S.F.J. Flipsen
info
Please Note
<p>This page displays the records of the person named above and is not linked to a unique person identifier. This record may need to be merged to a profile.</p>
36 records found
1
Introduction In the bachelor program of the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, three courses on sustainability are offered. Sustainable Impact focuses on the basics of sustainability like ecodesign and LCA, Design for the Circular Economy focuses on circular business models and future design visions, and the Sustainable Transitions minor focuses on sustainable systems interventions. Although these courses score “more than satisfactory” on student evaluations (EvaSys), attendance is low and decreasing over the course. Besides, coordinators of the parallel running design projects notice that students struggle with the integration of sustainability into the design solutions. To make sustainability more applicable, we developed a new master elective related to design for repair, named Repair! (ID5422, 3EC over 8 weeks). In this course we explicitly implemented the theory of productive failure by Kapur & Bielaczyc (2012) and followed the course-design model for productive failure described in Persaud & Flipsen (2023). Contrary to traditional teaching, productive failure flips the process and starts with an explorative problem which students cannot solve without the right knowledge. This is followed by an instruction explaining the missing concept and filling the knowledge gap, after which students apply their learnings on their own project. This approach engages students in active problem-solving, with the goal to increase retention of the theoretical concepts and facilitate deep learning. In the Repair course respectively 24 and 36 students participated over the past two years. Students work on client-based products, focusing on a demonstration model to show the improved fit of the product within a circular economy. In this paper, we will present the course and its content, one of the workshops explaining the productive failure approach, and finalize with an analysis of the student’s learning experiences.
...
Introduction In the bachelor program of the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, three courses on sustainability are offered. Sustainable Impact focuses on the basics of sustainability like ecodesign and LCA, Design for the Circular Economy focuses on circular business models and future design visions, and the Sustainable Transitions minor focuses on sustainable systems interventions. Although these courses score “more than satisfactory” on student evaluations (EvaSys), attendance is low and decreasing over the course. Besides, coordinators of the parallel running design projects notice that students struggle with the integration of sustainability into the design solutions. To make sustainability more applicable, we developed a new master elective related to design for repair, named Repair! (ID5422, 3EC over 8 weeks). In this course we explicitly implemented the theory of productive failure by Kapur & Bielaczyc (2012) and followed the course-design model for productive failure described in Persaud & Flipsen (2023). Contrary to traditional teaching, productive failure flips the process and starts with an explorative problem which students cannot solve without the right knowledge. This is followed by an instruction explaining the missing concept and filling the knowledge gap, after which students apply their learnings on their own project. This approach engages students in active problem-solving, with the goal to increase retention of the theoretical concepts and facilitate deep learning. In the Repair course respectively 24 and 36 students participated over the past two years. Students work on client-based products, focusing on a demonstration model to show the improved fit of the product within a circular economy. In this paper, we will present the course and its content, one of the workshops explaining the productive failure approach, and finalize with an analysis of the student’s learning experiences.
The traditional approach of teaching engineering at the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering using direct instructions and problem-based learning was ineffective, as students failed to apply the engineering knowledge in their capstone design projects. Therefore, in the first-year engineering course Understanding Product Engineering (UPE), the Productive Failure (PF) method is used to teach mechanics of materials. Amongst other subjects, UPE includes modules on manufacturing techniques for plastics and metals, typically taught by theory alone. To address the challenge of practicing this knowledge and enhance their learning even more, a simple, safe, and cost-effective machine was introduced simulating thermoforming, injection moulding, and metal bending. This machine encourages experiential learning, which positively impacts knowledge retention and decision-making regarding material-manufacturing techniques.
To validate the student’s enhancement in learning, an A/B test is executed which compares the PF approach using the experiential machine with traditional direct instruction (DI). Group A (nine students) used the machine and struggled before receiving instructional materials, while Group B (nine students) received direct instruction first. The students were interviewed on their experiences after the workshop and tested online on the content.
Results showed significant differences in student perceptions and experiences. Group A, using the experiential machines, felt more confident, enthusiastic, intrigued, and engaged compared to Group B. However, test scores of the exam a week later showed little differences between the two approaches.
...
To validate the student’s enhancement in learning, an A/B test is executed which compares the PF approach using the experiential machine with traditional direct instruction (DI). Group A (nine students) used the machine and struggled before receiving instructional materials, while Group B (nine students) received direct instruction first. The students were interviewed on their experiences after the workshop and tested online on the content.
Results showed significant differences in student perceptions and experiences. Group A, using the experiential machines, felt more confident, enthusiastic, intrigued, and engaged compared to Group B. However, test scores of the exam a week later showed little differences between the two approaches.
...
