Smart mechanics

Nowadays the Word ''Smart'', regarding products, is associated to devices enhanced by electronics in sensitive and responsive ways. It refers to the technology that drive inanimate objects into a more sentient stage of their development. But electronics is not the only way to reach that goal. Through the intelligent use of mechanics it can also be achieve the point on which inanimated objects would recognize key features of their users, helping them with this to perform better whatever task these objects are meant to do.

This is the case of the Cannondale concept bike developed by Priority Design. The C.E.R.V (continuosly ergonomic race Vehicle) adapt its handle bar position to match the most efficient posture for different kind of terrain. Without a doubt a great example of meaningful collaboration between design and engineering.

 

Find more about the CERV bike here

The hard side of Opensource

Arduino The Documentary (2010) English HD from gnd on Vimeo.

Opensource is probably the most philosophically relevant idea coming from the computer sciences. Actually the idea of sharing knowledge it's, of course, not new but it the age on which patent and rights have drag the technical knowledge to a exclusive corporate corner sharing information about how things work it's a revolutionary endeavor. In a good metaphor expressed in this documentary the Opensource is compared with Gutenberg's movable type printer. Before Gutenberg the production of books were in hands of a few, mostly cleric,that controlled what could be read, hence what could be know, after him the amount and more important the variety of books explode given the people the chance of build themselves for themselves a body of knowledge to understand the world. Gutenberg's printer was a very important piece of Open hardware that boost society into a new direction.

Today we are confronting a similar scenario. We are surrounding by technological devices like cellphones, computers, consoles, mp-players, etc. That we barely know how to use and we are even less inform about how they actually works. This disinformation has huge consecuenses in a world on which the number of this kind of devices may be even bigger than the actual population. Think on what is lost every time that a computer or a cellphone goes to the trash, maybe the system as a whole doesn't work but, what about all those little parts that give life to that cellphone or that computer? what if we can do something with those parts? what if we can play and tinker with that old low resolution cellphone camera or that screen? what about the spinning wheel of that broken mouse or the optics of that old digital camera? the possibilities are amazingly wide. For doing that we need knowledge and tools, but as we know big part of the knowledge comes from playing with the tools and here is where Arduino comes into scene. this piece of very cheap and non-exclusive piece of hardware is the tool which allow us to start connecting all those little parts and give them a purpose, whatever this purpose would be. Here is the potential of this little device that have been revolutionizing the digital world, and the revolution consist on materialize the digital world itself for sake of fun, what purpose beautiful and productive than that.

Following fun and with the help of Opensource tools as Arduino and Processing amazing things have come to life like 3d printers that cost little more than a thousand dollars or new music instrument and a lot of new robots. Opensource tools like Arduino bring down the technical threshold of electronic devices world to a level that allow not specialized people to start to interact in a expressive and creative way with it, and the best part... in a social way too, because is not about what I can do and how I can make profit out of that (not only at least) but what We can do and how we take this thing into the next level.

Opensource means sharing knowledge, and sharing knowledge means better and faster understanding and develop of communities. It may not be new but as a movement based on the technologies that are changing the face of our daily living surely, is a philosophy to adopt.

Challenges of future design

In this video Hamilton Smith, part of the team that develop the first synthetic cell, talk with Noy Bassik about building machines in the scale of a cell. Two basic ideas are discuss in this conversation, the first one coming from Smith is to build living machines through the alteration of a already existing organism. This mean build a purpose-full device out of the essential biological parts, DNA. In the other side is the vision of Bassik that pursuit the develop of machines that interact with the chemical world of biology. What he's doing is engineer devices that can be controlled by chemical reactions fulfill a purpose. The purpose of this machines is now in the level of mechanical effects but -as they discuss- is projected to be a lot more than that, a complete factory that can sense and react producing and delivering substances needed by the organism.

