Introduction Brief: The brief for this project is to understand how design can be driven by material experiences and theories that relate to this. In order to do this you will engage with the recommended texts, then create a series of experiments with a waste material and evaluate the experiential qualities of your experiments based on user feedback. You will start by picking a waste material, which you will then experiment with in order to understand its material properties but also to create a range of experimental material samples with their own unique qualities. You will apply a range of different processes to your material in order to do this, such as compressing, blending or mixing compounding it with other materials. You will then explore the experiential potential of these experiments by gathering user feedback on the qualities of teach of these samples. Finally you will analyse both the user feedback and the materials in order to create a description of the material samples and proposals for products and contexts where they could be applied.
Facts:
Words:
―― ―― ―― ―― ――
Christmas, Citrus, Fruity, Kids, Orange, Squishy, Stringy, Sweet, Tasty, Waxy.
A Easy Peeler is actually just a small Clementine They are produced in Spain Britain consumes 180m kg of them a year They are found in almost 80% of shopping baskets Best Kept in a Fridge
Raw Material Thoughts: This raw ingredient caught my eye instantly as a waste material to use because it’s association with being a throw away snack food. Hence I thought that their must be a lot of waste peel generated each year. It also has a lot of interesting properties in it’s raw form, this include being fire resistant. This is probably due to its high moisture content, so it will be interesting to see if this actuality translates to dry materials made with it. It also has a high tensile strength it certain directions, but rips easily when pierced. It’s scent is also a notable property because its very familiar to most people, this is something that I will also try to play with when developing new materials from it As I am just using the waste peel of the Easy Peeler, it will fall under the Scenario 3 of MDD, because it is a relativity unexplored material. I therefore will be approaching my material generation and user testing with this in mind.
Ingredients:
Methods:
Baking Powder, Corn Flour, Easy Peel Netting, Easy Peeler Peel, Easy Peeler Pulp, Glycerine, Oats, Paper, Potato Starch, Salt, Water, White Vinegar.
Baking, Blending, Boiling, Chopping, Drying, Frying, Kneading, Microwaving, Stirring, Waiting.
Experiments Thoughts: Unlike the MMD article I did not have a material in mind when I begun experimenting. I just wanted to have fun and create as many weird and wacky things as possible. This being said I did some things into account when creating these samples. The first thing I kept in mind was that I wanted all my samples the same basic size and shape, to make may testing more fair and impartial. To achieve this I used a standard 5 cm hole baking tray, and I made sure to grease it. I also recorded down a rough recipe for each material so that I could recreate it or add to it in the future. After messing around in the kitchen for 3 days making some completely random material samples and some tried and tested ideas from the internet I was left with samples, many overlapping with slight variations and some completely different from the rest.
Questions:
Users:
―― ―― ―― ――
4 Artists, 8 Designers, 4 Randoms
Pick three samples. Why were you drawn to this particular sample? What does this sample remind you off? What adjectives best describe this sample?
User Test #1 Thoughts: The main purpose of this first user test was to whittle down my 28 samples to a small sub set that I could then test more in depth. Therefore I tired to get a big set of users to test as many samples as possible, from their results I would then be able to select the most intersting and diverse samples. As I also used this test to generate data and observations about both the visual and tactile qualities of the material. I based my questions around the both emotional and physical frame work of the questions laid out in the MDD article. Users then wrote down their answers on individually post it notes, so I quickly visualise the results. The users were not told what the materials were created with, but many guessed due to the strong smell and orange colour.
Questions:
Users:
―― ―― ―― ――
2 Artists, 1 Designer, 1 Random.
What is your instant emotional response to this material? What materials do you most associate this sample with? What Objects do you most associate this sample with? What adjectives would you describe this sample with?
User Test #2 Thoughts: After the first user test, I choose 6 samples to move forward with, these were the most interesting to me and the user group and also were very diverse. I choose to only move forward with 6 because in my experience I felt that people can only really be bothered or engaged when testing is around 10 minutes or you pay them. For this test I blindfolded the users and give them one sample a time in a random order. I choose to do blind testing because I believed it might focus the user attention more and not over allow them to apply their own visual biases. I also choose to use the questions above as framework rather then as strict criteria. I did this because I feel users gut reaction and the order they choose to make comments about a material are more important then having clean ordered answers. I then when back and organised their comments into answers for the 4 questions.
Questions:
Users:
―― ―― ―― ――
1 Artists, 2 Designer, 1 Random.
What is your instant emotional response to this material? What materials do you most associate this sample with? What Objects do you most associate this sample with? What adjectives would you describe this sample with?
