Final Portfolio

For my final portfolio, I chose to create a word cloud based off of my own blog posts and then connect those overarching words and themes to what I learned in the course.

So first, since we are in a design class, I would like to talk about the design of my word cloud. I chose to make it in the shape of a gear for several reasons. A gear:

• typically reminds us of something mechanical and as a mechanical engineer I thought it would be appropriate 
• works in a group of gears to accomplish some kind of action - like how we worked throughout this class together (from the assembly line to the PVC pipe activity)
• can be the starting point from which you go on to create something exciting and new

I decided to contrast the mechanical aspects of the gear (and mix in some of the art side) by making it with fun colors and a font that looks like handwriting. I tried to make this gear represent what is so special about this class: the mixing of engineering and art.

Now I would like to talk about some of the dominant words and how I think they fit into our class:

1. Make - it seems appropriate that I used the word "make" a lot since that is what we tried to do throughout the class. Throughout this class, the definition of making has changed a lot for me. I used to associate making strictly with physical products that served some kind of special purpose. After experiences like the clay, concrete, and chair labs, where we made things for no real reason other than to make them, and the inkscape lab (which featured digital making), I have come to change my definition of making to be much broader in scope. I now see making as the creation of new ideas and products (either physical or digital) and sculptures that communicate the maker's message.

2. Share - I was surprised that share was one of the more common words I used, but I quickly realized that sharing has been such a huge part of our class. Every week, our professors have shared insights about how our different disciplines connect and through every lab, we shared our findings with our peers. We also shared what we learned through our blogs, which people can explore to understand what we learned in the class.

3. People - Obviously people were at the heart of this class. We each brought our own unique perspectives and engaged in conversation every week about issues as diverse as the controversy of restoring historical ruins. Through this class, I have made friends with people from different disciplines who I may not have met during my PSU experience.

4. Learn and Try - One of the things I am most grateful for is that we had the ability to try new things and learn about different areas. I have always been interested in the intersection of different areas (e.g. my research in engineering and health and human development) and so it has been great to have a judgement-free environment to try new things (like laser cutting) and to do things that I have no expertise in (like sculpting). I think this community has been one of the best things that has come out of this class and it has allowed me to learn in a way that is very different from my learning in my other classes.

My top three labs:

1. One of the labs I learned the most from was the drawing lab. At the beginning of it, I had no idea what a scribble bot was and I had no desire to make one. I didn't understand the point of creating something that would make random markings because it seemed to go against everything I had been taught about art. But, throughout the process, I came to appreciate and enjoy the randomness of the mark-making and I loved seeing all of our bots at the same time to see how each of them was unique. Making the bot was definitely challenging, but it was also a very rewarding experience.

I also liked that I was able to use the laser cutting experience I gained earlier to make my spirographs. I really enjoy applied learning and appreciate the opportunity to do it since many of my other classes are theoretical.

2. The Concrete Lab - I really learned a lot from this lab and how art and engineering overlap. I had always previously thought of concrete as used exclusively for building because it's a very practical material. It was interesting to see it in a new context and to use it to make art. I also enjoyed the opportunity to use my laser cutting skills and the freedom of the fabric formwork to just kind of see what happens. I am usually very deliberate when making something, so it was nice to experiment in an open environment. Finally, I liked the hands on aspect and the fact that I had something physical at the end to represent my efforts.

3. The Knitting Lab - This lab was one of my favorites and it taught me not only how to knit, but how I can use the internet and other resources to try something new. I think I often get in a rut in school of just trying to get homework done and study for tests, but at the end of that process, you have nothing to show for it except for a grade. It was so nice to break out of that cycle and try to learn something just for the fun of it. Going forward, I would like to do more DIY projects and really leverage the internet for inspiration and instruction.