Now in the eye of a Designer this may look really far away from our expertise area but there is some hints that can give us a second look. First the formal level, the technique worked by

Bassik is inspire in Origami and from this ancient art the idea of build volume out of a flat surface is drawn to research with the out coming of relevant insights to control materials through shape. This imply that formal thinking is needed in the conception of this new kind of machines and designer at above all formal thinkers. Another component of the thinking process of Design can take us into a deeper level, this is the behavioral awareness. Is well know that in Design practice the biggest tool is Observation, observation of people and their conducts, of systems and their components and relations between them, of causes and effects, actually of whatever is involved in the studied situation. This tool in combination with the problem solving thinking of engineers brings about comprehensive solutions that almost in every field of the building-things human endeavor has drive innovation. With the develop of techniques that enables to build thing in the micro scale we are entering in a new stage of technology and the products of this new phase will progressively increase in complexity, when this start to happen it will be necessary the knowledge and the thinking on how the outcome of the process of this machines will affect the whole system, in simpler words, how the behavior of this devices will cause effects on the other component of the system, as the non-micro scale devices affect us and the environment today.

Some of this worries have already take in hands of designers as in Nanotopia or in Victimless leather presented mainly as Art projects but in the way that this technologies star to permeate more deeply our cultures and our daily life the need for a technical and reflective presence of design will be more critical. So, maybe it's time to aim for the future and involve Design in the next technological revolution, design at micro scale.

The future of e-paper: the trash can?

A new post on innovation-report inform about a new ''break through'' on material sciences coming from the University of Cincinnati, a Disposable e-paper. Actually from the scientific side it's really a break through. A paper based technology that enables to display information, in different ways including video, as the screens are doing it today but with the difference that would be flexible and low cost; todays standard technology (as kindle and ipad) relays on complex circuitry printed on glass that's expensive and of course rigid.

Until now everything it's OK but what catch my attention was the link between low-cost and disposability. The scientist claim that this technology would be so affordable that at the end of the day or the week you can just throw it to the garbage can. My worries are why we attached the value of and object, and in this case a really awesome product of Technic, just to its monetary value. In other words, why because is cheap it's OK to throw it to the garbage! It's not so that we cannot see value in other things other that money like functionality, convenience or even human effort (of developing such device) or the notion that maybe the intrinsic value that having something like that in our possession maybe higher that let it go to the property (and personal preoccupation and involvement free) space of the trash stream.

Cheap cannot be a synonym of disposability. Affordability cannot be a synonym of bad quality. And the garbage can cannot be the goal for technology development nor the end point of the value chain.

The report claims this technology maybe available in the market three to five years from now, we can only expect that until then our ways to see this issues change a little bit.

via: Innovations report

Image: Flickr/Kranky

Designer! which kind? ....mm...Designer

Design is a common noun for a big amount of different occupations. As people who have a degree on design sometimes we feel a rather disappointed with common notion of Design that able to almost everybody to become a designer just by personal statement, and because of this we usually try to separate ourselves from the crowd saying that we are Industrial, Graphic, Product, Information, Interaction, Car, Yacht, Fashion, Furniture, Interior, Stage, Green, Red, Blue or else Designer; we are good on that.

In contrast with this recently a group of Design researchers has publish a paper on Design Issues that try to find common places in diverse disciplines of the design though a very simple methodology, conversation. They realize a series of workshops with a handfull of expert Designers (more than 10 years of practice) from different fields. From the fashion design to jet engine design and from furniture design to TV documentary. The first thing they found was that, although with some nuances, all the Designers talk the same language. When an engine Designer was put into conversation with a graphic one the only idea that needed an explanation was ''thumbnail'' and it was quickly grasped... by the engine designer. So language, I mean technical language, even through heavy specialization is a common tool.

Other interesting finding of the study was that we relate the idea of good design mainly with the acceptance and recognition coming from our peers, and only then with the user acceptance, sintitutional recognition or commercial success.

