Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T12:10:13.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE KARAKURI CARD DECK: CO-DESIGNING INDUSTRIAL IOT CONCEPTUAL SOLUTIONS

Part of: Design Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2020

Á. Aranda Muñoz ,
U. Florin ,
Y. Eriksson ,
Y. Yamamoto  and
K. Sandström
Á. Aranda Muñoz*
Affiliation:
Mälardalen University, Sweden RISE, Sweden
U. Florin
Affiliation:
Mälardalen University, Sweden
Y. Eriksson
Affiliation:
Mälardalen University, Sweden
Y. Yamamoto
Affiliation:
Mälardalen University, Sweden
K. Sandström
Affiliation:
RISE, Sweden
*
*alvaro.aranda.munoz@mdh.se

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Novel IoT market solutions and research promise IoT modules that do not require programming or electrical setup, yet shop floor personnel need to face problem solving activities to create technical solutions. This paper introduces the Karakuri card deck and presents a case study composed of four workshop sessions in four manufacturing settings, where shop floor personnel tested the cards as a means of ideating and presenting conceptual IoT solutions in the form of diagrams. The results indicate the validity of the proposed conceptual solutions and suggest prototyping as a next step.

Keywords

case studyparticipatory designinternet of things (IoT)early design phaseidea generation
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference , Volume 1 , May 2020 , pp. 807 - 816
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Brito, R. and Houghton, P. (n.d.), “IoT Service Kit”, available at: http://iotservicekit.com/ (accessed 14 November 2019).Google Scholar
Chen, Y.H. (2011), “IoT deck: a digital card-based ideation game to inspire internet of things design”, in 4th World Conference on Design Research, Proceedings of IASDR2011, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Dibitonto, M. et al. (2018), “The IoT Design Deck: A Tool for the Co-design of Connected Products”, in Ahram, T. and Falcão, C. (Eds.), Advances in Usability and User Experience, Vol. 607, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60492-3_21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farris, A.V. and Sengupta, P. (2016), “Democratizing Children's Computation: Learning Computational Science as Aesthetic Experience: Democratizing Children's Computation”, Educational Theory, Vol. 66 No. 1-2, pp. 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flaticon (2019), Flaticon, available at: https://www.flaticon.com/ (accessed 14 November 2019).Google Scholar
Friedman, B. and Hendry, D. (2012), “The envisioning cards: a toolkit for catalyzing humanistic and technical imaginations”, Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI ’12, presented at the 2012 ACM annual conference, ACM Press, Austin, Texas, USA, p. 1145. https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornecker, E. and Buur, J. (2006), “Getting a Grip on Tangible Interaction: A Framework on Physical Space and Social Interaction”, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 437–446. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katayama, H. (2017), “Legend and Future Horizon of Lean Concept and Technology”, Procedia Manufacturing, Vol. 11, pp. 1093–1101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumashiro, M. (2011), “Kaizen: Ergonomics Approach to Occupational Health and Safety”, Journal of Human Ergology, 2011, 40 巻, 1_2 号, p. 163–167, 公開日 2014/11/13, https://doi.org/10.11183/jhe.40.163Google Scholar
Lucero, A. et al. (2016), “Designing with Cards”, in Markopoulos, P., Martens, J.-B., Malins, J., Coninx, K. and Liapis, A. (Eds.), Collaboration in Creative Design, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 75–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29155-0_5Google Scholar
Martin, B., Hanington, B. and Hanington, B.M. (2012), Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions, Rockport Publishers.Google Scholar
MethodKit Cards (2012), MethodKit, available at: https://methodkit.com/ (accessed 14 November 2019).Google Scholar
Miorandi, D. et al. (2012), “Internet of things: Vision, applications and research challenges”, Ad Hoc Networks, Vol. 10 No. 7, pp. 1497–1516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2012.02.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mora, S., Gianni, F. and Divitini, M. (2017), “Tiles: A Card-based Ideation Toolkit for the Internet of Things”, Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS ’17, presented at the the 2017 Conference, ACM Press, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, pp. 587–598. https://doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ræbild, U. and Hasling, KM. (2018), “Sustainable Design Cards: A learning Tool for Supporting Sustainable Design Strategies”, Niinimäki, K. (ed.), Sustainable Fashion in a circular economy. Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture, Helsinki.Google Scholar
Rode, J.A. et al. (2015), “From computational thinking to computational making”, Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing - UbiComp ’15, presented at the the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference, ACM Press, Osaka, Japan, pp. 239–250. https://doi.org/10.1145/2750858.2804261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, C. et al. (2015), Designing Connected Products: UX for the Consumer Internet of Things, O'Reilly Media.Google Scholar
Sanders, E. and Stappers, P. (2008), “Co-creation and the New Landscapes of Design”, CoDesign, Vol. 4, pp. 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tedre, M. and Denning, P.J. (2016), “The long quest for computational thinking”, Proceedings of the 16th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research - Koli Calling ’16, presented at the 16th Koli Calling International Conference, ACM Press, Koli, Finland, pp. 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1145/2999541.2999542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tissenbaum, M. et al. (2017), “Critical computational empowerment: Engaging youth as shapers of the digital future”, 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), presented at the 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), IEEE, Athens, Greece, pp. 1705–1708. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01113.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, B. (2011), “Visualizing Thought: Topics in Cognitive Science (2010)”, Topics in Cognitive Science, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 499–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01113.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Udoh, I.S. and Kotonya, G. (2018), “Developing IoT applications: challenges and frameworks”, IET Cyber-Physical Systems: Theory & Applications, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-cps.2017.0068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wölfel, C. and Merritt, T. (2013), “Method Card Design Dimensions: A Survey of Card-Based Design Tools”, in Kotzé, P., Marsden, G., Lindgaard, G., Wesson, J. and Winckler, M. (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction–INTERACT 2013, Vol. 8117, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 479–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40483-2_34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamamoto, Y., Sandström, K. and Aranda Munoz, A. (2018a), “Karakuri IoT - the concept and the result of pre-study”. In Advances in Transdisciplinary Engineering. Volume 8: Advances in Manufacturing Technology XXXII. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-902-7-311Google Scholar
Yamamoto, Y., Sandström, K. and Aranda Munoz, A. (2018b), “Development of methods that support exploration of simple and low-cost IoT-aided improvement solutions at manufacturing plants”. In The 2018 Annual Autumn Meeting of Japan Industrial Management Association JIMA. Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar