F522Product Focus and AnalysisImages with this symbol , are videos. Hover over the video and click the play button that appears to watch the video.

Video

Manufacturer Needs•Labour The manufacturers, in regard to my design would want to include as little manual labour as possible to keep costs down. This is achieved by manufacturing the product using machinery as far as possible, which also eliminates/minimizes the factor of human error and faults. My product was made almost completely from the injection moulding process which would be manned by someone, most likely an unskilled labourer. This would mean that they wouldn’t need to be paid a lot, or at least not the same wage as a skilled worker, hence the costs are at a minimum.

•Target Market The manufacturer would need to research their market so that they could then refine and focus their design to suit the consumer. By carrying out surveys and getting to know the specifications of their consumer, they are able to understand and include the specific requirements that would make their product more appealing to this definitive market. In my case, the manufacturers have found that not only is knife sharpener used in the home, but it’s also needed on activities such as hunting and camping - in which case being lightweight is essential, as well as being made of materials that are weather resistant.

•Cost of Production The manufacturer would need the cost of production to be as cost effective as possible so that the product could be large scale batch produced. The direct costs would involve the materials, so the thermoplastics that are melted in the injection moulding process. Also the labour needed to man the machinery is included in this cost. In addition the amount of money needed to run the injection moulding machine is substantial and so the manufacturer’s would need to produce more units to compensate

•Assembly The manufacturer would need to understand that the product is primarily one injection moulded piece, and the only other separate part of the product is attached using 3 Philips head screws. This could be done at home by the consumer, which would save the manufacturers a little money . However, the product had already been assembled and packaged ready for purchase, which might’ve encouraged people to buy it, as it is easy and primed for use.

•Environmental Issues The plastics used in the injection moulding process are thermoplastics, and so rather than the products being thrown away or burnt when no longer useable, they are able to be melted again and remoulded when they reach the end of their use. This decreases the potential output of greenhouse gases that are associated with burning plastics. This would also benefit the company as this could be an asset when marketing their product to consumers – they’re more likely to buy if they think they’re making a conscious effort to help the environment.

Consumer Needs• What it offers the consumerThe consumer would expect the product to successfully sharpen utensils, either a knife or a pair of scissors. It should be comfortable and easy to hold, in such a way that it doesn’t create risk of injury to the user. It should also be quite durable, and resist scratches or wear, as not only does this decrease the aesthetics of the product, but it also weakens it after repetitive attrition.

• CostThe consumer expects the product to be inexpensive, as there are a lot of utensils required in the kitchen – if they were all highly priced it would amount to too much for the average consumer. It should be priced in a way that is not so cheap that the consumer thinks they’re not receiving quality, but so that it is affordable.

• Value for MoneyThe consumer expects the product to have a reasonably long life-span, as it is not expected to be used very often. This means that buying frequent replacements is not on the consumers agenda or something that they factor in financially. The product also needs to be effective and do what it says it will, without much difficulty on the users part.

• MaintenanceThe consumer expects the product to be able to be cleaned easily, so being dishwasher safe would be an advantage and make a consumer more likely to buy the product. As the product is made up of more than one part, it should be easy for the consumer to re-attach or tighten the screws that hold the product together.

• Ease of Use/Ergonomic ComfortThe consumer expects the product to be comfortable to hold so that it is easy to use and therefore is more efficient.

• Instructions/SafetyThe consumer expects the instructions to be as clear as possible and give sure direction as to how to hold both the product and utensil, perhaps in the form of pictures as well as words. This is especially important as holding the utensil incorrectly could result in a hand slipping and the user injuring themselves.

• StorageAs the product is not needed often enough to be left out in sight the consumer expects it to be compact enough to be stored away and take up little space in a drawer, or cupboard. It should perhaps come with a protection so that the blades for sharpening are not dulled by being knocked repeatedly against items it is stored with.

• Product AfterlifeThe consumer expects the product to be able to be recycled, as this would be an incentive to buy the product. Knowing that the product would not add to greenhouse gases by being burnt or stored on landfills would encourage the consumer to purchase it.

Key Criteria

StorageThe designer would have decided to make this product quite small and compact so that it is easy to store away when not in use (which would most likely be often).

ErgonomicsThe designer would have designed the product to be as ergonomic as possible, especially as it is a handheld product that needs to be gripped firmly. This would explain the contours on the handle that increase the stability of the consumers hold on the product and also the raised lip that provides a comfortable rest for the thumb

MaterialsThe designers would have arranged the product so that it was made out of the same material as far as possible – in this case polypropylene, which can be melted and remoulded into a new product making it more eco-friendly than most plastic products.The other materials chosen for example, the metal for the blades would’ve been chosen for their ability to keep a sharp edge, their durability and resistance to wear.

FunctionThe designers would have wanted the product to function effectively; so it would sharpen the utensils successfully without any cause for complaint on the consumers part

Competition/PriceThe consumers would’ve designed the product so that it could be cost effective and affordable for the majority of the market – increasing sales and making sure they offer value for money where competitors cannot.

WeightThe designers would have formed the product so that it is lightweight, as this would enable it to be handheld and increase its outreach. This can be seen by the fact that the product is used not just in the kitchen, but also on enterprises such as hunting and fishing

MaintenanceThe designers would have had the idea that for the product to be marketable to the majority of people, it would need to have easy maintenance. This would explain the reason why it is dishwasher safe and also why the product is primarily one piece of plastic – there is only one other detachable part and this is held in place by three Philips head screws which can easily be tightened or re-screwed if necessary by the consumer. SafetyThe designer would have designed the product so that whatever you were sharpening would be facing away from you to minimize the chance of accidents

In this section I will analyse my product with a designers intentions in mind to determine why they might’ve made the choices they did when designing the product.

In conclusion, after considering the above categories it is clear that the designer primarily wanted the product to sharpen knives and scissors in the most effective way and then secondly to be lightweight to increase portability and the range of situations it could be used in. They have done this at the expense of utmost safety and also aesthetics, both of which I aim to improve in my design.

Strengths and Weaknesses Comparison – Primary ResearchIntroduction: This section discusses my comparisons between my knife sharpener and those developed by other companies. By doing this I aim to find points from other products that I can apply to my design, and also to find weaknesses and mistakes that I can avoid including.

Ergonomics• The product has a definite handle for

the consumer to grip it firmly. It also has contours that theoretically make the grip of the users hand on the product more natural and much more comfortable to hold

• The contours have not been created with the use of anthropometrics, so the spacing is unrealistic and therefore useless

• The shape of the handle means that it cuts into the hand of the user, and isn’t comfortable at all.

Functions• The product allows the consumer to

sharpen the blades of both knives and scissors to improve their efficiency in both the kitchen and other outdoor uses

• The product doesn’t have any way of collecting the filings from the sharpened utensils.

Aesthetics• The product doesn’t look particularly

striking, and the materials used give it a very cut-price appearance and feel

Key• Positives• Negatives• Comparison• Elements to carry forward

Cost• The product is very competitively

priced so it is affordable for the majority of people

• The product is priced this low because of the materials used. For more high-end materials to be used to increase the aesthetics, the price of the product would have to be increased to make it cost effective

Materials

• The polypropylene is suitable for this product, as it is weather resistant, meaning it can be used outdoors, and also very hard, so it is durable enough to be used in the home and elsewhere.

• The material can be melted and remoulded so it helps the environment instead of being burnt

• The material can be found in many different colours which would be an advantage when selling and improving aesthetics

Similar Products - Steel Rod

FunctionThe product sharpens the blade of a knife using a sliding motion instead of being sharpened between two blades.

MaterialsThe product is made almost completely from steel, save the handle which is just a plastic covering. The steel is a good choice of material as it is resistant to wear. The plastic is easily moulded and so this allows for more freedom when coming up with an ergonomic design.

Ergonomics

• The product’s handle has a curved shape which is comfortable to hold.

• It also incorporates indentations which increase the grip on the handle.

Cost• The product is more

expensive than the maxam sharpener, and this may be because there is a higher quantity of coveted metal e.g. steel. The price ranges from around under £10.00 to near £100.00, and this is because of the range of finishes on the steel and different processes undergone to achieve the hardest metal.

Aesthetics• The product is familiarly

used by professional chefs and so it has that appeal and implication that by using it, you achieve a better edge with your knife and therefore better quality food. The simplicity of the design would mean that it would not look out of place in a modern day kitchen.

A video in which the advantages and disadvantages of the products in fig 5. and fig 6. are discussed

Fig

5.

Fig

6.

Video

Chantry Knife Sharpener tew-550w

FunctionThe product sharpens knives only without a handheld facility. It needs to placed on a table for stability, whereby the knife is then sharpened on the criss-crossed steel rods using a sliding motion.

CostThe product is also significantly more expensive than the Maxam knife sharpener, as the one I found from Legend Cookshops was £24.99 and this was the general price range. This again was based on the fact that the product was made primarily from steel, and the design involved in the sharpening mechanism is a lot more intricate.

ErgonomicsThe handheld section of the product is made of a mouldable plastic and this has been implemented so that indentations can be included, improving the grip and stability of the handle. The jutting lip that surround s the handle stops the hand from slipping onto the sharpening rod, which has an abrasive texture and could injure the user.

ErgonomicsThe product provides a lip with a severe indentation for the hand to grip as a handle. The fact that it is made from steel means that it can withstand any high amount of pressure that the user may apply. The way the indentation has been formed means that it is irrelevant whether you are right or left-handed – both can use the product with ease. The angle of the blades is pre-set so it can be used straight away.

MaintenanceThe product is easily wiped down, so it can be kept clean relatively often. In the video I remove the inner mechanism (fig.2) and point out how it functions, and although this was useful it could be seen as a design flaw, as the screws were easily loosened as opposed to the Maxam which is very secure and also uses screws, meaning the heavy mechanism could drop out at any time. However, if this were to happen and the apparatus were to break on impact, there are replacement s available, so it could be fixed quickly. MaterialsThe product is made entirely from steel and the housing is coated with a gloss finish. This means that the product is quite heavy which would be dangerous for small children and adults alike if it were to fall. Steel is a very popular material due to its hardness and resistance to wear. It’s also quite expensive due to the method of sourcing. As a result the overall cost of the product is increased. The blades for sharpening inside the product are made from butchers steel. This means that the blades are coated in either ceramic or diamond which sharpen the blades and have longitudinal ridges.

AestheticsThe product is not striking visually, although the simplicity and effectiveness has meant that it is on permanent display at the New York Museum of Modern Arts. The mechanism is hidden by the steel housing and the coating on this steel can come in a variety of colours. (fig 3.)

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig 9.

TransportThe product is made originally in Sheffield so the cost of transporting the product is included in the final pricing, and this can vary depending on where the product needs to be shipped to. The company ships worldwide, like just like Maxam but because of the materials used and also perhaps the size of the product, the Chantry is more expensive with shipping costing as much as £25.00

Electric Buffalo Knife Sharpener

FunctionThe product sharpens knives using different textures (coarse, fine) using an electric sharpening mechanism, meaning you need only slide the knife through the designated slots to achieve a sharpened edge. It also doesn’t have handheld facility and has to be placed on a stable worktop for use.

AestheticsThe product looks quite boxy and unattractive in shape, although the finish on the plastic housing is quite neutral meaning it would go well in most modern households.

Fig. 10

StorageBecause of the shape and size of the product, it would be quite hard to store away as it’s not very compact

Fig.

11

Comparison

I think that the steel rods are better than the Maxam, as the ergonomics make it much more comfortable to use. The fact that there aren’t designated finger holds actually works to it’s advantage as it means that the consumer can hold the product however they feel more comfortable. However, this does limit the amount of grip available. The lack of structure in the product on the other hand means that the method of sharpening is unclear and requires a certain amount of skill on the consumers part, as without it the product would be used incorrectly decreasing it’s efficiency.

ComparisonI believe that the Chantry is better than the Maxam, because the method of sharpening is a lot easier and more comfortable. Although the Maxam is predominately handheld, there is the option of using it on a flat surface but this presents safety issues which aren’t present with the Chantry. With this sharpener, the knife faces away from you completely contrary to the Maxam where the knife is placed in such a way where an injury is likely.

Similar products – Secondary Research

MaterialsThe product’s different components comprise of diamond abrasive wheels, polypropylene and rubber. The product is marketed as being 100% diamond abrasive meaning that instead of being attached to an average steel grinding wheel with a mixture of other abrasive grains, it uses real diamonds exclusively. This is an advantage as it means that the wheels will be effective for a very long time as diamonds are very resistant to wear. Steel is a popular material but also quite expensive. Polypropylene is an appropriate material as it has a high melting point, so when the product is worked quite hard, the resulting heat will not damage the housing. It is very lightweight so it doesn’t add any extra weight to the already heavy interior, and it is unlikely to shatter if dropped. The rubber is used for the suction pads on the base of the product and these are effective as they don’t damage the work surface and provide a lot of grip and stability. Maintenance/HygieneDue to the fact the product is electric it is not possible for it to be dishwasher safe, however the materials used make it easy to be wiped down. The filings that accumulate during sharpening are caught by the magnetic function on the product. This magnet can be removed and washed making it a very hygienic product. In case of the instance that the sharpening wheels become dulled or faulty, it is possible to buy replacement wheel

ErgonomicsThe product does not have any designated places to hold it, as you are not expected to need to. It has non-slip rubber grips on the base so that it is secure enough to simply run the knife through. The base of the machine is very wide so there is no chance of it wobbling or tipping over while in use. The angle of the slots for the knife are pre-set to the optimum angle so it’s ready for use immediately.

A video where the advantages and disadvantages of the products in Fig. 5, Fig.7 & Fig.11 are discussed

CostThe product is much more expensive than the other sharpeners I have researched, and some of the main reasons for this are because it’s electric, the materials used and the processes needed to attain these materials. From Eurowire Containers, the sharpener was £42.50, £55.00 form Amazon and £41.86 from ebay.

ErgonomicsThe product is a small cylindrical shape and doesn’t include any facility to allow handheld grip e.g. contours, indentations etc. The user is expected to perhaps support themselves, if necessary, on a surrounding work surface. This improves the safety of the product as it means hands are out of range when sharpening the knives. The product includes a mechanism which secures the entire base of the product to any surface, like a suction pad.

FunctionThe Anysharp knife sharpener is a manual knife sharpener that is meant for table top use.

AestheticsThe product looks very smart and the use of metal give it a good quality appearance - neutral colours (e.g. black) mean it would appeal to the majority of the market and not look out of place in a modern day kitchen. The cylindrical shape makes it look neat and compact.

CostThe product isn’t quite inexpensive, however it isn’t a high-end product price. In comparison to an electric sharpener it is very affordable, but put next to other manual sharpeners, it’s not as cost-effective. On Amazon it was £15.10, on ebay it was £12.50 and from TheHut.com it was £15.99.

StorageThe product is very small (Fig. 14) and so would be easy to store away when not in use.

Fig.

13

Fig. 14

MaterialsThis product uses materials such as tungsten carbide, polymer plastic and a type of metal that comes in different colours. The tungsten carbide is suitable as it keeps a sharp edge for a very long time. The polymer cover used is a good decision as it protects the knife from the metal edge. The use of metal means that if excess pressure is applied, the entire structure won’t warp or collapse like other plastics might do.

Maintenance/HygieneThe product does not have any way of collecting the filings when a knife is sharpened, or making sure that they do not fly into food or onto a food prep surface.

Comparison

After research I think that the buffalo is better than the Maxam, largely due to the fact that it has a feature that improves the hygiene aspect of it. The magnet included in the design means that the filings are collected and able to be cleaned, in comparison to the Maxam, which lacks any way of making sure the metal excess is contained. Another point which I think is better is the lack of indentations or contours for the hand. This encourages the consumer not to hold onto the sharpener which improves safety. Finally I think the 3 stage sharpening feature is beneficial as it makes the end result better quality than that of the Maxam.

ComparisonI think this sharpener is better than the Maxam, in regards to aesthetics, safety and materials. The materials used are stronger and more durable, plus they give the product a look and feel of quality rather than the uncostly plastic of the Maxam. The suction feature that fastens the product to ‘any’ surface means that the consumer doesn’t need to support the product and so their free hand is kept out of the way – a safety feature which the Maxam lacks. The method of sharpening increases this safety, as rather than the blade of the knife being pointed towards the user, the Anysharp works by pointing the blade away.

Video

Lakelands Compact Knife Sharpener

ErgonomicsThe handle is covered in a soft rubber grip which is comfortable to hold, plus it is shaped with indentations which improve the design. It also includes a non slip base so it is stable when sharpening on a flat surface which improves the safety, as it would be un safe if it wobbled a lot.FunctionThe product sharpens knives using different textures to achieve a sharp edge which will improve it’s performance in the kitchen when slicing food.

AestheticsThe product looks very sleek and compact down to the curved shape; rather than being boxy and clunky. The different textures for sharpening are clearly labelled in eye-catching colours so as to avoid misuse

Maintenance/HygieneThe product has no facility in which it can collect the filings from the knife being sharpened and so they are free to contaminate a food prep surface. Due to the materials used, it is easy to wipe down to maintain cleanliness.

CostThe Lakelands compact knife sharpener is relatively inexpensive at £9.99 in comparison to my knife sharpener which is in the ‘compact’ category which was priced at £4.99

StorageBecause of its smart, solid design, the product can be tidied away easily in small spaces such as a drawer or inside a container.

MaterialsThe product uses most likely tungsten carbide to sharpen blades in a polymer housing – probably polyethene. This material means that the product is lightweight and not at all cumbersome. It also means there’s not much chance of the product damaging a surface or breaking if it’s dropped, as the plastic is known for it’s high strength and rigidity.

Related products-Primary Research

These products have features in them that I may be able to

incorporate in the design of my productHandles

The contours that are used on the handle of this product could be useful for my design as they increase grip and make the product more comfortable to hold. On the other hand, in that section a different material could be used as the plastic is quite slippery.

This product has indentations which theoretically should increase the grip – however, as they are made of the same material as the rest of the product they don’t really benefit the design and the entire handheld section is quite slippery. If they were made of rubber or any other material with grip, then this idea would be effective

This product doesn’t involve any materials that include grip or comfort, however the shape of the handle is quite effective in that it fits the natural contours of the hand so that it is comfortable to hold.

This product incorporates a material and surface texture that increases grip. The shape of the handle feels very natural to hold although the size of the handle is a little awkward – although this may be due to the nature of the product and not really a design flaw

ComparisonI think that the Lakelands is better than the Maxam, because it has more stability when sharpening on a flat surface. The indentations are effective at making the product more comfortable to hold, and the rubber grip is important in improving the products safety. The size of the product is smaller than the Maxam however, which means the users hands are in close proximity of the knife which is not as good as the Maxam. As regards hygiene, neither product has a collection feature for the metal shavings.

This product is also very good in the fact that the curves of the handle fit the natural hold of the hand (e.g. where the thumb rests) so it improves comfort when it is held. In addition it also incorporates a rubber like material that improves grip

ConclusionI have found many different elements to include in my final design, as well as some negatives that I will definitely be avoiding.

The handle has jutting lips either end of it which means that the hand fits snugly in between. However it has no contours or indentations so the user is essentially holding a stick. However they have made use of different materials that add grip.

Base Grips

This spoon rest has instead of isolated spots of rubber, a completely covered base which uses up more material, but also increases the protection the surface has against it. In addition it improves the stability.

The scales in the image use separate circles of rubber aligned in a uniform arrangement so that they provide the minimum protection against the product and the work surface. In comparison, it uses less rubber material than the spoon rest, however these rubber circles are more likely to fall off.

Unlike the spoon rest or scales, the electric sharpener doesn’t use circles of rubber, rather it uses rubber suction pads – these are more effective at keeping the product stable and free from slipping than the scales. It doesn’t matter whether the surface is wet or not as they work well regardless. They elevate the product significantly from the work surface, although these are also prone to falling off.

Positives to carry forward• I will be using a rubber like material for the handle of my design as I have seen how it improves the grip

when holding it, which minimizes the risk of injury. • When designing the shape of my handle, I will incorporate indentations, contours or any anthropometric

shape which will make the product more ergonomic as opposed to the current design• I will be designing my product to be used on a work surface or handheld, as I have seen how the

product is make less efficient by trying to allow both to be possible. I will probably go with the work surface option as this allows for more stability and so increases the safety of it.

• I will definitely incorporate a magnetic feature to collect the metal shavings so that they are easily cleaned, as this would greatly improve the hygiene of the product and I know that this is vital in an environment where food is prepared.

• I will include a grip system for the base of my design as this increases stability and also helps to protect the work surface from scratching.

Negatives to dismiss• I will not be designing the product to be handheld as this presents too many problems that

compromise safety, and comfort. • I will not be using one material to manufacture the entire product as different materials suit different

needs and solve different issues which cannot be done by one material.

Moral ImplicationsThis section aims to highlight the various implications involved with my product and the different

responsibilities surrounding it.

My product uses various materials in its components which are effective together, although their methods of sourcing are not ideal. The sharpener is mainly polypropylene, the blades are made of tungsten carbide, and the screws are most likely out of steel. • PolypropyleneThe process of manufacturing polypropylene begins initially with the sourcing of oil, as all plastics are fundamentally oil based. Oil is drilled from different parts of the world and this process is not only incredibly expensive, but also damaging to the environment. Oil is a non-renewable natural resource and the rate of extraction far out paces the rate of production – for every barrel found, the world consumes three. It is most abundant in the Middle East although some of the biggest oil drilling companies such as Saudi Aramco , Gazprom, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell are based in the US, the Netherlands and Russia. The process of drilling oil is long, expensive and there are many aspects which damage the environment. The land must be leveled, cleared and then access roads must be built. Water wells must be drilled if there is no natural source near by and also depending on the locality of the drill site, trucks. Helicopters or barges are necessary to bring in equipment. All these culminate to make oil drilling an environmentally damaging process which risks the welfare of wildlife in the area and. I have included a picture below of what such a land drilling site looks like after being exploited for oil. In regards to my product, the main body (or handle) is manufactured from prolypropylene.

Environmental Implications Polypropylene is not bio-degradable, however, it is possible that it can be recycled and melted down to form new products. This is contrary to other commercial plastics that are left to be burnt on landfills and release greenhouse gases. My product is assembled quite simply, so it is possible to separate the necessary parts to reuse them. • TungstenThe material tungsten is sourced from the mineral ores scheelite and wolframite. The ore must be extracted from these materials, then processed and separated into its chemical form, ammonium paratungstate (ATP). Once this has been done, it needs to be reacted with carbon at temperatures above 1050°C to produce the tungsten carbide metal. Scheelie and Wolframite are both non-renewable ores, and so their constant mining is rapidly depleting supplies. In addition the materials are reached using open cut mining technologies because these are the most cost effective methods. These pits can be tens of miles wide and thousands of feet deep, generally until the desired material is completely exhausted. The pits are made big so that the large machinery can access it – machinery which is capable of killing wildlife and destroying habitats even further. Also, the chemicals used to treat the extracted ores can leak into the surrounding water and soil, stopping any possible rehabilitation for the environment. The picture below shows land before and after it has been leveled in preparation for the pit to be dug. Tungsten carbide is what the sharpeners on my product are made from.As regards to disposal, there are companies who offer to buy unwanted tungsten carbide and recycle them and these methods often include using chemical reactions to isolate the tungsten; there are still some methods which involve high temperatures and which are very expensive.

• SteelSteel is an alloy of iron and carbon both of which are non renewable and also need to be mined. To remove the iron form the ore, it must be reacted using smelting, which needs extremely high temperatures to occur. This requires the further burning of fossil fuels which releases greenhouse gases and damages the ozone layer. In relation to my product, steel is what the three Philips head screws are made from. Steel is widely recycled and reused which saves energy that would’ve otherwise been used in burning the material on landfill sites.• Environmental Ethical DebateThe materials used to manufacture the knife sharpener are all relatively damaging to the environment in regards to their sourcing and the processing necessary for them to be useful in manufacturing. Many parts of the entire process require the burning of fossil fuels which are not only limited resources, but harmful to the ozone layer. Although I couldn’t find a lot of necessary information, I know that the product is manufactured in China, and that the materials used are all found/manufactured in other parts of the world, so the effect of transport could be factored in as it would be substantial in regards to the company’s carbon footprint. The effect that the sourcing of these materials has on the landscape is horrendous especially as in most cases, it will never recover. There are alternatives to mining metals, but alternatives to metal-ores and polypropylene altogether should be found, as they use limited resources and damage the environment. Ideas like bio-plastics,

Social Implications• SafetyIn the case of my product, there is no warning anywhere on the product , packaging or instructions that warns against children playing with it, or an age range of who should be handling it. This presents a real safety issue as a symbol or written warning could act as a reminder to adults buying the product, so that they remember to keep the product out of children’s reach. As it stands, the threat of injury is not highlighted and so consumers may be lax about leaving it lying around. In addition, the instructions for using the product do not represent a particularly safe way of using the product. In practice, the method of sharpening knives and scissors especially carries the risk of stabbing yourself or slicing your hand. To avoid doing this, users are forced to find their own way of using the product which defeats the point of the instructions and means that they definitely need revising. • Low Wage and Working ConditionsIn the case of must products that are manufactured on a large scale and sold for low prices, it is down to the mistreatment of the labourers. This mistreatment can count as being paid below minimum wage (living wage), being worked long hours in poor conditions. Because in most less economically developed countries (LEDC), the laws on working conditions are not as thorough as those in more economically developed countries (MEDC), companies take advantage of this and choose to manufacture their products there, as then they can keep their costs as low as possible, and therefore keep their final pricing down to entice consumers, This comes at the expense of those working in the factories, as due to the meagre wages, labourers lead a life of poor quality, often living in slums and finding it hard to buy food and basic necessities. However, they often feel forced into working for these big companies, as they dominate the area; crushing local indigenous livelihoods; and monopolise business by offering thousands of jobs where there are none. In the pursuit of keeping expenses at a minimum,

businesses sometimes cut corners in vital areas, resulting in the compromised safety of their workers. My product was manufactured in China which is incidentally the leader in corrupt labour. Those who work in Chinese sweatshops are often migrants from the countryside, and because of laws passed in the 1970s, these people are treated as sub-citizens without access to pensions, healthcare rights and housing; so when they move to the city to find work they are forced into working for these companies for appalling wages and for very long hours – in some cases 7 days a week with an hour long lunch break. In the case of my product, labourers are required to operate very large machinery, and providing they do actually have to work long hours, there is a high chance that they could become drowsy and get seriously injured.

• Effects of MiningSome of the materials in my product need to be

mined to be reached, and this seriously damages the surrounding areas. Apart from the fact that the environment looks

ugly after the resources have been obtained, it is often irreversibly damaged. The mining strips the land of greenery, wildlife and it’s natural resources – features that indigenous people likely rely on. The chemicals used to treat the materials gained from mining can leak into the soil and water, which would have a severe impact on their lives. Without drinking water or fertile land, they wouldn’t be able to continue sustaining themselves and living in that area – leading to them being forced to move on, from their own homeland.

• Social Ethical DebateThere are many issues after researching the different processes that go into manufacturing this product. The safety issue can be resolved fairly easily, by simply printing clearly, anywhere on the packaging a warning regarding children tampering with it. Printing comprehensive instructions that are actually effective would also be beneficial and solve that problem. Regarding low wages and working conditions, it is common knowledge that this exploitation occurs, however it would appear that many value cheap products over the lives of those making them. Companies still do next to nothing about the working conditions, often actively seeking out these organisations so that they can get their products manufactured at the lowest price possible. Some people are not aware the extent of the damage is, and have misconceptions such as the workers are willing or they are paid minimum wage. This is untrue, as these people are effectively forced into these jobs out of lack of options, and the average monthly salary for a woman including overtime is CNY 1,690 (£150). In China, there is work being done to improve the working conditions of these people, but manufacturers could show responsibility by shunning these factories and opting for legitimate organisations that abide by the laws that protect people from injustice – maybe even supporting local trade in their own country.

Young women migrant workers in a rubber factory

Economic Implications• EmploymentDepending on the country,

manufacturers have an obligation to pay a certain amount of money for their labour – this is not always the case, and so manufacturers can ire a large volume of people and pay them relatively little so they can mass-produce.

• Obtaining raw materialsIn the case where manufacturers

source the raw materials themselves, they would need to factor in the cost of machinery and labour and transport which would all add up, plus the cost of using the materials to manufacture the final product. However, in the more likely case that the manufacturers purchase the already extracted materials from separate businesses, they would need to find the business that sold the right amount for the best price to them

• Manufacturing the productThe cost of labour, materials,

processes (e.g. injection moulding) and transport would be considered during manufacture

• Value for moneyThe factors mentioned above would

play a part in this section, as manufacturers want to make a profit; the costs involved would need to be off-set by the final price, but not so much that the consumer believes they are being ripped off.

• TransportationThe majority/ all of the materials

necessary for the production are found overseas, and so this is detrimental to the environment and also increases costs (importation)

After research I think that more of the product could be recycled if people were made more aware that these materials could be recycled, like steel and plastic

The improvement I make to the design will definitely make the product more ergonomic

The overall cost would naturally increase as labourers would have fair wages and manufacturers would need to spend more money to pay for the more environmentally friendly alternatives in the manufacturing

The sustainability would increase as alternative materials could be found that aren’t non-renewable, and the manufacturing methods could be improved so that the burning of fossil fuels could be decreased

My new design will have a different structure which should improve the strength but I will use similar if not exactly the same materials so the durability should stay the same

Ideally, manufacturers would situate their buildings as close to their resources as possible so that the necessary transportation distance would be as small as possible. This is not including the transportation of the finished goods overseas in exportation

Manufacturers could include some clear-cut instructions in terms of use, and a child age warning that was appropriate to make the product safer. My new design of the product will address the issue of safety in regards to ergonomics as well.

The present methods of manufacturing are effective but damaging to the environment. Seeking out alternatives that aren’t as detrimental would improve this part of the process

Eco-WebThis shows the improvements that applying my research regarding all the implications would have on the life-cycle of this product

Economic DebateThere are many costs involved with manufacturing the product from right at the start when the raw materials are sourced, to the very end when the final product is packaged and exported. The manufacturers need to find a balance that is tipped slightly more in their favour so that they can make a profit – this is hard to do with raw materials increasing in price as they decrease in amount. This would explain the attraction of cheap labour, as it is one cost that can be kept exceptionally low. However it is morally wrong and it is horrible that these labourers feel they have no other option than to resort to these businesses. If those with power paid fair wages and worked harder to find alternative materials, the worlds resources would not be depleting so rapidly and the prices wouldn’t rise so high and so fast. Of course this would inevitably increase the cost of the entire process and ultimately mean that the consumer must pay more but I feel this is a necessary sacrifice if people want to be assured that their products haven’t been made at the expense of someone’s life/quality of life.

SpecificationsKey: Function; Food Hygiene; Safety; Ergonomics; Materials; Storage; Aesthetics; Comfort; Technical Details;

JustificationsDesign BriefI chose a knife sharpener as my project, as the one I have access to has plenty of design flaws that I believe I can improve. The function of a knife sharpener is to sharpen the blades of utensils be it scissors or knives, so that they are more efficient/effective while in use.After choosing a product that I use quite often, I have analysed it, noting all the weaknesses and thinking of ways to improve it. To do this, I have done primary and secondary research of similar products so that I can do direct comparisons and pick out positives and negatives in relation to my own product. In addition, I have looked at related products to find inspiration for other parts of my new design, such as the handle, and the grips for the base of the product. These have helped me find ideas to carry forward and also points to avoid so that I don’t make the same mistakes. I plan on improving certain aspects of my product as mentioned above, such as the handle as it isn’t ergonomically shaped, stability and safety of the design These are only a few of the weaknesses I hope to remove – I have included the rest below as a reminder.

FunctionF1: The product must sharpen utensils effectively so that they are more efficient during use e.g. knives slicing foodFood HygieneFH1: The product must have a way of collecting the metal shavings from the sharpened product so that they don’t contaminate possible food prep surfacesFH2; The product must be able to be cleaned easily so that a build-up of dirt doesn’t make it less efficient or present a risk of illness if food preparation items are used on itSafety: S1: The product must have instructions on how it should be used so that there isn’t a risk of someone using it incorrectly and becoming injuredS2: The product must be packaged in such a way that the blades are covered so that the exposed blades do not cause injuryS3: The product should have an age range clearly printed on it so that consumers are reminded to keep it out of reachErgonomicsE1: The product must be comfortable to hold so that the consumer has a reasonable amount of grip and so can avoid cutting themselvesMaterialsM1 The materials must be durable and strong so that they can withstand wear and tear which is desirable in household itemsStorage: The product must be compact so that it can packed away in small spaces, as it isn’t an item that must be in full view all the timeAesthetics:A1: The product must use colours that contrast when marking instructions directly onto the product, so that they can be seen clearly and the product won’t be used incorrectly A2: The colours used shouldn’t be too bright, mainly neutral, so that they will fit in the majority of kitchensComfort:C1: The product should use more than one material when being manufactured, for instance rubber could be used on the handle to provide definite grip C2: The product should make use of indentations and contours so that it fits the natural curve of the handTechnical Details: TD1: The product shouldn’t be too heavy otherwise it will cause injury if droppedTD2: The product must fit the 95th percentile of people regarding size, otherwise it will be uncomfortable to hold for the majority of people and make the product less effective and present more hazardsTD3: The product must be easily disassembled so that the respective parts can be recycled

Weaknesses (Reminder)

Development of Improvements

Key• I will show the progression in my

sketches and models and each new improvement will be labeled: 1, 1.1, 1.2 etc.

• I will also show which design ideas are viable and that I would consider carrying forward using the following symbols

This section will look at my different concepts (preliminary ideas) and how they can be improved into viable design ideas. I will show this via sketches, 2D and 3D models and interactive dialogue.

Initial IdeasThese are some of my initial sketches, that I may consider putting forward and developing further.

Initial Ideas (continued)

Key: Function; Food Hygiene; Safety; Ergonomics; Materials; Storage; Aesthetics; Comfort; Technical Details; Justifications

Contours for the finger to rest/gripIndentation for thumb rest

Bumps/pitted surface to add texture and grip

Rubber (other soft material?) to guard against sharp edges

Wider base for stability

Removable part for washing(?)

Clear label for different utensils e.g.

different material, colour, extrusion

Further exploration of initial ideas

Removable section for hygiene

Thumb indent for better grip

Indentation for thumb

Finger holds for grip and stability

Thumb indent

Hand would be too close to knife when sharpening

Product could tip if too much force is applied Wide, sturdy base increases

stability

Shape doesn’t lend itself to storing away neatly

Weakness 1 & 2 – Handle and sharpening Key: Function; Food Hygiene; Safety; Ergonomics; Materials; Storage; Aesthetics; Comfort; Technical Details; Justifications

With this idea I moved straight onto the form of contours, as through research I have found this is one of the most comfortable handle shapes. In this card model, I found that the spacing of the indents was not comfortable and the number of them was unnecessary. In addition, the amount of negative space between the hand on the handle and the rest of the model was too much, counting as a waste. The handle I found to be too slim and meant that my fingers were positioned uncomfortably in my palm.