Conclusion:

This class has helped me come up with my own making philosophy and shaped how I view myself. I now think of myself as a prototype - I am constantly improving and trying to learn more. It has also encouraged me to explore and helped me think more about my long term goals. Throughout this year, I have become very interested in industrial and human-centered design and I hope to work at a consumer product design firm in the future. What I love about these firms is that they combine engineering expertise with psychology and art to make products that are functional and pleasing. Making for the Masses has given me several skills (like laser cutting) that are directly applicable to this field, but it has also taught me more about the maker movement and encouraged me to learn more about the intersection of art and engineering. Thank you for a great semester!

Prototyping Studies

For this study, I was actually helping collect the data as a member of the HUDDIL lab. This experiment was a really great learning process for me and a chance to explore my interests in both psychology and engineering. The idea for this experiment grew out of Jessica Menold's (my PI's) experience teaching an engineering design class for mechanical engineers. She noticed that many novice 3D printer users limited their ideas for their final project and became fixated on one type of design that was not necessarily optimized for 3D printing. She believes that many students are attracted to 3D printer over traditional manufacturing tools because it requires less physical work of them and is considered to be innovative. We decided to explore this through our study where participants completed an engineering design challenge either using cardboard or 3D printing.

Student building using cardboard

Our goal is to figure out how 3D printing influences the prototyping process. While this initial stage of the study was just to nail down logistics and understand the possibilities, I am very excited to continue learning about the prototyping process. This study has taught me how to do things like write IRBs, design protocols, recruit participants, and execute experiments.

I have learned so much from being in the HUDDIL lab including how different disciplines like human development (or arts and architecture) and engineering can help each other. Often in the lab, we pair up engineering and human development students with exciting and interesting results that we wouldn't otherwise experience. This year, in addition to this project, I have been able to work on designing an app for Penn State THON committee members and I look forward to doing more work at the intersection of engineering and design at an internship this summer.

Machines that Draw

We were given two weeks to create a scribble bot (without tape) and a drawing machine. I'll admit that I was initially skeptical that I would be able to accomplish these tasks - but I did! The first machine I worked on was the scribble bot. In class I came up with the idea of using a cup to essentially throw in all of the major components and then anchor the markers on the outside. That, I would soon learn, was the easy part. The difficult part was creating a propeller that would stay on the device. Ultimately, I tried several different approaches including a (dangerous) piece of pencil, a piece of styrofoam, and (my final design) the lid of a cup. You can see the evolution below.

Afterwards, it was time to make another drawing machine. I decided to use my laser cutting knowledge to make a couple of different spirographs. To make the gears, I used inkscape. Here are some pictures of the process:

 Now to answer some questions:

1. What did you learn from the first activity that helped in subsequent iterations?

One of my first discoveries, with regard to the scribble bot, was that the easiest way to deal with all the wiring was to throw the components into a cup. This would make sure that they were contained and decrease the risk of them breaking. I ultimately carried this idea through to my final prototype.

2. Did historical examples influence your design? How?

Yes, I saw the scribble bots that were made before our class and I also looked to my classmates for ideas. I used what I saw to make informed decisions about how I should approach problems like finding a good propeller. I initially used a small sharper object for my propeller, but after seeing that my peers had propellers with larger surface areas, I gave that a try and it worked significantly better.

For my spirograph, I definitely relied on examples I had seen in class and online on DIY sites.

3. What about your design worked well/didn’t work well?
My design was very stable, but the downside of that was that if the markers were balanced just right, the scribble bot wouldn't move because the markers were stable enough to resist the motion of the motor. If the markers are moved just a little bit the machine will begin to draw again. When it does move, it moves pretty slowly and in an unpredictable way (which can be good or bad depending on how you look at it!).

Overall, my spirographs turned out well. One issue though was that many of them broke when I was detaching them from the extra acrylic after laser cutting. This made the designs they made less smooth.

4. What expectations were realized or changed in your process? Were you surprised at anything?
I was definitely surprised that the propeller was so difficult to make. When I was using a broken pencil for it, I actually had to cover my eyes when I turned the motor on to make sure I wasn't hurt by the propeller (which would fly off). I was, however, ultimately able to make a successful propeller.

