Inclusive
Design
HCDE 419 🔗
|
SALMON Product Proposal
Paisley Maschmeier
Undergrad in HCDE University of Washington |
ABSTRACT
For able-bodied people, e-scooters can be a great way to commute. But for some who are disabled, e-scooters can be just another aspect of public life that is entirely inaccessible. The SALMON (Scooter that A Lot More peOple caN use) is an alternative to the traditional e-scooter that was designed over a series of codesign workshops, working directly with members of the disabled community. SALMON is the next step for inclusive micro-transportation.
POSITIONALITY
Knowing the identities of designers and where they stand in relation to their work is important for ensuring that a product will meet the needs of the intended audience.
Paisley Maschmeier (he/she/they)
Organizer of the codesign workshops and the product design engineer who self-identifies as a “half Mexican, Gender Nonconforming, Disabled student who is white passing, cis passing, and sometimes uses a mobility aide.” Paisley studies undergraduate Human Centered Design and Engineering at the University of Washington in Seattle.
Mina (she/her)
Co-designer who self-identifies as a “visibly Muslim, Pakistani, first-[generation] HCDE student who is Queer, Disabled, and a researcher.” Mina studies undergraduate Human Centered Design and Engineering at the University of Washington in Seattle.
Ishan (they/them)
Co-designer who self-identifies as a “South Asian, Neurodivergent, Cancer Surviving, Gender Fluid ‘Chaos Gremlin’ with Accessibility Needs”. Ishan studies undergraduate Astronomy at the University of Washington in Seattle.
INTRODUCTION
Networks of micro-vehicles (single occupancy vehicles owned by companies like Lime or Bird) have become increasingly popular in large cities over the last few years. In Seattle, one can easily find Lime electric scooter riders (or e-scooter riders) in the street, on sidewalks, and in parks. Someone can rent out one of these e-scooters (referred to as “public e-scooters”) by downloading the company’s app and paying a fee.
BACKGROUND
For able-bodied people, public e-scooters can be a great way to commute around their city. E-scooters are not bound by normal traffic like cars or even bicycles, and a driver’s license is not required to use one. But for some people who are disabled, public e-scooters are just another aspect of life that is entirely inaccessible and at times can make daily activities even harder than they already are. In response, the proposed is an alternative to the classic e-scooter called the SALMON (Scooter that A Lot More peOple caN use).
THE PROBLEM
E-scooters require the ability to stand for extended periods of time, firmly grasp the handlebars, and maintain balance, all while steering and accelerating. Many in the disabled community are unable to fulfill these requirements or do not want to risk injury even if they technically could. As Mina pointed out during one of her co-design workshops, “I think the reason why I might be a little apprehensive about these micro-vehicles is because those minor scrapes or cuts or whatever, I think for someone who is able-bodied that is not a big deal. [But] when I think of my own ability and I think of getting hurt, even in a minor way… it could throw a whole week off. Like if I have a cut on my leg I all of a sudden can’t inject my medication where I’m supposed to.”
Many public e-scooters do not have docking stations, meaning that the rider can leave the e-scooter wherever they want. Unfortunately, many users choose to leave their scooters in the middle of sidewalks or on curb cutouts. This can make public spaces inaccessible for some disabled people, especially those who use a mobility aide, such as a walker or wheelchair (Accessibility and Crowded Sidewalks, 14). Blocking sidewalks also creates barriers for people with luggage, strollers, carts, or who are larger than average.
The user is also required to download an app to use public e-scooters and use a smartphone to virtually unlock the e-scooter. This can be a barrier for many people who do not have access to a smartphone or who do not feel comfortable taking their phone out at the time. All of these issues mean that only a small group of those who want to use public e-scooters are actually able to do so.
THE SOLUTION
While companies have attempted to make public e-scooters more inclusive to different people’s abilities, none have found great success. An example of this is how in 2020, Lime piloted an “accessible e-scooter” (Figure 1) in San Francisco and Pittsburg. The company chose not to move forward with the design, unsurprising to Ishan and Mina. According to Ishan, “It doesn’t feel like I’d be able to balance on that… I think it’d make balance issues harder.” Mina shared the same sentiment, stating, “I’m not sure what disability this was designed for.”
For able-bodied people, e-scooters can be a great way to commute. But for some who are disabled, e-scooters can be just another aspect of public life that is entirely inaccessible. The SALMON (Scooter that A Lot More peOple caN use) is an alternative to the traditional e-scooter that was designed over a series of codesign workshops, working directly with members of the disabled community. SALMON is the next step for inclusive micro-transportation.
POSITIONALITY
Knowing the identities of designers and where they stand in relation to their work is important for ensuring that a product will meet the needs of the intended audience.
Paisley Maschmeier (he/she/they)
Organizer of the codesign workshops and the product design engineer who self-identifies as a “half Mexican, Gender Nonconforming, Disabled student who is white passing, cis passing, and sometimes uses a mobility aide.” Paisley studies undergraduate Human Centered Design and Engineering at the University of Washington in Seattle.
Mina (she/her)
Co-designer who self-identifies as a “visibly Muslim, Pakistani, first-[generation] HCDE student who is Queer, Disabled, and a researcher.” Mina studies undergraduate Human Centered Design and Engineering at the University of Washington in Seattle.
Ishan (they/them)
Co-designer who self-identifies as a “South Asian, Neurodivergent, Cancer Surviving, Gender Fluid ‘Chaos Gremlin’ with Accessibility Needs”. Ishan studies undergraduate Astronomy at the University of Washington in Seattle.
INTRODUCTION
Networks of micro-vehicles (single occupancy vehicles owned by companies like Lime or Bird) have become increasingly popular in large cities over the last few years. In Seattle, one can easily find Lime electric scooter riders (or e-scooter riders) in the street, on sidewalks, and in parks. Someone can rent out one of these e-scooters (referred to as “public e-scooters”) by downloading the company’s app and paying a fee.
BACKGROUND
For able-bodied people, public e-scooters can be a great way to commute around their city. E-scooters are not bound by normal traffic like cars or even bicycles, and a driver’s license is not required to use one. But for some people who are disabled, public e-scooters are just another aspect of life that is entirely inaccessible and at times can make daily activities even harder than they already are. In response, the proposed is an alternative to the classic e-scooter called the SALMON (Scooter that A Lot More peOple caN use).
THE PROBLEM
E-scooters require the ability to stand for extended periods of time, firmly grasp the handlebars, and maintain balance, all while steering and accelerating. Many in the disabled community are unable to fulfill these requirements or do not want to risk injury even if they technically could. As Mina pointed out during one of her co-design workshops, “I think the reason why I might be a little apprehensive about these micro-vehicles is because those minor scrapes or cuts or whatever, I think for someone who is able-bodied that is not a big deal. [But] when I think of my own ability and I think of getting hurt, even in a minor way… it could throw a whole week off. Like if I have a cut on my leg I all of a sudden can’t inject my medication where I’m supposed to.”
Many public e-scooters do not have docking stations, meaning that the rider can leave the e-scooter wherever they want. Unfortunately, many users choose to leave their scooters in the middle of sidewalks or on curb cutouts. This can make public spaces inaccessible for some disabled people, especially those who use a mobility aide, such as a walker or wheelchair (Accessibility and Crowded Sidewalks, 14). Blocking sidewalks also creates barriers for people with luggage, strollers, carts, or who are larger than average.
The user is also required to download an app to use public e-scooters and use a smartphone to virtually unlock the e-scooter. This can be a barrier for many people who do not have access to a smartphone or who do not feel comfortable taking their phone out at the time. All of these issues mean that only a small group of those who want to use public e-scooters are actually able to do so.
THE SOLUTION
While companies have attempted to make public e-scooters more inclusive to different people’s abilities, none have found great success. An example of this is how in 2020, Lime piloted an “accessible e-scooter” (Figure 1) in San Francisco and Pittsburg. The company chose not to move forward with the design, unsurprising to Ishan and Mina. According to Ishan, “It doesn’t feel like I’d be able to balance on that… I think it’d make balance issues harder.” Mina shared the same sentiment, stating, “I’m not sure what disability this was designed for.”
