Studio Week 5

Today in class we participated in a different and engaging activity. We were presented with a Breville appliance in groups of 10 (my group got a blender), and we had to disassemble it and analyse our tear down. When we received the product, it was very easy to take apart due to the obvious screws and bolts. However, when we tried to take it apart further, we realised it wasn't so easy, and it actually required more than simple hand tools. In the end to take apart the rotating blades from the jug, we had to insert it into a vice and use power tools to break it apart. They definitely manufactured that to be sturdy! Below are a couple of pictures of us in the process of breaking the blender down:

By the end, we had completely separated the parts of the blender (and even parts of the motor!). It was astounding to see just how many components was in a simple every day appliance we own at home. When that was complete, we had to identify the material of each part, and enter that into Greenfly. Greenfly then helped us calculate the life cycle analysis from raw material, to it's end waste. 

Overall i thought the activity was a valuable learning experience, especially since we had a Breville representative from the industry talk to us and explain certain components. I really enjoyed it and i think my team worked together very well!

Studio Week 4

This week we were required to have draft posters ready for a Cormack representative to see and give us feedback on. Unfortunately he didn't have time to get around to all the students, and i was one of them, so i never got any critique or feedback from him. Luckily though, i had the chance to display my work, and ask other students what they thought of my work.

Ginny Kwok looked at my design and commented on the overall shape of it. She liked the look of it, but asked if maybe the lid contained too much "empty space". It was a valid point, seeing as i had quite a large lid compared to the body. Max Glanville also gave me constructive feedback when he saw my posters. He commented that some of the posters had too much text, and too little graphics, and wasn't equally balanced. With feedback from students in my focus group, and from other tute groups, i could gain a better insight on what was required for the final presentation.

Below are a couple of photos i took of user interactions with my product.

Cormack Draft Posters

T2 Charette: LCA lifecycle analysis

Greenfly: Design greener products

• This video encourages us to think about environment considerations rather than just simply 'design'
• Using graphs and visual tools, it really highlights how alternative resources and materials could affect the life cycle selection of our designs
• The information given to us in our Environmental Declaration Report is very thorough, and definitely makes us think twice about wastage and energy consumption, all leading to global warming.

Therefore eco-design should always be on our minds when we design. We should be designing for a more sustainable environment to benefit not only us, but future generations.

Autodesk: Whole system and lifecycle thinking

• Improving performance and decreasing costs shouldn't be conflicting, because we should take a few steps to look at the whole 'system' of what we're designing for first
• It is important to do in depth research to figure out insights and thoughts of consumers before jumping straight into simply designing something
• We must also set our priorities, so we know where to fit in environmental goals to increase sustainability and decrease wastage

I gathered that no design process is 'linear' but there are rough guidelines we should all follow in our thinking. Doing this will ensure we get the best out of our work.

Autodesk: Improving product lifetime

• As designers we should always plan out exactly how products can be used to improve product lifetime
• We need to make things durable for reuse, despite it being "bad business" 
• The ideal product lifecycle is one of a closed loop, leaving no material for creating landfill, however this is very difficult and can be quite costly to achieve.

Not everything should be built to last forever, or else this could cause a catastrophe. Things should be designed to have a 'good end of life' to be recycled, or to be used in another environment.

Autodesk: Lightweighting

• Designing something to be lightweight can save on lots of resources and material
• The energy used to make materials are very large, so as designers we should always be conscious of sustainability
• Geometry and structure can be a strategy for sustainability - this includes hollows/ribs/decreasing wall thicknesses/using trusts

Making a design 'lightweight' is not always the way to go. There are consequences, such as the product may not be as robust, or may lead to a shorter lifecycle, which defeats the purpose of 'saving material' as in the long run, you'd be using more.

Autodesk: Green materials selection

• A good material can be determined by being abundant and non-toxic
• A doesn't require a lot energy and other resources to make it
• A good material it has the right physical properties for its functions

A good material must be balanced off by their trade-offs in uses and functions

Autodesk: Energy efficient design

• The first stage of energy is actually the mining and transport of coal
• Environmental impacts of energy may vary depending on the source of energy and its use
• If there is less sources of energy at the beginning of the 'energy stream', there is less energy used at the end, and therefore a lower cost

The more we know about energy, the more efficient our designs can be as designers.

Studio Week 3

In this class of studio we talked to peers and our tutors to further our designs. I have chosen to go with medicinal packaging of ibuprofen, and wanted to make it more arthritic friendly. I wore snow gloves (thickest gloves i owned) and tried to open existing pain killer medication. It proved extremely difficult as i could not get the grip i was looking for, and couldn't muster the 'push and turn' mechanism. With that in mind, my
design as changed quite a bit from the previous week.

Feedback From Peers:
I spoke to Christina Le about my concept development this week, and she liked the form of the rounded container and said it was easy to grip. However she asked whether the capsules would stick together, but that should be unlikely as Advil capsules do not in their plastic container. Daniel liked the design of the second container too, and said it suited the "medical standard" of packaging, yet the form was interesting enough that it should stand out on supermarket shelves.

Feedback from tutor:
I talked to mar again this week, and he made a very important point that i need to concentrate on making the packaging more inviting to users. This would mean less harsh edges, possibly more rounded corners, and just concentrate on the visual language cues. He also suggested i think about space issues/shipping issues and supermarket shelving displays. We looked up the existing packaging of Advil liquid capsules, and it seems that most of their packaging is not childproof, so mar suggested that i may not need to put a childproof feature in my design.

Other Tutor Session:
I listened to scott talk to a couple of students and listened to his suggestions of doing further research into specific mechanisms. He compared sponge applicators to things such as shoe polish

Studio Week 2

In our first class i presented my three concepts for my chosen topic.  I picked arthritis as my accessibility issue, and i mainly concentrated on food packaging. They are as follows:

Feedback from Peers:

I spoke to Ryan Go about my three concepts, and he liked my second concept in particular. He said that if i incorporated a measuring instrument, or device into it, it would be better. He also liked the shape and idea that it would be a sift and dispenser at the same time. After talking to Ryan, i spoke to Raymond Tinyow about my concept direction, and he liked the last concept. However he pointed out that if i was designing for arthritic parents feeding children, there may not be a need for parents to open the container, and the kids could do it themselves.

Feedback from Mar:

Mar pointed out that my first concept was lacking innovation, as it has been done every year. After reviewing all my concepts, he suggested i concentrate on my last concept, however, redesign for a different product, as vitamin gummy's have actually been proven to cause tooth decay for children. He liked the idea of a 'secondary use' however suggested i focus on something more directed at arthritic patients in particular.

Other Tutor Session:

I sat through one of Scott's tutorial groups, and i listened to him suggest further research into our selected topics. He gave directional advice, giving student's links to youtube videos, and websites for good packaging designs. 

Plan for next week:

I have to do further research into arthritic medicine, and in particular, packaging that these patients struggle to open. I have to refine my concept to be child-proof as well, and design a form that would be both aesthetically pleasing and of practical use. That means that alternative closure mechanisms will need to be thought through, and i should also look into what materials my container would be made from.