During the design and testing of the prototype, most of the feedback came from our mentor, Jeff Maki, and our teacher, Daniel Weiland. Unfortunately, we did not have time to get feedback from other stakeholders such as homeowners. Post-presentation, we received feedback from Laszlo Farago (an engineer at Boston Scientific), Matt Wilson (an engineer at Anderson Windows), Brent Hedding (an engineer at 3M), and Scott Blauwkamp (an engineer at Foth Production Solutions).

Overall, our project scored well in the prototype development and testing. The judges agreed that our prototype's creation was "very inventive" and used "lots of creativity". Our prototype scored worst in the problem validation and choosing the optimum solution because we did not use "very much feedback from the survey group".

Below is a compilation of the rubrics.

Title of Section Average Score Comments

Problem Statement and Background 4.333 Should define microgeneration

Validation of Problem 3.667 Little to no concept testing, Set goal for electricity generation then build around that

Possible Solutions 4 Not much feedback from survey group

Choosing the Optimum Solution 3.667 Didn't discuss materials in presentation

Design and Optimization 4.333 Creative/inventive

Prototype Development 5 ideas helped with understanding

Testing 5 Videos helped with understanding

Final Design and Next Steps 4 No post-build analysis/feedback from consumers, leverage existing technology for energy storage

Sources and Acknowledgments 5