What is Good Design in the Eyes of Older Users?

With the population of older consumers increasing and with the recent changes in legislation and attitudes towards this group, there have been corresponding changes in product design practice and a growing attempt to adopt an inclusive design approach. This recognises that people can become excluded from using products, services or environments if the needs and capabilities of all potential users are not taken into account. The inclusive design approach has developed from collaborations between industry, designers and researchers. One major influence in this area is the i~design project, whose definition is simply that “inclusive design is better design” (EDC, 2011). The Inclusive Design Toolkit website, a key output from the i~design project, states that a successful product must be “functional, usable, desirable and ultimately profitable” and that a key to good design is to reduce the demand on the user when capabilities decline with age or disability (EDC, 2011). It is also important to consider more emotional aspects, such as social acceptability and whether the potential user would actually want to use or be seen using the product (Keates and Clarkson, 2003). Other authors also emphasise that whilst inclusive design research and practice to date have focused primarily on the physical accessibility and usability of products, a better understanding is required of people’s emotional needs, such as social acceptability and desirability of products (Coleman et al, 2007; Lee, 2010). Similar views regarding the required shift in design focus are reflected in a number of other sources: the need to consider the less tangible human factors such as identity, emotion, delight and selfexpression (Cassim et al, 2007); simplicity, aesthetics, pleasure, personality, conspicuousness and fashion (Pullin, 2009); the product’s visual appearance (Crilly et al, 2004); creating pleasurable experiences (Demirbilek and Sener, 2003; Jordan, 2000); and the importance of the emotional aspects of design for a successful product (Norman, 2004), as well as needs related to specific cognitive conditions (e.g. Baumers and Heylighen, 2010)

Unlocking value for a circular economy through 3D printing: A research agenda

The circular economy (CE) aims to radically improve resource efficiency by eliminating the concept of waste and leading to a shift away from the linear take-make-waste model. In a CE, resources are flowing in a circular manner either in a biocycle (biomass) or technocycle (inorganic materials). While early studies indicate that 3D printing (3DP) holds substantial promise for sustainability and the creation of a CE, there is no guarantee that it will do so. There is great uncertainty regarding whether the current trajectory of 3DP adoption is creating more circular material flows or if it is leading to an alternative scenario in which less eco-efficient localised production, demands for customised goods, and a higher rate of product obsolescence combine to bring about increased resource consumption. It is critical that CE principles are embedded into the new manufacturing system before the adoption of 3DP reaches a critical inflection point in which negative practices become entrenched. This paper, authored by both academic and industry experts, proposes a research agenda to determine enablers and barriers for 3DP to achieve a CE. We explore the two following overarching questions to discover what specific issues they entail: (1) How can a more distributed manufacturing system based on 3DP create a circular economy of closed-loop material flows? (2) What are the barriers to a circular 3D printing economy? We specifically examine six areas-design, supply chains, information flows, entrepreneurship, business models and education-with the aim of formulating a research agenda to enable 3DP to reach its full potential for a CE

A framework for differentiation in composed digital-physical products

Product-service systems (PSS) composed of physical products and digital services are emerging as an important new product category. In this paper we suggest that the established metaphor of layering is insufficient to capture the diverse ways in which PSS can be differentiated for, and by, consumers. Responding to this issue, we develop a new framework that centres on the distinction between different modes of horizontal product differentiation, including static, dynamic, compository and user-journey differentiation. Using a design science research (DSR) approach, the framework is applied to two case studies of prototype PSS that use augmented reality to connect physical goods to digital services. Building on this analysis, we argue that the uncovered aspects of differentiation should be further investigated in the management literature and that the existing metaphor of layers should be superseded by a more suitable one

Part Selection for Freeform Injection Molding:Framework for Development of a Unique Methodology

The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of a methodology, which will enable industrial end-users to identify potential components to be manufactured by Freeform Injection Molding (FIM). The difference between the technical and economic criteria needed for part selection for Additive Manufacturing (AM) and FIM will be discussed, which will lead us towards proposing a new methodology for part selection for FIM. Our proposed approach starts by identifying the most similar components (from end-user part libraries) to some reference parts, which can be produced by FIM. Identification will be followed by cluster analysis based on important factors for FIM part selection. As there are some interdependency between the factors involved in the clusters, some decision rules using Fuzzy Interference System (FIS) will be applied to rank the parts within each cluster using user-defined technical and economic criteria. Once the first set of potential FIMable parts have been identified, Design of Experiment (DOE) will be conducted to investigate which factors are most important and how they interact with each other to generate the desirable quality of the FIM parts. The DOE results will be validated in order to finetune the ranges of the parameters, which gives the best results. Finally, a predictive model will be developed based on the optimum feasible range of FIM parameters. This will help the end-users to analytically find the new FIMable parts without repeating the algorithm for the new parts

Product circularity assessment methodology

In today’s dynamic economic environment, industry is facing global challenges such as meeting the needs of a growing population, resource scarcity and landfill space shortage. These issues highlight the need for a dramatically more efficient use of natural resources to create social and economic value for society while respecting the carrying capacity limits of the planet. Additive manufacturing technologies provide opportunities to support sustainable manufacturing and the circular economy paradigm. These opportunities can be leveraged throughout the product lifecycle: energy and material consumption reduction in manufacturing, lower material use through maintenance, reuse, remanufacturing and recycling. Despite these benefits being more broadly recognised in recent years, industrial applications are still scarce. This work proposes a quantitative methodology to assess the circularities arising along the lifecycle of a product fabricated with additive manufacturing technologies, thereby supporting the shift to more circular industrial systems and sustainability

Product circularity assessment methodology

In today’s dynamic economic environment, industry is facing global challenges such as meeting the needs of a growing population, resource scarcity and landfill space shortage. These issues highlight the need for a dramatically more efficient use of natural resources to create social and economic value for society while respecting the carrying capacity limits of the planet. Additive manufacturing technologies provide opportunities to support sustainable manufacturing and the circular economy paradigm. These opportunities can be leveraged throughout the product lifecycle: energy and material consumption reduction in manufacturing, lower material use through maintenance, reuse, remanufacturing and recycling. Despite these benefits being more broadly recognised in recent years, industrial applications are still scarce. This work proposes a quantitative methodology to assess the circularities arising along the lifecycle of a product fabricated with additive manufacturing technologies, thereby supporting the shift to more circular industrial systems and sustainability

Unlocking value for a circular economy through 3D printing: A research agenda

The circular economy (CE) aims to radically improve resource efficiency by eliminating the concept of waste and leading to a shift away from the linear take-make-waste model. In a CE, resources are flowing in a circular manner either in a biocycle (biomass) or technocycle (inorganic materials). While early studies indicate that 3D printing (3DP) holds substantial promise for sustainability and the creation of a CE, there is no guarantee that it will do so. There is great uncertainty regarding whether the current trajectory of 3DP adoption is creating more circular material flows or if it is leading to an alternative scenario in which less eco-efficient localised production, demands for customised goods, and a higher rate of product obsolescence combine to bring about increased resource consumption. It is critical that CE principles are embedded into the new manufacturing system before the adoption of 3DP reaches a critical inflection point in which negative practices become entrenched. This paper, authored by both academic and industry experts, proposes a research agenda to determine enablers and barriers for 3DP to achieve a CE. We explore the two following overarching questions to discover what specific issues they entail: (1) How can a more distributed manufacturing system based on 3DP create a circular economy of closed-loop material flows? (2) What are the barriers to a circular 3D printing economy? We specifically examine six areas-design, supply chains, information flows, entrepreneurship, business models and education-with the aim of formulating a research agenda to enable 3DP to reach its full potential for a CE