The final group design photo and presentation sketch should be accompanied by a detailed description (NOTE: while this outcome was collaborative, each student is still to write their own answers to the questions below)
In studio yesterday we had a charette workshop which consisted of thinking and drawing out differ types of ideas in 15 minute blocks. The main topic surrounding the charette was on how to make people more emotionally attached to their products. The product that was allocated to all the groups was a chair from IKEA which costs $35, we were asked to construct the chair then construct a mind map to the pros and cons of the chair in relation to the user and why they would want to keep it or throw it.
· How will the proposed solution improve the emotional attachment of the user to the chair?
The primary intention of the rocker attachments was to make a product which the mother and child could grow with, with having an attachment which didn’t need any modifications on the chair was a big bonus for the end user. The target market was towards parents with toddlers as they can purchase this attachment to add on the legs of the chair. By increasing the product life with adding more features on the chair with a slip on attachment will lead to more memories on the chair, thus leading to a stronger emotional attachment to the chair.
· What are the proposed materials?
The proposed material for the slip on rocker feet and middle brace will be laminated plywood due to its structural strength and load it will have to support. The brace and feet of the rocker will be CNC routered to ensure a uniform cut with the joining pieces.
· How do you expect the consumer to use it?
The consumer is expected to use this slip on product daily for about 1-3 years where the toddler is still young and needs feeding and comforting. After the 3 years the slip on attachments can easily be dismantled and the chair can convert back into an ordinary chair but with a whole lot more memories.
· What stimulus will encourage the user to modify the chair or buy the aftermarket attachments for the chair (e.g., change in life circumstances, etc)?
The topic of price was one of the main topics to as why this product would be useful. The attachments were estimated to cost around $50 while a rocker chair would cost over $200. Discussion amongst the group finalised that most starting families don’t have as much income to purchase high priced product in which they will not use for long. The ability to easily transform the chair from a standard chair to a rocker would also attract the target market to modify the chair.
The final group design photo and presentation sketch should be accompanied by a detailed description (NOTE: while this outcome was collaborative, each student is still to write their own answers to the questions below)
In studio yesterday we had a charette workshop which consisted of thinking and drawing out differ types of ideas in 15 minute blocks. The main topic surrounding the charette was on how to make people more emotionally attached to their products. The product that was allocated to all the groups was a chair from IKEA which costs $35, we were asked to construct the chair then construct a mind map to the pros and cons of the chair in relation to the user and why they would want to keep it or throw it.
· How will the proposed solution improve the emotional attachment of the user to the chair?
The primary intention of the rocker attachments was to make a product which the mother and child could grow with, with having an attachment which didn’t need any modifications on the chair was a big bonus for the end user. The target market was towards parents with toddlers as they can purchase this attachment to add on the legs of the chair. By increasing the product life with adding more features on the chair with a slip on attachment will lead to more memories on the chair, thus leading to a stronger emotional attachment to the chair.
· What are the proposed materials?
The proposed material for the slip on rocker feet and middle brace will be laminated plywood due to its structural strength and load it will have to support. The brace and feet of the rocker will be CNC routered to ensure a uniform cut with the joining pieces.
· How do you expect the consumer to use it?
The consumer is expected to use this slip on product daily for about 1-3 years where the toddler is still young and needs feeding and comforting. After the 3 years the slip on attachments can easily be dismantled and the chair can convert back into an ordinary chair but with a whole lot more memories.
· What stimulus will encourage the user to modify the chair or buy the aftermarket attachments for the chair (e.g., change in life circumstances, etc)?
The topic of price was one of the main topics to as why this product would be useful. The attachments were estimated to cost around $50 while a rocker chair would cost over $200. Discussion amongst the group finalised that most starting families don’t have as much income to purchase high priced product in which they will not use for long. The ability to easily transform the chair from a standard chair to a rocker would also attract the target market to modify the chair.
The blog should also include a design process reflection that discusses the student’s learning from the Charette:
· How has this task challenged your design thinking about promoting long-term satisfaction, product attachment and product endurance?
Objectified inconjuction to this workshop has opened my mind to as how important some products can mean to people. There is a saying “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure” which I think is so true, no one can put a price on any object that anyone owns just because they don’t know what the object and owner have gone through. By designing more everyday objects which create emotional attachment will defiantly impact our daily living and our environment.
The workshop also involved groups of 16 individuals to present their 15minutes drawings and ideas in 15 minute time frames, within this time so much different ideas and approaches were used to try fulfilling the one objective. By seeing the magnitude and amount of work produced will definitely encourage me to step away from my work and let other critique it.
· How do you feel about designing beyond the original product?
Being an industrial designer we often improve products that already exist and make them either more superior then they are by either adding or subtracting. I often like the idea of designing beyond the product to the extreme as you can always pull back ideas to bring them back to reality.
· How did you feel about the collaborative problem-solving activity?
As is described in the above, working in a team of 8 or 16 is much better than the one. By having so much minds all contributing to the one problem I think create a much more colourful end idea. Brainstorming ideas is an example of how collaborative problem solving can have such benefits adding to this, I think it’s also a lot more productive as well when everybody is focus and stays on task.
· If you were to design a piece of furniture from scratch, how would you do it differently? (Sketches not required, I just wanted to know if you have a design philosophy that you’d like to follow).
My design piece would start with the users, to find out who will be using the piece of furniture and how they will be using it will be one of the main focuses on my design. My designs have a very technical approach to it where I steer more towards function then towards form. The product will have to look pleasing to the market of course but what good is a product to the user if it’s not useful as well.
· How has this task challenged your design thinking about promoting long-term satisfaction, product attachment and product endurance?
Objectified inconjuction to this workshop has opened my mind to as how important some products can mean to people. There is a saying “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure” which I think is so true, no one can put a price on any object that anyone owns just because they don’t know what the object and owner have gone through. By designing more everyday objects which create emotional attachment will defiantly impact our daily living and our environment.
The workshop also involved groups of 16 individuals to present their 15minutes drawings and ideas in 15 minute time frames, within this time so much different ideas and approaches were used to try fulfilling the one objective. By seeing the magnitude and amount of work produced will definitely encourage me to step away from my work and let other critique it.
· How do you feel about designing beyond the original product?
Being an industrial designer we often improve products that already exist and make them either more superior then they are by either adding or subtracting. I often like the idea of designing beyond the product to the extreme as you can always pull back ideas to bring them back to reality.
· How did you feel about the collaborative problem-solving activity?
As is described in the above, working in a team of 8 or 16 is much better than the one. By having so much minds all contributing to the one problem I think create a much more colourful end idea. Brainstorming ideas is an example of how collaborative problem solving can have such benefits adding to this, I think it’s also a lot more productive as well when everybody is focus and stays on task.
· If you were to design a piece of furniture from scratch, how would you do it differently? (Sketches not required, I just wanted to know if you have a design philosophy that you’d like to follow).
My design piece would start with the users, to find out who will be using the piece of furniture and how they will be using it will be one of the main focuses on my design. My designs have a very technical approach to it where I steer more towards function then towards form. The product will have to look pleasing to the market of course but what good is a product to the user if it’s not useful as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment