college of engineering white

Project 4: Climbing Wall

Abstract

The scope of this project involves designing and constructing a portable climbing structure to assist a child with redirecting dangerous sensory seeking behaviors in the home. The structure will be made for indoor use, and the materials used will comply with the comfort needs of the child. The portable nature of the structure must enabled it to be easily put away and stored when not in use. The design will keep the safety of the child paramount, and the needs of the family will be addressed in accordance with factors such as age and the specific behavioral activity of the child.

Frederick Heerdt, Carter Birdwell, Aiden Bull, Sean Borchers

Problem Statement

The client has commissioned a portable, indoor climbing wall/ climbing play set to help redirect dangerous sensory seeking behaviors in the home. More details coming soon.

Design Specifications

  • Indoor — The product must fit in a space less than [enter dimensions] and must be transportable through doors.
  • Portable — The product must be able to be “put away” when not being used, e.g. foldable.
  • Sensory Friendly — The product must help redirect dangerous sensory seeking behaviors in the home.
  • Safe — The product design and creation must adhere to professional standards of ethics and safety.

Background Research

Our preliminary research involved comparing previous designs of indoor climbing walls, and although results that matched our specific constraints were sparse, this was useful to help brainstorm ideas. Additionally, we knew that a previous group worked on a similar project (Project 6 Spring 2024), which gave us a basic idea of what we needed to make.

Regarding child climbing walls, we found that a common average height is about 8 feet for children ranging from ages 5 to 10. This served as a baseline for the maximum allowed height within our designs. We also considered the fact that being able to move the design through door openings in a house would increase the portability, so we would settle on a height of about 6 feet for each of our concept designs.

Concept Design 1

This design is an A-frame structure with one side as a climbing wall and the other as an optional net/ rope ladder. The base offers adjustability to change the climbing incline angle and can collapse to be easily moved and stored.

Concept Design 2

Similar to design 1, this design is an A-frame structure with one side as a climbing wall and the other as an optional net/ rope ladder. The base is foldable for easy storage and can lock in place for structural support.

Concept Design 3

This design includes two walls for the user to climb upward in between them. It starts flatly folded with a width of approximately 1 to 1.5 feet for the purpose of convenient storage. It can then expand and lock between two sets of bars on the top and bottom. The connection between the bars and joint as seen in the image would likely impliment the use of a universal joint.

The height is 6 feet, which is lower than the average height for a child climbing wall. The age of the child is unknown at this point, but assuming the average wingspan of an 8 year old child is used, the extended climbing width of the structure would be about 4.5 feet maximum. Due to the fact that the child may be younger and that the child would need room to bend their arms in order to climb, the actual design width was decreased by a foot to a range of 3 to 3.5 feet.

Selected Concept Design

Based on the chosen criteria, the design selected was Concept Design 1, the A-frame structure with an adjustable climbing angle. Of the three options, it had the best combination of portability, safety, cost, simplicity, creativity, and longevity. It scored particularly well with portability, but the safety of the current design iteration was not as favorable as the other options. Given the other advantages, we will further develop this structure to enable safer support for the user at the base.

Decision Matrix

Semester

2024 Fall