User Test #3 Thoughts: The last user test I did was a touch-less test, were user were shown samples one at a time on a white sheet and were not allowed to touch it. I also used the same questions from user test two for a framework, This enabled me to compare and contrast the visual and tactile qualities of the materials, and also the emotions these two qualities provoked. As with the last test, I let the users touch the materials after the test was complete and this gave me another chance to see how the reality of the materials met with their expectations. Another thing that I repeated from user test two was to have all test subjects give comments on every material. I felt this was very important to get fair and comparable results. However, It did limit the amount of users I could test, due the time it took to test.
Key:
Average Users:
―― Black both visual and tactile users ―― Orange tactile users only ―― Blue visual users only
6 Both, 4 Tactile, 4 Visual.
Analysis Thoughts: After collecting a lot of raw data, observations and comments on my 6 main samples, I chose to use a idea form the MDD article and compile each sample’s feedback into a spider diagram. After doing so I could easily see trends that emerged and also got a idea of the main attributes of each sample. It was interesting to see how the feed back from different tests contrasted. For example with sample seen left, only users that could see the sample thought it looked healthy and tasty, where as users who could only touch it felt it was some kind of rock or gravel composite. After making the diagram I highlighted words, and opinions that kept arising, and these in turn contributed hugely to my analysis of each sample.
Ingredients:
Instructions:
- 1/2 Easy Peeler Peel
―― ―― ―― ――
Pre-heat oven at gas mark 1 Place Peel on lightly greased Oven Tray Baked for 3 hours Leave to cool at room temperature
Sample #1 Thoughts:
Products:
Words:
It’s very important to mention that this material was the only one in the final set that did not have a flat biscuit like shape. Hence during user testing, it provoked a instant reaction of being like a hat, helmet or bowl.
―― Packaging ―― Bowl ―― Novelty Hat
Ball, Curiosity, Hard, Hard, Hat, Natural, Nostalgia, Organic, Pours, Rough, Synthetic, Warm, Weathered.
Having said this it was well received with all the user groups, this was in part due to its natural and familiar qualities. They seemed to really respond to its dry, warm and tough feel. Due to this and its tough material qualities I feel like this product would lend itself well to a hard packaging material. This is due to it being easily formed, it’s hard but giving strength and the way it makes people feel warm.
Ingredients:
Instructions:
―― 1 tbsp Easy Peeler Peel blended finely ―― 1 tbsp Easy Peeler Peel Thinly Sliced
―― ―― ―― ―― ――
Pre-heat oven at gas mark 1 Need the two parts together Place on lightly greased Oven Tray Baked for 3 hours Leave to cool at room temperature
Sample #7 Thoughts:
Products:
Words:
This sample was very interesting in the fact that no one wanted to eat it. This was probably to do with it both feeling like and looking like recycled plastic.
―― Internal Structure ―― Further Development
Cleaning, Coral, Dry, Gross, Natural, Organic, Recycled, Sharp, Used, Vile.
It seemed to be reminiscent of something you might find washed up on a beech covered in sand and painful to stand on. Due to this a lot of people felt like it should be used in some kind of shower body scrubbing situation. However, it will disintegrate when it touches water, this is probably not a great career option for it. Due to its strength and lack of weight, I feel it would be right at home as a internal structure of component, in much the same way as honey comb is.
Ingredients:
Instructions:
―― 1 tbsp Easy Peeler Peel blended finely ―― 1 tbsp Oats
―― ―― ―― ―― ――
Pre-heat oven at gas mark 1 Need the two parts together Place on lightly greased Oven Tray Baked for 3 hours Leave to cool at room temperature
Sample #9 Thoughts:
Products:
This sample was unavoidably natural in both blind and touch-less testing. It reminded almost all test subject of nature, goodness and health. Some users even went as far as feeling nostalgia for being out in the wild, they found it romantic.
―― Indoor sculpture Earthy, Food, ―― Place mats Gravel, ―― Tray Healthy, Nostalgic, Oats, Rocky, Stone.
Physically the material is very brittle and hard, granular in nature and non uniform. It is also porous and doesn’t take to water without immediately falling apart. It also takes issue with being bent, it makes this clear by snapping. With all this in mind I feel this material defiantly lends itself to something in the home, not any home but a holiday home by the sea. Hence I think its a good way to bring nature into a city dwelling in the form of a detractive, not functional item.