I also underestimated the amount of materials I would need. Luckily my friends had a ball of rubber bands and other random supplies that I was able to use. At one point, my drawing machine was too light, so I took a small pill bottle and filled it with water to weigh it down. There was definitely a lot of bricolage and creativity in this project.

5. What materials or processes would be useful to extend your drawing machines capabilities?

Tape and propellers would be extremely helpful for the scribble bots. The spirograph was pretty straightforward (and there isn't much room for changes), which I think is the beauty of it.

Trading Card: Charles M. Schulz

Maker Trading Card

For my maker trading card, I picked Charles M. Schulz, the maker of the famous Peanuts cartoon. I picked Schulz because the Peanuts are very special to my family, especially my grandfather, who is an artist and a maker in his own right (he's built a house and a couple of boats along with some other side projects). Growing up, I always watched the Charlie Brown TV specials and my family has collected various cards, ornaments, etc. that have made the Peanuts significant to me.

I chose to represent Schulz as I believe he would represent himself: as Charlie Brown! Growing up, Schulz, like Charlie, was snubbed by his peers. He was a very private person who had a special relationship with his dog, Spike (who is believed to be the inspiration for Snoopy). I chose to use a cartoon of Charlie Brown looking out over the water because I felt like it represented Schulz and his unique perspective and take on the world. I included Charlie Brown's famous phrase "Good grief" because of its significance throughout the cartoon series.

Answers to Questions:

1. How did the investigation of makers relate to your conceptions of what it means to make?

I think I initially thought that making had to be something 3 dimensional. What I ended up discovering through my research and throughout this class, is that making can result in digital artifacts as well as 3D ones. Schulz made thousands of cartoons in his life that were the result of hard work and significant thought. To me, that constitutes making!

2. Did you have any discoveries/controversies over your maker?

I previously didn't know much about Schulz, but most people do express their lives in some way through their work, so I wasn't surprised to learn that he was a Charlie Brown "outsider" figure. I knew my grandfather really loved Charlie Brown and I was surprised by how much he and Schulz have in common. Both came from working class families and served their countries. Both were quiet makers who loved expressing themselves through their art.

3. What similarities and differences to find with the maker that you focused on both now and into your future?

Not sure if I am interpreting this question correctly, but I think Schulz and I are similar in our dedication to our work. As I mentioned on the back of his card, he only took 5 weeks of vacation in the decades of work he did on Peanuts and I am pretty devoted to my school work and my hobbies. I think we also both have thick skins - Schulz's cartoons were rejected by his high school yearbook and I have had several rejections (and am sure I will have several more!) before I am deemed "successful." One of my takeaways from him is that I think he was always making for himself - not to please others - and that's why his work is so great and relatable. I will try to remember this when making in the future.

4. How can learning about other makers create greater understanding and respect across all forms of making? Is this form of respect important? Why or why not?

I think learning about other makers generates greater understanding and respect because you develop an appreciation for the work other people do. Everyone is good at some things and weaker in others. If we are exposed to people who do something well, we respect them even more knowing it's a personal weakness of ours.

I think this respect is important because we need to respect each other in order to relate and learn from each other. Understanding and respect allow us to learn from others and become better makers ourselves. Understanding and respect also make us decent human beings.

Knitting!

I was very excited to knit - I've done it once before when I was younger and I remembered the basics, but I had never started and ended it myself. We worked by playing the video and then pausing it to catch up. Out of the three of us, Julie had the most knitting experience, which shows in her swatch.

