Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-p566r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-27T23:49:43.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Capturing Prototype Progress in Digital Fabrication Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Yazan A M Barhoush*
Affiliation:
University of Oulu;
Jørgen Falck Erichsen
Affiliation:
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Norway
Heikki Sjöman
Affiliation:
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Norway
Georgi V. Georgiev
Affiliation:
University of Oulu;
Martin Steinert
Affiliation:
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Norway
*
Contact: Barhoush, Yazan A M, University of Oulu, Center for Ubiquitous Computing, Finland, yazan.barhoush@oulu.fi

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.

The early (pre-requirement) stages of product development can provide relevant insights into the creative design process. At these stages, the communication of ideas during the prototyping process can serve as a rich source for information. In this paper, we attempt to document physical prototypes generated during the design process. We describe the design and preliminary testing of Protobooth Oulu: a system that can be used for documenting the process of prototyping products through capturing process output 'snapshots' in time at the early stages of product development. Our primary motivation is to facilitate documentation and reflection from an educational perspective. We tested the system during a course on digital fabrication in a FabLab environment, where ten teams documented their coursework over the course of six weeks. Managing to capture prototypes over time, analysis of the captured data showed evolution and major changes in the prototypes. Such data can be used for understanding the process of prototyping and consequently provide means to improve prototype and overall creative performance. We outline a future Protobooth system in terms of functionality.

Type
Article
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) 2019

References

Bracewell, R., Wallace, K., Moss, M. and Knott, D. (2009), “Capturing design rationale”. Computer-Aided Design, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 173186.Google Scholar
Chang, C.-I. (2003), “Hyperspectral Imaging: Techniques for Spectral Detection and Classification”, Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Chang, C.-I. (2007), “Hyperspectral Data Exploitation: Theory and Applications”, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Dalsgaard, P. and Halskov, K. (2012), “Reflective Design Documentation”, Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 428437.Google Scholar
Dorst, K. and Cross, N. (2001), “Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution”, Design Studies, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 425437.Google Scholar
Edelman, J.A. and Leifer, L. (2012), “Qualitative Methods and Metrics for Assessing Wayfinding and Navigation in Engineering Design”, in Plattner, H., Meinel, C. and Leifer, L. (Eds.), Design Thinking Research: Measuring Performance in Context, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 151181.Google Scholar
Gerstenberg, A., Sjöman, H., Reime, T., Abrahamsson, P. and Steinert, M. (2015), “A Simultaneous, Multidisciplinary Development and Design Journey – Reflections on Prototyping”, in Chorianopoulos, K., Divitini, M., Baalsrud Hauge, J., Jaccheri, L. and Malaka, R. (Eds.), Entertainment Computing - ICEC 2015, Springer International Publishing, pp. 409416.Google Scholar
Grahn, H. and Geladi, P. (2007), “Techniques and Applications of Hyperspectral Image Analysis”, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Gutierrez Lopez, M., Haesen, M., Luyten, K. and Coninx, K. (2015), “Helaba: A System to Highlight Design Rationale in Collaborative Design Processes”, in Luo, Y. (Ed.), Cooperative Design, Visualization, and Engineering, Springer International Publishing, pp. 175184.Google Scholar
Gutierrez Lopez, M., Rovelo Ruiz, G., Luyten, K., Haesen, M. and Coninx, K. (2018), “Re-thinking Traceability: A Prototype to Record and Revisit the Evolution of Design Artefacts”, Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on Supporting Groupwork, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 196208.Google Scholar
Herstatt, C., Stockstrom, C., Verworn, B. and Nagahira, A. (2006), “‘Fuzzy front end’ practices in innovating japanese companies”, International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, Vol. 03 No. 01, pp. 4360.Google Scholar
Ju, W., Ionescu, A., Neeley, L. and Winograd, T. (2004), “Where the Wild Things Work: Capturing Shared Physical Design Workspaces”, Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 533541.Google Scholar
Kohtala, S.M.I., Erichsen, J.A.B., Sjöman, H., Steinert, M. (2018), “Augmenting Physical Prototype Activities in Early-Stage Product Development”. DS 91: Proceedings of NordDesign 2018, Linköping, Sweden, 14th - 17th August 2018 Design in the Era of Digitalization. https://doi.org/10.1109/ice.2017.8279935Google Scholar
Leifer, L.J. and Steinert, M. (2011), “Dancing with ambiguity: Causality behavior, design thinking, and triple-loop-learning”, Information Knowledge Systems Management, Vol. 10 No. 1–4, pp. 151173.Google Scholar
Perry, M. and Sanderson, D. (1998), “Coordinating joint design work: the role of communication and artefacts”, Design Studies, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 273288.Google Scholar
Pierce, J., Sengers, P., Hirsch, T., Jenkins, T., Gaver, W. and DiSalvo, C. (2015), “Expanding and Refining Design and Criticality in HCI”, Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 20832092.Google Scholar
Sjöman, H., Erichsen, J.A.B., Welo, T. and Steinert, M. (2017), “Effortless capture of design output a prerequisite for building a design repository with quantified design output”, 2017 International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC), presented at the 2017 International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC), pp. 564570.Google Scholar
Swan, L., Tanase, D. and Taylor, A.S. (2010), “Design's Processional Character”, Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 6574.Google Scholar
Wolf, T.V., Rode, J.A., Sussman, J. and Kellogg, W.A. (2006), “Dispelling ‘Design’ As the Black Art of CHI”, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 521530.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, J., Stolterman, E. and Forlizzi, J. (2010), “An Analysis and Critique of Research Through Design: Towards a Formalization of a Research Approach”, Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 310319.Google Scholar