I made another model with a sturdier handle and tried to give more consideration to the spacing between the contours and the number of them. I also tried to make the negative space smaller to reduce waste. When I tried the model, the handle was then too thick and felt unstable in my hand. The contours were improved a little, although they were still too close together so my fingers felt squashed.

Regarding this design idea, I wanted to use some of the different ideas I had found during my research to improve the handle

1.0 1.1 1.2

This model gave me a better idea of the real width of the idea, unlike the card. I found that the sharp edges were uncomfortable and added extra width which made my hand stretch over the handle more although this size may be more comfortable for someone with bigger hands. The base was stable which meant that it functioned well as a table top sharpener, as the user could grip the handle and place weight onto the table securely.

In this model I sanded the edges to make them curve round and more comfortable, as it would mean that the hand could fit more naturally around the handle. In the previous model, I found that the way my thumb rested was quite awk--ward and uncomfort--able, whereas withthe edges sanded it isable to fall more naturally round the side.

1.3

1.4 In this improvement I incorporated the con--tours I had tried out in the card model, but I tried to measure out the width and spacing of the fingers so that I didn’t get the same problem (see idea 1.0). The model fit well, especially with the indent on the handle for the thumb, which improved comfort and grip.

However, when the model was held by someone else, they found the contours were spaced too closely together, and the handle was too small. This was due to the width of the handle which meant he folded his fingers over each other; and also the radius of the curvature, which forced his fingers into an uncomfortable bended position.

This problem would come under technical details, and I would solve it by calculating an average of everyone’s hand size to make a more comfortable fit for more people.

I found with this design that to get sufficient grip, the position of the hand differed to when it was held aloft – this meant that when it was actually in use on a flat surface, the indentations and contours were not quite accurate. The hand naturally curved into a position I had not allowed for when designing the contours, and so it was quite uncomfortable when it was in realistic use. In the picture it is demonstratedhow the wrist is forced into an awkward position when the contours are used, which whenheld for a prolonged period oftime caused considerable discomfort. The way the wrist almost rests on the worktop is clearly impractical, and I also found that the strain on the wrist was painful after a while. With this model I also found that although there were improvements, the depth of the product wasn’t as good as previous models – it was less stable as it was a slimmer design.

In this model I wanted to show the ideal hand position, where the user is most comfortable. Apparently this is very different from my suggested contours, so this is a point I will take further, to test out the most natural feeling handhold before accommodating for it. I noticed with this model however that the thumb is a lot closer to the sharpener than in the previous model, and this presents a safety issue as it is now more likely that the

1.5

user will be cut if the knife(?) somehow manages to come out of the sharpening feature.In future models this will be something to consider and a solution could be to design a sort of guard or protection for the users hand.

2.0

This idea originated fromthe concept of minimalismand the point is that ratherthan the handle and the functioning part of the product being separate, maybe they could be one and the same(?). The cylindrical shape was easy enough to hold as my hand was able to fit round it comfortably, however it offered no grip so it was easy to accidentally drop it which would prove to be a safety issue.

I then developed the model to improve the grip on it – by including the indentations of my fingers, there was more resistance and less chance of the product slipping from my hand. It also improved comfort as I didn’t have to grip so hard; my fingers were able to rest in the grooves.However, this obviously meant that the product, or at least the indentations were tailored to fit me,and wouldn’t necessarily improve anything for someone of a different hand size. This was made clear when it was held by another classmate – because his hands were bigger, he was not able to hold the product comfortably while trying to make use of the recess’ – he would have to disregard them if he were to properly grip the product.

2.1

2.2

This idea was created so that people could find the grooves that suited their own hand size and so was more comfortable. However the design was actually less comfortable, as the contours that went all the way round the product made it harder to hold firmly. In theory, I would manufacture this product out of a stiffer material, and this would surely create discomfort if the contours were pressing into the users palm as they do here (see fig.1).In the same model, it is clear that the thumb is much too close to where the sharpening feature would be placed and potentially too close to the blade of the knife. I would have to make the product taller/ bigger so that there could be more space between the hand and the sharpener. This would mean there would be less chance of the blade slipping and cutting the hand of the user.

Fig1

.

With this idea, I wanted to use the shape from this sketch, as during my research with the modelling I have found that the most comfortable and effective shape is one that allows the hand/arm to be at a slight angle to the sharpener, instead of a severe straight on grip(?). With this model this proved to be true as the angle is more natural to hold and

However, with this model, the edges were very sharp, and would present a safety issue if a child were to get hold of it, let alone the fact that there would be blades in it theoretically. In addition to being somewhat dangerous, the edges are quite uncomfortable to grip as they cut into the users palm. In addition, the sharp edges would damage any work surface if it were dropped.

Disc-sanding the edges made the product less of a danger and they also didn’t affect the stability of the product as I originally thought, as the radius of the curvature wasn’t as severe as I first intended. However, due to the nature of the material, the product was quite slippy(?), and so even though it was more comfortable to hold post-sanding, it was still very hard to grip it tightly enough so that it could be safe.

unlike my other ideas, it fits the majority of people. In addition, the way the hand is positioned means that it is out of the way of the utensil being sharpened, avoiding a potential safety hazard.

Anti-Slip Mat/Rug UnderlayThis material had an almost sticky texture and was very effective at providing grip. It was also quite soft and so was pretty comfortable. However, due to the fact that it had very wide holes it appeared very hard to clean which would be a key factor in a kitchen item. Plasticine – Anti-Slip

IndentationsI created this texture using the underlay (above) and pressed it into the plasticine. The plasticine itself was quite easy to grip, although it could still do with improvement which this texture did. The groves were deep enough to make a difference but not so deep that they would become a hygiene issue and trap dirt, bacteria etc. that would be hard to clean Plasticine – Sandpaper

IndentationsI created this texture by pressing the grain of a sheet of sandpaper into the plasticine. This did not improve the grip of the plasticine at all, this was perhaps because the indents weren’t deep enough.

3.0

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

4.0

4.1

4.2

Video Development - In this video I discussed with my teacher the pros and cons of my recent models and what I could do to develop them further and improve my final design

In the video the client comments on the last model being slightly unstable and wobbly – however it is necessary to point out that the product is not meant for use when the user is sat down, as this contributes to the instability. Ordinarily and for safety, the product would be used on a work surface with the consumer standing up applying weight downwards, making it much more steady.

During the discussion there were many points made that I thought were valid and would work to improve my final model. There were also weaknesses that I myself noticed in the models that I hadn’t taken note of before - although they weren’t mentioned in the video I have included them in the pointers below.

• “Chunky”, and robust build makes it feel sturdy

• Wide base area makes it much more stable – user is able to gain more purchase and use product safely

• Handle is too wide and so is uncomfortable

• Finger indents add more grip• Contours on one side limit use to

users of certain dexterity• Smaller width means less stability –

would decrease safety

• The shape is much more conducive to comfort – fits the natural shape of the hand

• The base still needs to be wider• The knife slots are too shallow –

this would restrict the types of knives that could be used on it

Video

I will include a grip system for the base of my design as this increases stability and also helps to protect the work surface from scratching.

The first material I tested as a potential base grip was felt. Although it’s soft, non-scratchy texture was good at protecting the work surface, it provided next to no grip and still slid around a lot. In addition to this I found that the material picked up dirt while in use, which would be not only unsightly but a hygiene problem if the product is to be used in the kitchen

The next material I tried was the same anti-slip rug underlay I used previously. Although for a different function, I found the same issues – the large holes would trap dirt which would be unhygienic and difficult to clean thoroughly. Despite this, the material made a very good base as it gripped the table surface well and prevented the model from slipping.

With the next attempt I tested the stability of rubber feet. These were quite large, almost the same width as the base of the model, and so I only needed two. In addition to being wide, they were also high, meaning that after I attached them to the base they gave the product more height. However, because of the tapered design of the feet, this made the model much more unstable and prone to wobbling. However this did keep the model of the work surface which would hypothetically protect a kitchen worktop.

These were similar to the previous rubber feet, only smaller. However, there was still only room for a couple of them on the base of the model – this coupled with the same tapered design and smaller width made the model even more unstable as the feet reduced the points of contact on the work surface

Lastly, I experimented with the grip of an elastic band. I used one with a larger thickness than that in the picture, and applied the strips to the base using double sided tape. The end result was the best overall. The natural friction of rubber made it perfect for providing grip, and as the elastic band did not have much depth at all, it didn’t raise the model off the surface to the point of instability. The parallel strips made sure there was enough grip throughout the base of the model.

Video

Weakness 2 & 3 Sharpening and Hygiene

Key: Function; Food Hygiene; Safety; Ergonomics; Materials; Storage; Aesthetics; Comfort; Technical Details; Justifications

The sharpening feature on my original product is unable to be removed and so any metal filings that haven’t fallen onto surrounding surfaces are still stuck on the sharpener - left to build up over time and present a hygiene issue. Also this could hinder the effectiveness of the sharpener if they are left to accumulate. By designing the feature to be removable, it can easily be washed separately. To do this, I researched mechanisms that would securely hold the feature in place while in use, but that could also easily be removed when necessary:

The first mechanism I found was a simple sliding drawer. This was because I wanted to focus on ease of movement this design was ideal as the drawer is designed to slide in and out smoothly. However, if I were to choose this idea, I would need to adjust the resistance of the slide, as it would be ineffective if the sharpening feature was too easy to remove. This could be done by lining the slide with a material that provides friction to hold the sharpening feature in.

Regarding the safety of this design, if too much force is applied while using the sharpener, it could cause the feature to ‘flip’ out of it’s hold making it dangerous as well as ineffective. By lining the slide with a material that provides friction, this could make it more stable and safer.

As an improvement on the first idea, I found a “T-bar” slide, like those found on more sophisticated drawer slides.This should help to increase the stability of the sharpening feature while in use and stop it from suddenly jumping out of the slot.

5.0

5.1

I found an idea that was loosely based on a ratchet and pawl mechanism. the Safety 1st Cabinet Slide Lock. The sides of the product are lined with teeth that then provide resistance if the slide is tugged back upwards. In this case a button is pressed which releases the mechanism in the slide, where it can be easily pulled off.

After seeing this example, I thought it would improve my design as the jagged slide would provide more security for the removable sharpener instead of relying on the size of the slots to provide resistance,

5.2Video

Video

Weakness 2 Sharpening (continued)

To get a better idea of how the mechanism would work, I constructed a model from translucent 3mm acrylic. I designed the piece on Solidworks and glued them together using acrylic cement. This method of manufacture is not particularly viable as it would cost too much money and energy to cut out all the different pieces and then put them all together, when it could potentially be produced all in one which would be more cost-effective. From this model I found that the sharpener slid in and out of the setting well and it was secure in its holder.

There were no outstanding issues with the model although to improve it I would find a way to make sure the sharpener was as steady/solid as possible. One way would be to manufacture the product with magnets so that while the sharpener is in use, it is more secure. After some research I found that it is possible to find magnets that are dishwasher safe and don’t lose their magnetism after washing. Another way to improve the stability would be to line the slide with a material that provides friction such as silicon rubber. Used for products such as phone cases, it has sufficient grip and flexibility. It is also used for things such as cake moulds and so is dishwasher safe.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Figure 1 demonstrates the idea of a magnet on the underside of the sharpener.

Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the different ways in which silicon could be attached to the sharpener to improve the design

Weakness 4 - Safety (symbols and instructions)

For this part I researched different symbols that are used in everyday life – that are widely recognised and understood. With these examples, the drawings are incredibly simple and only represent the essentials so there is no confusion.

The symbols only include the bare minimum when it comes to shapes and also use a couple of contrasting colours/shades.Black and white are the most obvious combinations as there is then no chance of confusion with colour-blind consumers and it creates the most clear-cut image. On the other hand, red is a popular colour to use when indicating danger or safety.

Contrasting colours are striking and easy to understand quickly

In my original product, there was no sign of instructions on how to use the product, let alone safely. It only had a small image on the packaging of suggested use which wasn’t particularly clear or informative – it only gave a basic idea.

As well as informing people on how to use the product, there should be all the necessary safety precautions and warnings that are normally seen on products that have a degree of safety risk.Points that should be mentioned somewhere on the product:• The blades are sharp• The knives that are used are sharp• There is a risk of injury• It shouldn’t be accessible to children

When I write the instruction booklet and create the signage, it will have to be:• Clear/easy to understand• Contrasting colours or black and white• Limited use of words so it can be universal• Simple shapes – as little detail as possible without

losing the meaning

Ske

tche

s in

Fig

.5, 6

cre

ated

in 2

D D

esig

n

Fig.

1

Fig.

2

Fig.

3Fi

g. 4

Fig.

5Fi

g. 6

Final Design

This is my final design after developing my weaknesses and thinking of suitable materials. Here I have checked my design against my initial list of specifications and a reminder of what I was hoping to achieve/ improve with this new product design.

F1 - The product is still able to fulfil its function as a knife sharpener, as I have included the necessary sharpening slots for the knife at an appropriate depth so that different sizes may use the product. The purpose of having two slots is that one may be used for the typical straight edged knife, and the other for serrated knives

S1 & S3 - I have improved the safety of the design with the shape of the product as well as the “safety card” that I have designed. It would include various warning symbols depicting the hazard of sharp knives and the need to keep the product away from young children.

FH1 - I have fulfilled the food hygiene spec as the removable sharpening feature allows for more thorough and frequent cleaning as if the consumer doesn’t believe the whole unit needs washing, they can still maintain the sharpener.

E1 -I have improved the ergonomics by designing the rubber sleeve for the handle, as well as adding contours and texture to this so that maximum grip can be achieved.

