management, standard garages, and street meters — scoring each against convenience, cost, availability, and safety. The central design problem was defined as: "Design a parking solution that optimizes existing spaces in congested urban areas, prioritizing convenience, affordability, and safety for drivers while maximizing occupancy and profitability for operators."

Customer needs identification drew on six in-depth interviews with long-term Los Angeles residents. A key finding: 62% of people spend 10–20 minutes searching for parking. 17 customer needs were distilled and ranked by importance, spanning locating a spot quickly, affordable pricing, seamless mobile payment, clean facilities, advance reservations, safety, emergency access, and integration with public transit.

Requirements development translated those needs into 14 measurable engineering metrics with marginal and ideal targets — for example:

• Time to locate spot: <3 min (marginal), <2 min (ideal)
• Reservation success rate: >80% marginal, 90% ideal
• Lift speed: 2 m/s marginal, 0.1 m/s (controlled) ideal
• Emergency response time: <60 s marginal, <30 s ideal
• Parking space width: 2.4 m marginal, 2.5 m ideal
• Customer support response: <5 min marginal, <3 min ideal

Functional Design

Functional design abstracted the parking problem into energy, mass, and signal flows using an EMS (Energy-Mass-Signal) diagram covering three operational phases: Setup, Usage, and Wrap-Up.

A Function Structure Diagram (FSD) — iterated five times through the design process — mapped every input and output transformation the system must perform: receiving a vehicle, measuring its dimensions, assigning a floor and spot, transporting via hydraulic lift, guiding the driver to an exit elevator, and managing all associated signal flows (parking location, secure-entry codes, space-occupied status, QR identifiers). The FSD served as the blueprint linking customer needs to physical subsystems.

Conceptual Design & Concept Evaluation

A Concept Combination Table generated design variants by mixing solution principles across key functions (security, user interface, vehicle measurement, allocation logic, transportation method). Five distinct variants emerged:

• Design 1 — Low-Cost: basic app + traditional ramps, minimal automation
• Design 2 — Fully Automated: full sensor suite + hydraulic lifts + AI allocation
• Design 3 — Labor-Intensive: valet-based, maximum human involvement
• Design 4 — AI-Powered Autonomous: self-driving vehicle integration
• Design 5 — Long-Term Use: modular, expandable subscription-focused structure

Concept evaluation used a two-stage process: a Concept Screening Matrix eliminated weaker options, and a Concept Scoring Matrix weighted 14 customer criteria to rank finalists. The hybrid Design 1 + 2 combination scored highest (4.66 / 5) — combining a mobile app and hydraulic lifts while remaining cost-feasible.

Feasibility was assessed via Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scoring, confirming that all key technologies (hydraulic lifts, QR scanning, mobile apps, CCTV) are at TRL 8–9 — mature and ready for deployment.

Embodiment Design

Embodiment design decomposed the selected concept into six functional clusters and defined all interfaces between them:

• Security Chunk: CCTV cameras, video analytics, on-site guards, entry gate
• User Interface Chunk: display kiosks, ticket printer, QR code scanner, mobile app
• Logic Chunk: vehicle sensors + cameras for size measurement, Information Storage File (ISF), parking allocation algorithm
• Drive Path Chunk: one-way lanes, lift staging area, per-floor navigation
• Automated Lift Chunk: two hydraulic lifts (7,000 lb capacity each), gated boundary, steel-beam guide rails
• User Exit Chunk: wide elevators, escalators, secured exit door

Layout drawings (iterated three times) placed the structure at 220 ft × 50 ft. Vehicle floors are segregated by type — compact vehicles together, SUVs together — increasing overall capacity by an estimated 20–25%. Long-term parkers are placed on upper floors; short-term near exits. A Bill of Materials covered structural concrete, hydraulic lift hardware, LED lighting (720 kW facility load), rooftop solar, and EV charging stations. Average vehicle assumptions: 4,904 lb weight, 14.7 ft length, 6.8 ft width.

Product Evaluation

P-diagrams (Parameter Diagrams) were constructed for the two major subsystems — the hydraulic lift and the mobile app / allocation logic — mapping control signals, noise factors (vehicle weight variance, network latency, emergency events), and response metrics (lift cycle time, allocation accuracy, user wait time).

Performance modeling verified that two hydraulic lifts operating in parallel can service the expected peak demand without a queue exceeding the 3-minute target. Lift energy consumption was estimated at ~200 kW/day for both units combined, offset by rooftop solar generation. Robustness and reliability were evaluated against noise factors: backup generators cover power failures; treated-steel reinforcements handle weather exposure; redundant surveillance covers camera blind spots.

Detail Design & Design for X

Detail design applied a full Design for X (DFX) analysis across six dimensions:

• Design for Manufacturing (DFM): Primary structure in reinforced concrete with standardized precast components; auxiliary hardware uses eco-friendly/recyclable materials; solar panels and LED systems sourced for low manufacturing impact.
• Design for Assembly (DFA): Modular construction phasing; standardized bolt patterns and fittings throughout; maintenance-accessible placement of lift components and electrical panels.
• Design for Cost (DFC): High-cost items (hydraulic lifts, app development) justified by long-term ROI and reduced labor; solar panels reduce ~30% of operational electricity costs.
• Design for Reliability (DFR): Treated-steel reinforcements, weather-resistant coatings, backup generator with automatic transfer switch, redundant camera coverage.
• Design for Environment (DFE): Rooftop solar array, LED lighting throughout, recyclable steel framing, reduced vehicle emissions from faster parking.
• Design for Ergonomics: Intuitive app UI with accessibility mode (large fonts, voice commands); wide elevators compliant with ADA; anti-slip staircases with handrails; clear wayfinding signage at every decision point.

Final layout drawings and a complete Bill of Materials were produced. The Design Portfolio Entry (pages 56–63) compiled the full design narrative in condensed form. A final functional and performance evaluation confirmed all 14 engineering metrics were met at or above marginal targets, with eight of fourteen reaching ideal values.