Our swatches (mine is on the right)

Once I got the hang of the basics, the knitting was relatively easy. The only problem I had was that I kept (somehow) adding more rows each time. The video told us to do 15 by 15, but I ended up with at least 30 "new" stitches. I also had a good number of holes throughout and I made my stitches really tight, which made knitting the next row pretty difficult. The next time I knit, I will try to make looser loops for better results. I also will try to stop making more rows. This experience was very instructive in that I learned how to knit (which is very fun and relaxing!), but it also showed me that I can google almost anything and find a good video to demonstrate it. One of my goals going forward is to try to do more of this self-guided learning on my own.

The knitting squad

Made my lopsided swatch into a sleeping mask!

Concrete Lab

Over the course of a couple months I made my concrete formwork and eventually poured the concrete into it to make my slab. But, before I even made it, I had to learn more about how to make my formwork and I had to choose whether I should use the CNC mill to create my negative or if I should use fabric. We started down in Digifab again - this time to learn about the CNC mill, which we could use to make our form. After a demonstration, we were passed a bunch of foam samples to see what the possibilities might be. Then, we went down to see the CNC mill in action.

CNC bed

Setting up the different cutters

Starting to cut

The finished product

After seeing what the CNC mill could do, Marcus explained our other option: using fabric. He explained that the CNC mill would probably get us a more accurate result, but that the fabric could surprise us in some interesting ways. Ultimately, I decided to use fabric, so I could try out my laser cutting skills I gained from the lab 1 demonstration. I definitely learn better by doing, so I saw this as a great opportunity to see how much I had retained from the laser cutter demo and feel more comfortable using the machine.

I ended up making what I thought at first was a flower, but ultimately looked more like a sun. (Side note: A nice byproduct of my laser cutting were several pieces that I used to make dog tags for my friends). I chose a nice simple design because I figured it would be easy to tell what I was going for.

The next step was to attach my cut-out to the framework that would physically hold the concrete. It took me a couple of tries to get good at drilling the holes, but soon I had secured my form work and I began to pour the concrete. After smoothing it over several times with a water-concrete mix, it was ready to sit.

I came back the following week and was pleasantly surprised that my concrete slab turned out as an almost perfect replica of my shape. I wasn't sure if the masonite was strong enough against the concrete, but it was! This experience was one of my favorites in Making for the Masses because I was able to see a project through several stages and learn from those around me. I now feel super comfortable using the laser cutter (which I'm sure will come in handy in the future) and I have more hands-on building experience (which I cannot get enough of!). Working in this open and collaborative environment helped me learn so much about the making process. Check out the finished product below!

My concrete sun/flower!

Paper Airplanes

Today in Making for the Masses, we learned about the differences between crafting and mass producing. We first looked at crafting in Tom's example (ceramics) and how that evolved into mass producing. Overall, it was a really interesting discussion because I had never really thought of mass produced things as comparable to crafting in quality.

After the lecture, it was time to test out how three methods (craft production, mass production (assembly line), and mass production (after changes to our assembly line)) work with paper airplanes.

Run #1 – Craft Production:
- What did you observe about the process?
The process was pretty hectic and disorganized. Everyone was working at different speeds and with different outcomes (some planes were great and others were lower quality). There was definitely a learning curve and people got better the longer they did it. The quality overall seemed to decrease throughout the exercise as the people who were less skilled rushed to keep up with the other workers.

- Did all the aircraft take the same amount of time to produce and test?
No, because of the different skill levels of the people producing and testing, some planes were made very quickly and others lagged behind. This ultimately resulted in the fewest airplanes produced compared to our next two trials.

- If not, to what can you attribute the variation?
I think the variation can be most easily attributed to the different skill and experience levels of the workers. Some workers were better at producing the airplanes and better at shooting them into the trash can than others.

Run #2 – Mass Production, Assembly Line 1:
- How did the assembly line process differ from the craft production process?
Now that we were starting to work together, we saw each other as more of a team and tried to figure out the best way to utilize our expertise in different areas (e.g. quality of production, throwing abilities, etc.). This round was still not perfect (there was definitely some bottlenecking at certain people), but overall we were more efficient and more collaborative.