Figure 1. Black scooter with a bicycle seat standing upright in a city street (Lime Debuts Accessible Scooter)
|
This failure on Lime’s part shows that there is a market need for accessible public e-scooters. That is where SALMON steps in. SALMON is an alternative to the typical public e-scooter that puts the needs of disabled people first and provides a safe way for those with certain accessibility needs to navigate the bustling of city life. This e-scooter was designed through a series of codesign workshops, working directly with members of the disabled community. Main differences between SALMON and traditional public e-scooters include 4 wheels for better balance, adjustable handlebar height, and multiple methods of steering.
|
METHOD
Research was performed by holding two codesign workshops over the span of two weeks. Mina and Ishan were selected as participants through convenience sampling. Mina and Ishan participated in the first session separately, and then together for the second. As compensation for their time, Mina and Ishan each received home-made candles.
Session 1
The goal of the first session was to brainstorm ideas for a more inclusive micro-vehicle that can fulfill the same purpose as a normal public e-scooter. Each session began with a short introduction to the public e-scooter and the design prompt: If a micro-vehicle was made for you, what would it look like? The participants were also presented with different types of micro-vehicles for inspiration (Figure 2), though it was made clear to participants that they did not need to base their design off any single micro-vehicle. Ideas were recorded through sketches and audio/video recordings.
Research was performed by holding two codesign workshops over the span of two weeks. Mina and Ishan were selected as participants through convenience sampling. Mina and Ishan participated in the first session separately, and then together for the second. As compensation for their time, Mina and Ishan each received home-made candles.
Session 1
The goal of the first session was to brainstorm ideas for a more inclusive micro-vehicle that can fulfill the same purpose as a normal public e-scooter. Each session began with a short introduction to the public e-scooter and the design prompt: If a micro-vehicle was made for you, what would it look like? The participants were also presented with different types of micro-vehicles for inspiration (Figure 2), though it was made clear to participants that they did not need to base their design off any single micro-vehicle. Ideas were recorded through sketches and audio/video recordings.
|
Session 2
The goal of the second session was to agree on specific features that SALMON should have. Mina and Ishan each had the opportunity to present their ideas to the other participant and discuss which features they would both like to include. The workshop organizer had a more active role in this session than in the last. Instead of merely asking questions, they were able to present their own findings from each participant and discuss their own opinions and ideas for SALMON. In the end, all three had to agree on a feature for it to be carried forward into the sketching and prototyping phase. |
Figure 2. Drawing of various micro-vehicles on a blank background (Safe Micromobility, 33)
|
Figure 3. Mina's Co-design Session 1 Sketches on white a background
|
FINDINGS
Session 1 Safety was Mina’s greatest concern throughout the co-design workshop, as minor scrapes and bumps can be detrimental to the health of a disabled person. Mina proposed that SALMON should have a sturdy base with wide wheels. That way, no balancing would be required of the rider, reducing injury due to falling. Mina focused primarily on designing seated micro-vehicles, in some sketches complete with armrests, seatbelts, and an overhead enclosure to protect from harsh weather. (Mina quickly realized that she was designing a car.) |
Mina has tendonitis in her hands, which makes it difficult to grasp some objects, as well as make the wide movements necessary to steer a traditional e-scooter. Because of this, Mina recommended the use of a joystick to steer the SALMON as an alternative.
Mina was very excited at the prospect of SALMON having some element of navigation, such that the user can tell SALMON where they want to go, and SALMON would give them directions similar to Google Maps. As someone with multiple sclerosis, which causes temporary relapses where she loses her vision, Mina thought the navigation features should be usable through voice control and audio instructions, perhaps via personal Bluetooth headphones.
Mina was very excited at the prospect of SALMON having some element of navigation, such that the user can tell SALMON where they want to go, and SALMON would give them directions similar to Google Maps. As someone with multiple sclerosis, which causes temporary relapses where she loses her vision, Mina thought the navigation features should be usable through voice control and audio instructions, perhaps via personal Bluetooth headphones.
|
Storability was Ishan’s greatest concern throughout the codesign workshop. An important feature that came out of this discussion was the ability for SALMON to fold into something that could be stored on the side of the sidewalk or up against buildings. That way SALMON’s presence would not hinder disabled people’s ability to comfortably use the sidewalk.
