The Stand That Would Not Fit
A two-person design-and-build firm in Wellington has a contract to supply 12 public bicycle repair stands for a council-owned coastal trail. The budget is NZ$9,500 for all 12, installed. Each stand must hold a pump, a tethered multi-tool, a 15 mm pedal spanner, and a QR-code sign linking to a repair guide. The council's asset team requires a 10-year structural life in a salt-spray environment and low maintenance; the trail trust wants bright colours and a tool inventory that is hard to steal. The firm's CNC router bed is 900 mm × 600 mm, but the current top plate is a single 1,150 mm aluminium piece. Prototype 1 was mild steel with a powder coat; after three weeks of salt-spray testing, rust appeared at the welds. The local anodiser quotes five weeks for a batch, and the install date is nine weeks away.
1. Choose a material and finish for the stand and justify it against the 10-year coastal life and the $9,500 budget.
Read the worked answer
The stand has to survive salt spray for 10 years, but the budget is only $791 per unit, so the material choice must be driven by life-cycle cost, not just purchase price.
Mild steel with powder coat is out: the salt-spray test showed weld rust at three weeks, and a coating scratch will create a corrosion cell. 316 stainless would give the best corrosion resistance but is likely to exceed the budget once fabricated, and it still needs isolating washers against other metals.
A realistic choice is hot-dip galvanised steel, fabricated and welded first and galvanised after, with a marine-grade powder coat or a two-pack epoxy on top. The zinc sacrificially protects cut edges and weld zones, which is exactly where the prototype failed. Alternatively, 6061-T6 aluminium with a fully anodised finish and stainless fasteners isolated with nylon washers would meet the life requirement and reduce mass, but the anodiser's five-week turnaround must be booked immediately to meet the nine-week install.
I would select galvanised steel with a powder coat if the anodising slot cannot be secured, because it is more repairable in the field: a damaged area can be touched up with a zinc-rich coating. The decision should be recorded against the council's 10-year life and low-maintenance requirements, and a sample should go back into salt-spray testing before the full batch is ordered.
2. The 1,150 mm top plate does not fit the CNC bed. Evaluate the options: redesign into two pieces, outsource, or change the plate size.
Read the worked answer
The 1,150 mm top plate cannot be cut on a 900 mm × 600 mm bed, so the firm has three real options.
Redesign into two pieces: split the plate into two parts with a lap joint and a backing plate, or a bolt-on 250 mm extension. This keeps production in-house and costs little, but it creates a joint that can trap water, loosen under vibration, and become a corrosion site - exactly the kind of detail that undermines a 10-year coastal life. It also adds assembly time across 12 units.
Outsource the one-piece plate: a local fabricator with a larger bed can cut or fold the plate, probably for $30–$60 per unit. At 12 units that is $360–$720, which may fit the $9,500 budget. The one-piece plate is stronger and has no joint, so it is the lowest-risk technical option if the lead time is three weeks or less.
Shrink the plate to 900 mm: this is the cheapest, but it changes the function. A shorter plate may not hold a bike frame securely or may reduce the stability of the stand, so it should only be considered if the stand is redesigned around it.
My recommendation is to get a firm quote for outsource cutting first, because it preserves the design intent. If the quote breaks the budget, redesign with a bolted extension and test the joint for stiffness and salt-spray corrosion before committing.
3. Explain how the firm should deal with the trail trust's request for a hard-to-steal tool inventory while meeting the council's maintenance requirement.
Read the worked answer
The trust wants tools that are hard to steal; the council wants low maintenance. These pull in opposite directions: a tool that is permanently welded or cabled on is hard to steal but also hard to replace when it breaks.
The firm should design a modular tool cassette that locks into the stand with a security fastener, rather than tethering each tool separately. The cassette can hold standard tools - including the 15 mm pedal spanner, which is the highest-theft item - and can be swapped as a unit by a council technician with a key. Security Torx or a proprietary key raises the effort for casual theft without making maintenance impossible. The tools should be engraved or stamped, and the QR code should let users report a missing tool, which gives the council data on theft hotspots.
The trade-off is that a determined thief can still take the whole cassette. That is acceptable if the cassette is cheaper to replace than 12 individual tools and if the design avoids creating a lever point. The firm should also consider making the pedal spanner a fixed, cranked arm on the stand rather than a loose tool, which removes the most commonly stolen item entirely. The decision should be tested with the council's maintenance team before the batch is made.