Back to projects

Domestic Waste Compactor

This project focused on developing a compact domestic waste compactor for paper, plastic and cans through a requirement-driven mechanical design workflow: market and requirement analysis, functional decomposition, concept generation, CAD architecture, component sizing, FEM validation and topology-oriented refinement.

Final CAD assembly of the domestic waste compactor

The early phase translated user needs and market gaps into a structured functional model. The goal was to understand how the product should work before choosing a specific solution. SFA, TFA and the Morphological Matrix were used to map the operating sequence, break down the main functions and compare different technical options.

Sequential Functional Analysis diagram
Sequential Functional Analysis Step-by-step map of the compactor operation.
Tree Functional Analysis diagram
Tree Functional Analysis Functions grouped by design area.
Morphological Matrix preview
Morphological Matrix Technical options compared function by function.

The final concept was selected from nine generated alternatives across different solution families. The decision was based on a quality/cost evaluation and Pareto/PDS reasoning, to support a more objective design decision.

The goal of this step was not to choose the most complex option, but to select the concept with the best balance between performance, feasibility and cost.

The chart shows the comparison that led to Concept 5 as the final design direction.

Quality-cost concept evaluation plot
Quality/cost comparison between concepts

The CAD architecture was organized around load paths, accessibility and modularity. After concept selection, the system was developed as a complete assembly, including structural elements, moving parts, actuator interfaces, fastening points and removable containers.

The model was used to check the overall layout, component placement and interactions between the main subsystems before moving to sizing and validation.

Final CAD assembly showing the frame and internal architecture
CAD assembly

The external panel was designed using surface modelling, not just as a closing cover but as part of the product layout.

The work focused on shaping a clean front surface, checking its continuity with zebra and porcupine analyses, and then adapting it to the final CAD assembly.

The frame was developed parametrically so that dimensions and interfaces could be adjusted without rebuilding the model from scratch. This made it easier to test different layouts while keeping the same structural logic.

Parametric frame variant one
Parametric frame variant two
Parametric frame variant three
Parametric frame variant four

Critical subsystems were sized using a safety-margin approach to verify their strength and stability under the expected loads and operating conditions.

The main checks included:

Compaction force

Can crushing was treated as a buckling-driven problem, then checked against experimental and commercial compaction data.

Linear actuator

Stroke, force capacity, rod stability and positioning accuracy were sized to avoid buckling and preserve controlled motion.

Compaction plate

The plate was dimensioned for multi-format contact and reinforced to distribute eccentric loads toward the frame.

Chambers and containers

Compaction, displacement and storage volumes were coordinated to keep waste handling modular and accessible.

Tubular frame

Posts and bracings were checked against compression and horizontal thrust while preserving a removable-container side.

Electrical and Control Integration

The emergency battery and control unit were considered as part of the mechanical system integration, not as an afterthought.

A FEM comparison was used to choose the material for the critical structural plate. Steel and aluminum were tested under the same load conditions. Aluminum reduced the weight, but showed higher displacement and a lower safety margin. For this reason, S235 steel was kept and the weight reduction was moved to the next step: topology optimization.

Aluminum

Aluminum Von Mises stress plot
Von Mises
Aluminum displacement plot
Displacement

Lower weight, but higher displacement and insufficient safety margin for this component.

Steel S235

Steel S235 Von Mises stress plot
Von Mises
Steel S235 displacement plot
Displacement

Higher safety margin and lower displacement under the same load case.

Topology optimization was used to understand where material could be removed from the steel plate without compromising its structural behaviour. The optimization result was not used directly as a final part. It was converted into a reference shape, rebuilt as a cleaner CAD geometry and then checked again with FEM.

Forty percent remaining mass topology optimization result
40% remaining massFirst optimization result.
Thirty percent remaining mass topology optimization result
30% remaining massMore aggressive material reduction.
Iso-surface result from density field
Iso-surfaceReference shape extracted from the optimization.
Final optimized CAD plate
CAD reconstructionClean CAD model rebuilt from the optimized shape.
Final optimized plate Von Mises stress plot
Final stress checkStress verification after reconstruction.
Final optimized plate displacement plot
Final displacement checkDisplacement verification after reconstruction.