Ishan focused entirely on designing a standing micro-vehicle, as they were concerned that a seated micro-vehicle would not be able to account for the great variance in human size. Ishan recommended that SALMON have a very sturdy and solid base that did not require balancing, as well as an alternative form of steering as supposed to tradition axil steering. |
Figure 4. Ishan's Co-design Session 1 Sketches on a white background
|
To achieve this, Ishan suggested the use of Mecanum wheels, wheels that do not need to twist side to side to make turns but instead spin in different directions and at different speeds in order to make turns. This would help ensure the stability of SALMON.
Ishan also brought up how aesthetics play an important role in the transportation people chose to use. Disabled people often times will negatively stand out in crowds, perhaps due to a mobility aid or unusual physical characteristics. It is important that whatever e-scooter alternative is created does not make the person using it look, as Ishan put it, “dorky”. That would only cause disabled people to become further ostracized.
Session 2
At the beginning of session 2, it was decided by all participants that SALMON would be a standing micro-vehicle. Once that was determined, the workshop organizer presented four design requirements for SALMON that Mina and Ishan had communicated were of top priority.
Ishan also brought up how aesthetics play an important role in the transportation people chose to use. Disabled people often times will negatively stand out in crowds, perhaps due to a mobility aid or unusual physical characteristics. It is important that whatever e-scooter alternative is created does not make the person using it look, as Ishan put it, “dorky”. That would only cause disabled people to become further ostracized.
Session 2
At the beginning of session 2, it was decided by all participants that SALMON would be a standing micro-vehicle. Once that was determined, the workshop organizer presented four design requirements for SALMON that Mina and Ishan had communicated were of top priority.
- Accessibility – that using SALMON is not only possible for the person, but realistic and easy to do.
- Safety – that steps are taken to prevent the user from falling off SALMON, such as removing the need for active balancing.
- Navigation – that the user can easily follow a map while riding SALMON, being given both audio and visual directions.
- Storability – that SALMON is easy to keep on the edge of sidewalks, not blocking anyone’s path.
Figure 5. Co-design Session 2 Sketches on a grey background
To address general accessibility, it was agreed that SALMON should utilize a personalized pin code that each user can use to unlock it, as supposed to using their smartphone. The pin pad should have a tangible surface with actual buttons, for visually impaired users.
It was also agreed that SALMON should have two separate methods of steering, one being traditional turning of handlebars to steer and the other being the use of a small, flat joystick that can be operated with the user’s thumb.
To address safety, it was decided that SALMON utilize a four-wheel design, as well as the Mecanum wheels recommended by Ishan. This would prevent the need for the rider to actively balance while steering, reducing the risk that the user might fall and hurt themself.
It was also agreed that SALMON should have two separate methods of steering, one being traditional turning of handlebars to steer and the other being the use of a small, flat joystick that can be operated with the user’s thumb.
To address safety, it was decided that SALMON utilize a four-wheel design, as well as the Mecanum wheels recommended by Ishan. This would prevent the need for the rider to actively balance while steering, reducing the risk that the user might fall and hurt themself.
Figure 6. SALMON Cardboard Prototype standing upright in a room
|
To address navigation, it was initially thought that SALMON would have a small touchscreen that could show a map and give directions, but it was agreed that the touchscreen would get graffitied on immediately. Instead, the co-designers decided that SAMLON should have a phone holder which would allow the user to utilize their own navigation methods. While this is less accessible than a built-in screen, it seemed to be the best option given that SALMON is meant to replace the public e-scooter, which must sustain significant damage. To address storability, it was decided that the handlebar stem of SALMON be able to fold over just like a regular e-scooter. Conversely, most public e-scooters do not have any folding or storing capabilities. |
DESIGNING, SKETCHING, AND PROTOTYPING
After finishing the research, the design engineer opted to first create a life-sized cardboard prototype of SALMON in order to get a sense for proper dimensions. It should be noted that the design engineer is smaller than the average human, so all dimensions of the following sketches and prototypes are placeholders and exact measurements will require further testing.
After finishing the research, the design engineer opted to first create a life-sized cardboard prototype of SALMON in order to get a sense for proper dimensions. It should be noted that the design engineer is smaller than the average human, so all dimensions of the following sketches and prototypes are placeholders and exact measurements will require further testing.
|
PlatformThe platform of SALMON is a 2ftx2ft square with rounded corners that allows someone to stand normally while riding. Wheels are attached to the underside of the platform and placed as far apart from each other as possible for maximum stability.