Words:
Ingredients:
Instructions:
―― ―― ―― ――
―― Pre-heat oven at gas mark 1 ―― Drain the moisture from the pulp and peel ―― Chop the bag into 1-2cm parts ―― Need the three parts together ―― Place on lightly greased Oven Tray ―― Baked for 3 hours ―― Leave to cool at room temperature
1 tsp Easy Peeler Peel blended finely 1 tsp Easy Peeler Pulp blended finely 1 tsp Corn Flour A sprinkle of Easy Peeler bag
Sample #16 Thoughts:
Products:
Words:
This sample had the most positive reaction of any sample I tested. It some how managed to hit a emotive part of people, conjuring a warm and cosy feeling in them. Often with the blind tests, when I let the users see the samples after testing, they picked up this sample first
―― Mugs ―― Vases ―― Other things that remind you of home
Alien, Ceramic, Cosy, Foam, Food, Happy, Kind, Natural.
It reminded a lot of people concrete, and porcelain, due to is soft and rigid texture. Unfortunately unlike these two materials it is bound by cornstarch and so melts when it encounters water. I defiantly feel like if this material could be treated in such a way that it became water proof, it should be and then immediately be used in some form of crockery. The idea of having a mug made out of it well sitting by a fire (or a radiator), sounds cosy, warm and thoroughly enjoyable.
Ingredients:
Instructions:
―― 1 tbsp Easy Peeler Peel blended finely ―― 1 tbsp Easy Peeler Finely blended finely ―― 1 tsp White Vinegar ―― 2 tsp Corn Flour ―― 1 tsp Glycerine ―― 1 tsp Salt ―― 4 tbsp Water
―― Pre-heat oven at gas mark 1 ―― Drain the moisture from the pulp and peel ―― Mix together all ingredients in pot on low heat ―― Mix continuously till mixture has become transparent ―― Place on lightly greased Oven Tray ―― Baked for 3 hours ―― Leave to cool at room temperature
Sample #19 Thoughts:
Products:
In contrast with sample #16, this sample was met with hostility, repulsion and disgust. I may as well of asked my user group to touch a blob fish. All except one of my blind users was actively upset that I had just placed this in their hand with out warning them.
Ew, ―― Kids Toys ―― Homemade Toys Flakey, Gross, Jaffa Cake, Jam, Latex, No, Skin, Squishy, Toys, Ugly.
The material does have some interesting physical qualities, with its hard skin but flexible nature. It was these qualities that made a very small majority of my users remember childhood toys. For this reason I feel like this material could be used for children’s toys, even home made toys. The big plus point being that if a kid 3 and under eats it, they won’t die because its digestible. Unless they choke on it.
Words:
Ingredients:
Instructions:
―― 1 tbsp Easy Peeler Peel blended finely ―― 1 tbsp Potato ―― 1/2 tbsp Water
―― ―― ―― ―― ――
Pre-heat oven at gas mark 1 Drain the moisture from the peel Dry the Peel at a low heat in the oven Mix all ingredients together till mixed Microwave for 3 minutes
Sample #27 Thoughts:
Products:
Words:
This was the wild card in my user group, it wasn’t chosen or picked out by many people in my initial testing. However, I choose to keep this material in my final 6 due it being very different form the first 5 and also having very good physical properties.
―― Kids Art Medium ―― Alternative for wood if varnished ―― Further Development
Boring, Food, Grainy, Hard, Indifferent, Wood.
It was interesting therefore when my blind and touch-less testers found this ample very boring. However, I feel this was because it felt very familiar to other materials . The blind testers felt strongly it was a porcelain like material and users who could not touch it felt it was some sort of MDF. This contrast was very interesting and informative. One of the biggest plus points about this is it’s easy ability to be formed and quick cooking time. So I feel this could be made into a kids art medium, and varnished for a long happy life on the fridge.
Thoughts: At the beginning of the process I tried to follow the template set out in the MDD article. However, I quickly lost interest in the article due to its very academic cadence and therefore found it very difficult to follow it’s text and process. I therefore choose to use its ideas as a framework and developed my own way to discover the physical and emotional properties of my sample set. I found the process of this project very rewarding in the experimental nature of it, it was very freeing to be able to experiment with both new materials and ways to test the,. I learnt a great deal on user testing and also spent a great deal of time trying to record my process through photographs and through notation.
Conclusion Bibliography: ―― Ceccolini, Marina, “Agridust”, Behance.net, 2016 <https://www.behance.net/gallery/24616719/ AgriDust-Biodegradable-material> [accessed 16 January 2016] ―― Instructables.com, “Bio-Plastic”, 2016 <http:// www.instructables.com/id/Bio-plastic/> [accessed 16 January 2016] ―― Karana, Barati, Rognoli, and Zeeuw van der Laan, “Material Driven Design (MDD): A Method To Design For Material Experiences”, IJDesign, 9 (2015), 39-54 ―― Ribul, Miriam, “Recipes For Material Activism”, Issuu, 2014 <http://issuu.com/miriamribul/docs/ miriam_ribul_recipes_for_material_a> [accessed 16 January 2016]
Fred Wordie