In engineering, some projects begin with equations. Others begin with people.
Project group S1 and their clients standing in front of their project board at the Capstone Showcase.
Capstone Project Name:
Acting on Limitations: Improving Front Drive Power Assist Devices in Collaboration with Accessible Okanagan
Team Members:
- Ciana Dawydiuk-Clozza – Mechanical Engineering (Biomedical Concentration)
- Hussain Al-Digs – Electrical Engineering
- Sonia Mann – Mechanical Engineering (Biomedical Concentration)
- Brennen Topor – Mechanical Engineering (Biomedical Concentration)
- Deven Cresitelli – Mechanical Engineering
- Brett Stefan – Mechanical Engineering (Biomedical Concentration)
- Thorsten Krohn PLEX – (Person with lived experience)
For this Capstone team, it started with a question that refused to stay theoretical: what happens when a critical component fails in a device someone depends on every day? From there, their project, “Acting on Limitations: Improving Front Drive Power Assist Devices in Collaboration with Accessible Okanagan”, took shape not just as a design challenge, but as a responsibility.
Their work centers on a deceptively small component: the central attachment bracket in front-drive power assist devices. But its impact is anything but small. As the team explains, “The existing central bracket suffers from mechanical wear, instability, and eventual failure, which can compromise both the safety and usability of the device.”
And when that bracket fails, the consequences ripple outward. The device stops functioning as intended. Mobility is interrupted. Independence is compromised for vulnerable users that rely on it to go about day to day life.
Homing in on this problem, they explained their focus: “Our project focuses on redesigning the central attachment bracket…to improve durability, stability, and user safety.”
Designing with people, not just for them
The partnership with Accessible Okanagan grounded the project in reality from the start. More than a stakeholder, the organization acted as a bridge between design and lived experience, offering context that no textbook could replicate.
Accessible Okanagan is a non-profit organization that promotes inclusion and wheelchair-accessible activities and events throughout the Okanagan. As a community partner, the organization provided a connection between design and lived experience.
Through these interactions, the team began to see the problem differently, not as an isolated mechanical flaw, but as part of a broader accessibility gap.
“Connecting with our clients and hearing directly about their experiences highlighted the significance of the problem we were addressing,” said James Hektner of Accessible Okanagan.
“It was a pleasure working with such a dedicated and professional group of students. Their attentiveness, collaboration and commitment resulted in the development of a practical prototype that is ready to be tested in real-world settings,” said Hektner.
What emerged was a shift in perspective. The bracket was no longer just a point of failure. It became a point of intervention – one that could improve not only a device, but the daily experience of its users.
Rendering of the central attachment bracket.
The balancing act behind the build
If the problem was clear, the solution was anything but straightforward.
Engineering, in practice, rarely offers clean trade-offs. Strength competes with usability. Durability complicates manufacturability. Cost shapes all those aforementioned categories. The team found themselves navigating all of it at once.
“One of the main challenges was balancing all of the factors that influenced the design, including strength, durability, manufacturability, cost, and usability,” the team explains.
The process became iterative by necessity. Ideas were tested, challenged, refined, and sometimes abandoned. Progress came not from individual breakthroughs, but from collective scrutiny.
“Being able to sit down as a team to talk through ideas and constructively challenge each other’s assumptions ultimately helped us overcome this.”
In that sense, the technical solution is inseparable from the way it was built: collaboratively, critically, and with a willingness to rethink.
Simplicity as a design philosophy
While many engineering solutions trend toward complexity, this team moved in the opposite direction.
Accessibility, for them, did not end with the user. It extended to the installation process, the sourcing of parts, and the overall usability of the design. “Our solution improves the device’s reliability while keeping the design simple, durable, and cost-effective,” they note.
The result is intentionally straightforward to reflect the use case of its users. Components can be easily sourced through the open-source design. Assembly requires minimal tools. Installation mirrors a plug-and-play system.
“Users can remove the original bracket and install our product with minimal tools or technical expertise.”
It is a quiet, yet loud kind of innovation – one that prioritizes ease over complexity.
Rendered exploded assembly of the central attachment bracket.
The team behind the work
The group itself reflects an interdisciplinary approach, combining expertise from electrical and mechanical engineering, with several members bringing a biomedical focus through the biomedical concentration within mechanical engineering at UBCO. Their shared foundation in systems analysis, mechanical design, and human-centered engineering shaped both the process and the outcome.
But beyond disciplines and technical skills, what stands out is the way they worked together.
“Our team dynamic was really special. We all brought a unique skill set to the project and were able to challenge and support each other in a really positive way.”
Even moments of levity found their way into the process. Their team captain, Ciana, had a drive that earned her the nickname “President Business” from the LEGO movie, a running joke that doubled as a morale boost during demanding phases of the project.
Learning beyond the formula sheet
Perhaps the most defining takeaway from their experience is how different real-world engineering feels compared to the classroom.
“We were surprised by how iterative and non-linear real-world engineering design is compared to academic problems,” they admit.
In lectures, problems resolve cleanly into one box. In practice, they evolve into multiple boxes. The team points to a shift in mindset as their most valuable outcome: “the ability to translate real-world problems into practical engineering solutions while balancing constraints.”
It is a skill that sits at the core of engineering, and one that can only be learned over and over by doing it over and over.
Stress simulation of the central attachment bracket.
Building something that lasts
While many projects end with a prototype or business plan, this team’s vision extends further – not through commercialization, but through accessibility of the solution itself.
The goal of this design was to create an open-source, accessible solution that can benefit the individuals who rely on these devices most.
There is something altruistic and deliberate in the choice of impact they are aiming for – an impact that is scalable not through profit, but through reach of its users.
And in that sense, the project lives up to its title. It acts on both engineering and practical limitations to reshape them into a reliable, technical product that is ultimately more human since it began with people.