Steering SALMON has two forms of moving and steering available for users, named Gear 1 and Gear 2. Gear 1 allows the user to hold down on the acceleration lever to move the e-scooter forward and turn the handlebars side-to-side to steer. An acceleration lever will be located on both the right and left handlebars, though only one will be operational at any given time. Gear 2 allows the user to accelerate and steer by use of a joystick that can be controlled by the user’s thumb. A joystick will be located on both the left and right handlebars, though only one will be operational at any given time. |
Figure 7. Sketch of SALMON as seen from above with dimensions
|
Figure 8. Sketch of Center Console as seen from above
|
Center Console
In between the handlebars is a sealed membrane keypad that controls the settings on SALMON. The keypad includes number 0 through 9 for each user to input their personal pin, as well as Start/Stop ride buttons, First/Second Gear buttons, and Left/Right hand buttons. Buttons glow a certain color to signify which settings of SALMON are currently active, and all buttons on the center console are locked when the wheels of SALMON are actively moving. |
|
Handlebars
The height of the handlebars can be adjusted by use of a turn knob located on the handlebar stem. Turning the knob one way increases the height of the handlebars and turning the other way decreases the height of the handlebars. In between the handlebars is the center console to the left and the phone holder to the right. |
Figure 9. Sketch of SALMON handlebars as seen from head on, demonstrating the adjustable height feature
|
Figure 10. Sketch of SALMON as see from the side, demonstrating the foldability and storability feature
|
Folding and Storing
The handlebar stem of SALMON is able to fold over as to be parallel with the platform. From there the micro-vehicle can be propped up on one side and leaned against a building or wall, instead of laying in the middle of pedestrian pathways. The SALMON rider could do this upon finishing their ride, or could a helpful passerby who supports the disabled community. |
CONCLUSION
Over the past few years, large cities have seen great progress in the development of their public micro-mobility programs. But it’s not real progress unless everyone is able to participate. While by no means can everyone ride SALMON, it opens the door for many more users than current public e-scooters as it addresses four major concerns held by some in the disabled community: Accessibility, Safety, Navigation, and Storability. SALMON takes into account the needs of disabled people in ways that public e-scooter companies like Lime and Bird have failed to. SALMON is the future of inclusive micro-transportation.
REFERENCES
SUPPLEMENTARY REFLECTION
As someone with difficulty walking, I absolutely love the idea of micro-transportation. Anything that can turn my 20-minute walk into a 10-minute ride is extremely beneficial to me. But as of yet I have been unable to find a micro-vehicle that is conducive to my abilities. So that was the inspiration for this whole project.
Going into this, I was determined to do it the right way. I wanted to hold co-design workshops, not interviews, I wanted to create an environment where Mina or Ishan was the expert and I was learning, and I wanted to compensate them fairly. (Compensation was actually a huge thing for me. It is unethical to expect oppressed people to fix problems their oppressors created without getting anything in return.) And I’m proud of myself for being able to carry all that out.
I think if I’d gone about this using traditional user research methods of interview then prototype then interview and back and forth until I felt like stopping, a lot would have gotten lost in translation. Because I actively designed with the participants, it removed me as the middleman and allowed their ideas to go straight from their heads to the sketch. It allowed me to act as more of a mediator than an interpreter, encouraging ideas without accidentally warping anyone’s words.
The second co-design session was absolutely essential, through I think many researchers may not have included it. I didn’t want me to have the final say in regard to design features, I wanted it to be a mutual agreement between all three of us. Coming together a second time allowed for this to happen.
While Ishan and Mina had a lot of overlapping ideas that all came to fruition during the second session, they actually went in very different directions initially. While Mina entirely abandoned designing a standing micro-vehicle, Ishan focused almost entirely on that. This was really helpful because I got to see two very different designs for the same initial concept: a more inclusive micro-vehicle.