- What were the implications for the workers?
While we were more efficient, there was definitely more stress on individual workers to deliver their folded part to the next person on the assembly line. At the same time, people were encouraging of each other's efforts, so we had a supportive, but also demanding environment.

- What are the implications for the process as a whole?
The process was definitely more efficient because we were able to play to different individual's strengths and weaknesses and create more airplanes in the same amount of time. The quality of the airplanes, however, decreased, which was interesting because mass production usually increases quality. Quantity increased, but quality was sacrificed in the process.

Run #3 – Mass Production, Revised Assembly Line:
- What recommendations did your group make and why?
We recommended that 2 people should work at each step of the process and each make 2 folds. We decided to do this because when 1 person made 1 fold, it seemed pretty wasteful of their time. This decreased the number of people working on one plane and increased quality. In general, we tried to organize our team better, so that we understood what was going on.

- Did the recommendations improve the line? If so, how? If not, why not?
The recommendations did improve the line by increasing our quality and our quantity. Because there were fewer people working on one airplane, we could make more. Also, quality increased because people were able to take their time more and make their folds precise.

- What effect did the recommendations have for the process as a whole?
The process became more efficient and the team was definitely more collaborative. Everyone had a better idea of what was going on and what needed to be accomplished. Overall, this process was most successful.

Tinker Toy Lab

This week in class we received an assignment to a certain part of a company (e.g. manufacturing, engineering, marketing, suppliers, etc.). Ultimately, two companies were created with one in the bigger room and one in the smaller conference room. I was out in the bigger room where the company functioned more like a bunch of smaller companies.

As a company, we had to receive information from the customers about what they were looking for and then communicate that to our engineers who would make a detailed engineering drawing to give to manufacturing (me) who would then send it over to the suppliers. From the very beginning, we were in trouble. Our marketers did not get a very clear message from the customers and told us that we were creating something with wheels that rolled. Our engineers struggled to come up with an engineering drawing (what they did produce was a 2d stick figure car) and to figure out which materials they needed, which slowed the process down. Unfortunately, instead of helping them, most of us just pressured them to move faster and then proceeded to stare into space and wait for them to finish.

When the drawings and supplies finally got to our suppliers, we ran into more hurdles because accounting and the suppliers could not agree on a price. We spent at least 40 minutes just talking with the suppliers before we realized that there were other suppliers we could talk to. Finally, we got the parts to manufacturing (me), but the parts seemed pretty random and we didn't even have 4 wheels. After more negotiations (we got 4 wheels!), we had about 5 minutes to assemble and test our device. Naturally, 5 minutes was not enough time for quality to go over all the issues with it and we definitely made a lower quality product than our competitors.

What I learned from this exercise is to be wary in larger companies of splitting responsibilities into different departments. It probably works better in real life because there are multiple projects, so a department is always working on something, but in our simulation, there was so much wasted time where multiple departments were stalled waiting for another one. This also caused some departments to be resentful of the other ones and instead of helping, they just became more impatient.

The other team was much more successful because their departments worked together to help each other fulfill the requirements. Their suppliers also were more reasonable about costs. Overall, their culture was very different and they saw each other as one entity instead of competing roles. I will try to remember to foster a strong culture and make communication a priority when working on projects in large groups.

Picture of our final prototype:

Clay Day

Today I returned to my second-grade self to do some clay work. I was excited to get started because I took art classes all through high school, but didn't make time for art in college. It was fun to tour the pottery studio and the kilns - I had no idea we even had facilities like that on campus, or that PSU is known for having a good ceramics program. It's pretty awesome that students get to build and use those kilns.

After we toured the facilities and saw the 3D clay printer, we started making our own creations using the coil method. I decided to just have fun with it and not care how my pot turned out. What I found most interesting is that you can make pretty much anything using coils. When you're a kid, you usually just use coils to make pots, but Tom pointed out a lot of different pieces that used coils as a base.