One big resemblance in all the stories told by the designers is the creative relationship with the material. Great deal of the time expended in the projects and the actual search -and find- of solutions goes through the hands and the direct contact with the material. Though the ''conversations'' with the material can be more or less physically attended, the direct experience and experimentation seems to be extremely relevant. In this way the lamp designer play with the glass to find out new shapes, properties and effects that can be use in the design as the engine designer, as well as the graphic one, includes the properties and qualities of the steel or the typography as constrains and capabilities that drives de design process.

The research unveils that in the communication area the main tool is by far the Sketching. Even when the computer techniques allow us to render projects more accurately (and more convincingly for the clients) than the hand, the sketching still prevail when it comes to capture and develop ideas.

The study also goes through the relationship with the final user and the big amount of energy spent in every design project on managing the uncertainty of collaborations with people and policies and as a conclusion stress the wide range of commonalities that bring designers together rather than split them around different technical, cultural and business context; and how much we need tools that make us aware of this and foster respect across the design world.

Even though this research found some really important insight of the design praxis, there are still some questions that should be address in order to bring about information on how designers are connected to each other further than the common places of the practice, which can also be found in others disciplines. We need to ask us about, how designers work out the difficult relationship between creation of new things (or stuffs as R.Gold said) and the renovation of the already existent things? Also, which are (if there are) the commonalities of our generative process in contrast with other creative areas? Learn about this can drive us to a more deep understanding of our discipline and its practical values.

Paper towels for oil spills: MIT researchers unveil autonomous oil-absorbing robot

MIT researchers unveil autonomous oil-absorbing robot

see also

The Plenitude of Rich Gold

Some weeks ago I went in a local bookstore just to kill some time , and after take a quick look into the shelves a small green spine cath my attention in the design theorie area (after that I notice that theorie books even when it comes to design, are usually graphically bored). I take it from the shelf and just there another two things call my interest. First, all the cover was illustrated with doodles that looks like made by a school kid -a thing that I found clever in a bookshelf full of elaborated computer renderings- very warm and very beautiful. The second thing was ''foreword by John Maeda'' writen under the autors name, Rich Gold. Then when I went into the book, to my surprise I didn't found any pictures, any renders, any oversimplify diagrams, nothing but words..and CARTOONS! yes cartoons. Every chapter or section starts with a cartoon, and also every main idea on the book is stressed with a cartoon. There is a cartoon to explain the overstuffed enviroment in wich we live that Gold calls ''the plenitude'', there is also a cartoon that show clearly the four disciplines (and professions pursuit by the autor) that have the responsability of around 97% of the plenitude, there is a cartoons to explain the seven path of innovation, the five problems of the Plenitude and the seven solutions for that; and even for explain how the Plenitude of ones is based in the poverty of others.

After been exposed to that amount of quality information two thoughts came to my mind, cartoons rules and I have to reed this book.

The book is about thing, or better say Stuff. What it is, from where it comes, where it goes, how we can deal with it and why we need to be sorrounded by this thing call ''the plenitude'' (after write this post I'm not sure anymore if this book it's really about ''stuff'')

The Plenitude, Creativity, Innovation and Making Stuff

autor: Rich Gold (foreword by John Maeda)

pages:111

the MIT press

EN-V: no more cars but movable-containers-points of a mobilitynet

the emotion of invention

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/dean_kamen_the_emotion_behind_invention.html

Augmenting Reality | Product Design and Development

this is a sample of the features in the next generation cars, where Augmented reality it's included as a part of driving experienced

Augmenting Reality | Product Design and Development

Artificial foot recycles energy ...as a silicon gun!!

Probably the engineers from the University of Michigan weren't thinking about this when they came with the idea of storage energy through the same kind of mechanical device that makes the silicon gun works (looj at the hhel clutch in the upper picture), but the design analogy it's perfect. This hight-tech electromechanical prosthetic feet works (in the mechanical part) with the same basic principle that a silicon gun, a clever solution for a very complex problem and a really good sample of analogous thinking in the design process.

for the complete article with all the explanation follow this

for a video of the device working folow this

and for the paper who explain... everything follow this