Looking back, there were times I was falling into the universal design trap. I wish I had defined my user more before beginning the workshops. While I tried to make it clear that the intended user was themselves, of course Ishan and Mina were concerned about other people’s abilities as well. Even now, I think it’s a bit unclear who SALMON is specifically targeted as besides the three of us and “disabled people” in general. If I had more time I’d definitely want to create some user personas to get a better idea of the spectrum of who is capable of using SALMON and how different design features allow for that. Overall, I’m proud of my work and I think this design proposal turned out really well.
Over the past few years, large cities have seen great progress in the development of their public micro-mobility programs. But it’s not real progress unless everyone is able to participate. While by no means can everyone ride SALMON, it opens the door for many more users than current public e-scooters as it addresses four major concerns held by some in the disabled community: Accessibility, Safety, Navigation, and Storability. SALMON takes into account the needs of disabled people in ways that public e-scooter companies like Lime and Bird have failed to. SALMON is the future of inclusive micro-transportation.
REFERENCES
- Cynthia L. Bennett, Emily E. Ackerman, Bonnie Fan, Jeffrey P. Bigham, Patrick Carrington, and Sarah E. Fox. 2021. (2021, June 28 – July 2). Accessibility and The Crowded Sidewalk: Micromobility’s Impact on Public Space. In the Proceedings of DIS’21: ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~jbigham/pubs/pdfs/2021/crowded-sidewalk.pdf
- International Transport Forum. (2020, February 17). Safe Micromobility. International Transport Forum Policy Papers OECD iLibrary. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/0b98fac1-en.pdf?expires=1668308865
- Cha, J. (2021). Micro-wheelchair: assistive micro-mobility design for people with mild physical disabilities [Master’s Thesis, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology]. Scholar Works. https://scholarworks.unist.ac.kr/handle/201301/50548
- Aman, J. J. C., Zakhem, M., & Smith-Colin, J. (2021). Towards Equity in Micromobility: Spatial Analysis of Access to Bikes and Scooters amongst Disadvantaged Populations. Sustainability, 13(21), 11856. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111856
- Wilson, M. (2020, January 13). E-scooters are leaving people with disabilities behind. Lime wants to fix that. Fast Company. Retrieved November 20, 2022, from https://www.fastcompany.com/90450211/e-scooters-are-leaving-people-with-disabilities-behind-lime-wants-to-fix-that
SUPPLEMENTARY REFLECTION
As someone with difficulty walking, I absolutely love the idea of micro-transportation. Anything that can turn my 20-minute walk into a 10-minute ride is extremely beneficial to me. But as of yet I have been unable to find a micro-vehicle that is conducive to my abilities. So that was the inspiration for this whole project.
Going into this, I was determined to do it the right way. I wanted to hold co-design workshops, not interviews, I wanted to create an environment where Mina or Ishan was the expert and I was learning, and I wanted to compensate them fairly. (Compensation was actually a huge thing for me. It is unethical to expect oppressed people to fix problems their oppressors created without getting anything in return.) And I’m proud of myself for being able to carry all that out.
I think if I’d gone about this using traditional user research methods of interview then prototype then interview and back and forth until I felt like stopping, a lot would have gotten lost in translation. Because I actively designed with the participants, it removed me as the middleman and allowed their ideas to go straight from their heads to the sketch. It allowed me to act as more of a mediator than an interpreter, encouraging ideas without accidentally warping anyone’s words.
The second co-design session was absolutely essential, through I think many researchers may not have included it. I didn’t want me to have the final say in regard to design features, I wanted it to be a mutual agreement between all three of us. Coming together a second time allowed for this to happen.
While Ishan and Mina had a lot of overlapping ideas that all came to fruition during the second session, they actually went in very different directions initially. While Mina entirely abandoned designing a standing micro-vehicle, Ishan focused almost entirely on that. This was really helpful because I got to see two very different designs for the same initial concept: a more inclusive micro-vehicle.
Looking back, there were times I was falling into the universal design trap. I wish I had defined my user more before beginning the workshops. While I tried to make it clear that the intended user was themselves, of course Ishan and Mina were concerned about other people’s abilities as well. Even now, I think it’s a bit unclear who SALMON is specifically targeted as besides the three of us and “disabled people” in general. If I had more time I’d definitely want to create some user personas to get a better idea of the spectrum of who is capable of using SALMON and how different design features allow for that. Overall, I’m proud of my work and I think this design proposal turned out really well.