Overall the clay experience fun and relaxing. In the future, it would be cool to do a lab with wheel thrown pottery because it's really challenging and probably new to most of the students in the class.

Here are my answers to the reflection questions:

What about your design worked well/didn’t work well?

I was pretty ambitious in trying to get the clay coil layers to widen and narrow significantly throughout the pot. This naturally causes some instability because the coils are only resting on a portion of the coils beneath them instead of being directly on top of each other. I also made relatively thick coils, which meant that each coil added significant weight to the structure and took away from its stability. If I did this again I would make thinner, more uniform coils and transition into protruding layers more gradually.

One part that did work really well was my smoothing process. I used the slip to smooth out the layers until it was no longer obvious that the pot was made from coils. It was fun to get my hands dirty and it made my pot look better!

Did you gravitate toward a particular shaping/making process? If so, why?

As I mentioned earlier, I used coils to build my pot. I chose to use coils because that is what I learned in school and Tom suggested we start by using coils. I also talked earlier about how versatile coils are in making any kind of clay structure, which I started to appreciate during this lab.

Was the making of your object informed by the tactile feedback of hand working?

Definitely, I changed my process a lot from start to finish. I got a lot better at making my coils from the beginning to the end, which led to gradual improvement moving up from the base of my pot. After I had been working for awhile, I went back to smooth over the spots I had done earlier.

Can you make connections between craft, design, industrial, and scientific applications of clay
and ceramic material?

My grandfather is an artist and he mostly does oil paintings, but he also has created a number of bowls that we use in our house. It's always been interesting to me that his art is both beautiful and functional - allowing us to cook and bake. Before exposure to his art, I saw things as either practical and useful or beautiful (not both). It's pretty amazing that clay can be used for so many different things and I have come to appreciate (through this class) that we can design things that are both beautiful and functional. I am really interested in industrial design (despite being an engineer), so it is awesome to learn about how to combine these aspects to create consumer products that are desirable and feasible.

Inkscape Exploration

I have done a lot of design work previously in Photoshop and in Pages, so I was very excited to try out this lab and learn more about graphic design. The first thing I learned was the difference between raster and vector graphics. Raster graphics, like those found in Photoshop, rely on a compilation of small dots that, when you zoom out, form a completed image. I like to think of raster graphics as similar to pointillism, which creates images out of small dots. Like if you were to go up to the piece below in a museum, when you zoom in too far on a raster image, you will find it to be very blurry and hard to discern. This is one of the downsides of raster graphics.

Vector graphics, however, use math and reasoning to fill in the blanks and create objects. While less detailed, raster images are more versatile in that they can be enlarged easily. They also have smaller files and can be edited later.

After I was armed with this knowledge, it was time to give it a try! Like many of us in this class, I consider myself a do-er, so I first checked out Inkscape without looking at the tutorials - just to get a feel for the program. I found very early on that I liked the 3D box tool.

After exploring on my own, I decided to try the tutorials. My favorite one was the one about Bezier curves, which I had used before, but had not thought about much beyond the fact that they allowed me to make curves.

I liked how Inkscape, like Photoshop, lets you work on multiple layers. This makes graphic design work a lot easier and solves a lot of problems that I have had designing in Powerpoint or Pages. I am so glad I learned about Inkscape because it came in handy when I was making my spirograph. I was able to use a built in function to create interlocking gears, which I then laser cut to make my final drawing machine.

It was great to apply my newly-gained knowledge to a new area. I now feel more comfortable working in vector based software (although I still prefer Photoshop).

Learning Factory

Earlier this week, I had the chance to visit the Learning Factory and become certified in safety, power tools, and machining. It was great to check out another resource on campus and learn about how to operate the machines safely and effectively.