FH2 -All the materials used are easily cleaned, either wiped down or in the dishwasher which contributes to the hygiene spec

TD2 - The shape of the product lends itself to the technical details spec, as the majority of people who tested my design found it comfortable and non-restrictive

St1 - The final model I made stands at 129mm, which is a suitable size to be able to be put away neatly

M1 - The materials I would use theoretically would be ABS and rubber, both of which are durable and tough so that they would withstand the pressure that would surely be applied to them during use

A2 - Although I initially stated that the product should have an unassuming colour scheme, the bold colours I used in the model only serve to make the product a feature along with it’s unusual shape, making it a talking point

C1 & C2 -The use of a relatively soft material such as rubber and the indentations also achieve comfort instead of holding the bare handle which may cause pain after a while

TD1 - The product weighs 0.224kg, which is definitely light enough to allow ease of use

TD3 - The product would be easy to disassemble and since there aren’t many different materials used, it would be easy to recycle the different components, e.g. main body, rubber sleeve

Testing – Plan of ActionIn the average kitchen, there are numerous surfaces such as tiled floors, etc. that can be easily chipped or damaged by falling utensils that are heavy or particularly hard. In the same way, the product itself could be damaged if it were to fall on aforementioned surfaces. To test this, I will execute a simple drop test and observe any changes to the material at the end, hence testing the materials for their hardness. I will drop the material from a specified height and see whether the materials split, shatter or if there is no change. I will also record the densities of the material samples and see whether this has any bearing on the results. Below I have included a sketch of how the experiment will be carried out. By carrying out this experiment I will be able to select the best material for my product. The experiment will be carried out in my own kitchen as this is a realistic environment complete with tiles so I can hopefully record some definitive results.

I dropped the respective materials from a height of 90cm as this is the average height of a kitchen worktop and this is the environment that I would

expect the tool to be used in

Material Density (g/mm³)

Drop 1 Result

Drop 2 Result

Drop 3 Result Mean Result

2mm Aluminium

14476 Slight blunt on one corner

No change

No change No change

5mm Utile

33950 No change

No change

No change No change

3mm HIPs

17100 No change

No change

No change No change

1mm Mild Steel

9150 No change

No change

No change No change

1mm Polystyrene

7546 No change

No change

No change No change

3mm Acrylic

14341 No change

No change

No change No change

Client Testing

I interviewed my original client and asked them questions based on the improved product

*Is the improved handle more comfortable?

*Is the improved design safer?

*Does the improved design look better?

*Would you be willing to pay more for the improved design?

*What do you like most about the new design?

*How could the design be improved further?

*The new product is safer

*The new design is much more comfortable

*The new design is nicer and smoother to hold

*The new product could be improved by widening the base as it is slightly unstable being as narrow as it is currently

In conclusion, what I will take forward from this interview are the key points. Mainly that the design of the product is good aesthetically and I shouldn’t change the basic shape. My client also stated that she liked the bold, singular colour scheme. However, her only concern was that the product was unstable due to the narrow base which was also mentioned in a previous video. To improve this I would definitely widen it to give the user more security when using it.

Conclusion

Video

Summary of Results

In this section I will analyse the results from my developments and also my testing and explain how certain experiences influenced my decisions during the modelling process and improvement making.

I firstly tried to improve the handle of my design, choosing Styrofoam as it is easy to manipulate and shape quickly. The initial model aimed to incorporate as much grip as possible to improve the ergonomics, and I thought that by incorporating more material, there would be more of the product to grip. However I found that this was actually uncomfortable and incidentally hindered the amount of grip a person could have on the product, as their hand was stretched around the material. In my aim to make the design as sturdy as possible I had neglected comfort as well, as the un-sanded sides cut into the users already strained palm.

For my second idea, I tried to incorporate more of my specifications including comfort and so I shaped the original model but with sanded edges and also with a slimmer finish. This allowed a greater range of people to hold the product comfortably and firmly, with more control over the product. To improve the ergonomics I also played around with ergonomics more, experimenting with different styles of indentation and contours to improve grip and make the users hand feel natural around the handle. Although the concept was well received by those who tried it, the execution of the idea was not as successful and again restricted the people who could use the product as the contours were not well spaced or accommodating to those with bigger hands. In addition, I found that the slimmer design meant that stability was suffering and many of my clients said the same

The next idea that I had needed precision and so I moved away from Styrofoam and used acrylic instead. By building up the model from different layers, I was able to create a really sturdy model. In addition, the new triangular shape solved the problem of technical details – the shape acted in such a way that the user could position their hands in a way that was comfortable to them and so this ended up being my best improvement for the weakness.

The next improvement I made was to the sharpening feature. I wanted it to be removable so that it could be easily and frequently washed to maintain hygiene.

My first idea was to incorporate the sliding mechanism of a typical bedside drawer, as this is easy to slide in and out. However I found this was too easy and would make the feature too lose for use. I then experimented with different sliding mechanisms that would still be easy to manipulate, but also have friction or a stopping mechanism. I found that the best idea was a mixture of silicon sliders that provide friction so that the feature isn’t too easy to remove, and a magnet on the base of the feature, to ensure

security for the user.

Analysis of Testing

My testing appeared to prove largely inconclusive, and this was because the conditions were not strict enough to gain valid results. The pieces I chose for my experiment were of varying sizes, and I also didn’t find a way to drop the materials from the same height each time. However, the repeats helped to average a mean which meant the results were clear and concise. From my results it would appear that I could manufacture my product out of all the tested materials. However I wouldn’t chose the utile or any sort of wood as it could be exposed to water in a kitchen environment, and this could cause untreated wood to warp or become damaged. The treatment for the wood that could prevent this may not be safe for consumption and so you wouldn’t want anything used for food prep to come into contact with it. Materials such as the aluminium and steel are easy to clean, but aesthetically they are harder to maintain as they scratch easier and more visibly. This is in contrast to the different plastics that I tested, HIPs, Polystyrene and Acrylic. Polystyrene is much too flimsy for a product that would be under considerable stress, albeit not often. Although HIPs and acrylic are much better candidates for the product I would select a material that could be injection moulded, as this manufacturing process would allow my product to be batch-produced and would simplify the different stages in manufacture.

Further Improvements

If I were to make any further modifications to my product, I would definitely take on board the suggestions of my clients and also learn from my own modelling, experiments etc. Firstly, I would increase the base width of my product, as throughout my project it was often commented on as being instable, a little wobbly and not very secure. This would increase the safety of the design, and also make it look even more engaging aesthetically wise as the shape would be unusual and interesting. It also wouldn’t cause any implications regarding manufacturing methods – I could still have the product injection moulded as it is still a relatively simple shape and not too complex.

A previous idea that portrays a product with a wider base

However this improvement could potentially affect my transportation costs and carbon footprint, as the new shape would need more packaging to encompass it in a standard shape for ease of stacking. This would take up more room while transporting the product and so not as many could be packed and transported at once. In addition, my waste could potentially increase, although using recyclable materials in packaging would counteract this.

However this is all in the worst case scenario as I am confident my modifications will not increase the dimensions dramatically and so my costs and environmental effects will not be a cause for concern.

Sketch illustrates how the product would be packaged and stacked

In this picture you can see by the knuckles straining how there is force being exerted away from the product, almost pushing it. If this were to become too much, the product could be cause to fall over while in use, creating the risk of injury. This is made more prominent by the narrow base which increases this risk

I would as another improvement make it more clear which slot is for which knife type. At the moment there are two slots, one for a normal knife edge, and one for a serrated edge. By creating extruded, colour coded signs directly on the product, I could have clear signs for the user so that they could use the product effectively and efficiently.

The symbols could be made more striking by having them in contrasting colours to the product so that they really stand out to the user and they are made aware.