Before going to the Learning Factory I didn't realize how many opportunities and resources students have access to. I think it's really great that the university is taking the initiative to encourage students to build things and giving them the resources to do it. One of the recent trends that I have heard about is that many engineering students come into college without a lot of building experience because they grew up with electronics and other devices that were harder to take apart (and probably more expensive to replace when they couldn't be put back together). I definitely can relate to this and it's one of the reasons I didn't enter college initially in engineering. I thought that I had to have a lot of building experience to be successful. Luckily, there are places like the learning factory where I can gain that experience.

In the future, I am looking forward to using the learning factory to do more hands on work and am grateful that our class was encouraged to go check it out. The possibilities there for art and engineering students are limitless and I am so excited to do some making!

Learning to Laser Cut

A broken and dirtied lens

This week I got laser cutting certified at Stuckeman's Digifab Lab. It was interesting to use Rhino for the first time and see how it differed from Solidworks. In Solidworks, you select icons to complete different tasks. In Rhino, you can do that, but you can also type in the command at the top in a formula bar and make adjustments (like setting dimensions) through there. It felt like a combination of Excel (because of the formula bar), Solidworks, and Photoshop (because of the use of layers and different settings for each).

Clean lenses

When designing our name plates, we learned about the differences between raster, which creates an engraving, and vector, which cuts directly through the material. We also learned how to change the settings in order to be sure the laser cutter would be able to penetrate a specific type of material (i.e. loading a setting for chip board, masonite, etc.). It was also interesting to see how the laser cutter works and how to maintain it.

I look forward to using in the future!

Getting ready to load the laser cutter

The laser cutter area

Make Something to Sit On

Today's challenge was to create something to sit on. The added bonus of having it potentially count as a lab 2 got us all motivated to go hard and I quickly reunited with some friends from EDSGN 100H to complete the challenge.

I have to admit that I was intimidated by the task ahead of us. After seeing the chair Matt made using compliant mechanisms, we felt we had to make something that was not only functional, but also aesthetically pleasing. Early in the process, we had a lot of trouble communicating our ideas. Someone in the group would start to describe their idea while all of us would look at them blankly. Then, someone else would chime in that they understood what that person was talking about and suddenly it didn't matter that no one else knew what was going on. I found myself nodding along without really getting what someone's idea was. I initially thought sketching our ideas would be a solution to this issue, but I quickly learned that our group was not super good at sketching either. Once we got the actual wood in our hands it was easier to show the other group members what our ideas were, but I think going forward, we need to spend more time in the early part of the process making sure everyone knows what the idea we are considering actually is. If we understood what each of the other people was proposing, we might have been able to better build off each other's ideas and come to a better design idea.

Our chair!

After several ideas, we settled on a stool that was ridged on either side. We started making the chair, but again, communication issues made it difficult for multiple people to work at the same time since we still didn't all have a sense of what was going on. Stephen ended up doing most of the building work while the rest of us supported him by retrieving supplies or haggling with other teams to get more wood. While this system was probably more time-efficient, I think it went against the nature of the task and I think we would have gotten more out of the experience if we shared responsibilities while making the chair.

We finished the chair with 30 seconds to spare only to realize that it was really high off the ground, so that only someone as tall as Matt could sit in it. Also, because we included no back support, I doubt anyone would have decided to sit in it for very long. In this exercise, our group focused more on what we thought would be aesthetically interesting than what would be comfortable. In doing so, we made an object that was pretty uncomfortable. This leads me to my first takeaway: be careful when prototyping for one specific quality (in this case aesthetics) because you may sacrifice other more desirable qualities. Also, if we had conducted more user research, we might have learned how much we should value aesthetics over ergonomics.

Trying out the stool

My second takeaway was: there's value in building an interdisciplinary team. I immediately gravitated towards the engineering group because I had previously worked with (most) of them before and I figured we would have a better shot at getting the lab 2 credit if we worked together. But, the whole point of this class is that having different perspectives makes you a better designer. The members of our team all had depth in engineering, but not in architecture or art, which could have been helpful when designing this chair for aesthetics or comfort. Going forward, I plan to make more of an effort to get to know (and work with) the students in the other departments.