The traditional approach of teaching engineering at the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering using direct instructions and problem-based learning was ineffective, as students failed to apply the engineering knowledge in their capstone design projects. Therefore, in the first-year engineering course Understanding Product Engineering (UPE), the Productive Failure (PF) method is used to teach mechanics of materials. Amongst other subjects, UPE includes modules on manufacturing techniques for plastics and metals, typically taught by theory alone. To address the challenge of practicing this knowledge and enhance their learning even more, a simple, safe, and cost-effective machine was introduced simulating thermoforming, injection moulding, and metal bending. This machine encourages experiential learning, which positively impacts knowledge retention and decision-making regarding material-manufacturing techniques.
To validate the student’s enhancement in learning, an A/B test is executed which compares the PF approach using the experiential machine with traditional direct instruction (DI). Group A (nine students) used the machine and struggled before receiving instructional materials, while Group B (nine students) received direct instruction first. The students were interviewed on their experiences after the workshop and tested online on the content.
Results showed significant differences in student perceptions and experiences. Group A, using the experiential machines, felt more confident, enthusiastic, intrigued, and engaged compared to Group B. However, test scores of the exam a week later showed little differences between the two approaches.
To validate the student’s enhancement in learning, an A/B test is executed which compares the PF approach using the experiential machine with traditional direct instruction (DI). Group A (nine students) used the machine and struggled before receiving instructional materials, while Group B (nine students) received direct instruction first. The students were interviewed on their experiences after the workshop and tested online on the content.
Results showed significant differences in student perceptions and experiences. Group A, using the experiential machines, felt more confident, enthusiastic, intrigued, and engaged compared to Group B. However, test scores of the exam a week later showed little differences between the two approaches.
Design for the Circular Economy often emphasizes business models and future visions, with less focus on practical application. Sustainability courses are generally seen as complex, attendance is often dropping, and the knowledge is minimally integrated into design projects.
In 2022, a new course on Repair was introduced. This course aligns with repair and with other R strategies like refurbishing, remanufacturing, and recycling. To engage students, the productive failure pedagogy was implemented in 8 weekly workshops. This method starts with an unsolvable exploratory problem, motivating students to learn the necessary knowledge. Workshops cover product architecture, disassembly documentation, part prioritization, legislation, directives, and human factors in repair design. The course, a master elective, has seen 25 to 50 students per run, working on client-based products to demonstrate improved circular economy fit.
This is the second IDE curriculum course using productive failure. Student evaluations (20 respondents) rated the course highly, with an overall grade of 8.5 out of 10 and a teaching, coaching, and feedback score of 4.68 out of 5. Students were highly engaged in making the circular economy actionable.
The paper will present the course, student outcomes, and qualitative learning experiences, focusing on the experiential learning aspect and the effects of productive failure on engineering courses. ...
In 2022, a new course on Repair was introduced. This course aligns with repair and with other R strategies like refurbishing, remanufacturing, and recycling. To engage students, the productive failure pedagogy was implemented in 8 weekly workshops. This method starts with an unsolvable exploratory problem, motivating students to learn the necessary knowledge. Workshops cover product architecture, disassembly documentation, part prioritization, legislation, directives, and human factors in repair design. The course, a master elective, has seen 25 to 50 students per run, working on client-based products to demonstrate improved circular economy fit.
This is the second IDE curriculum course using productive failure. Student evaluations (20 respondents) rated the course highly, with an overall grade of 8.5 out of 10 and a teaching, coaching, and feedback score of 4.68 out of 5. Students were highly engaged in making the circular economy actionable.
The paper will present the course, student outcomes, and qualitative learning experiences, focusing on the experiential learning aspect and the effects of productive failure on engineering courses. ...
Design for the Circular Economy often emphasizes business models and future visions, with less focus on practical application. Sustainability courses are generally seen as complex, attendance is often dropping, and the knowledge is minimally integrated into design projects.
In 2022, a new course on Repair was introduced. This course aligns with repair and with other R strategies like refurbishing, remanufacturing, and recycling. To engage students, the productive failure pedagogy was implemented in 8 weekly workshops. This method starts with an unsolvable exploratory problem, motivating students to learn the necessary knowledge. Workshops cover product architecture, disassembly documentation, part prioritization, legislation, directives, and human factors in repair design. The course, a master elective, has seen 25 to 50 students per run, working on client-based products to demonstrate improved circular economy fit.
This is the second IDE curriculum course using productive failure. Student evaluations (20 respondents) rated the course highly, with an overall grade of 8.5 out of 10 and a teaching, coaching, and feedback score of 4.68 out of 5. Students were highly engaged in making the circular economy actionable.
The paper will present the course, student outcomes, and qualitative learning experiences, focusing on the experiential learning aspect and the effects of productive failure on engineering courses.
In 2022, a new course on Repair was introduced. This course aligns with repair and with other R strategies like refurbishing, remanufacturing, and recycling. To engage students, the productive failure pedagogy was implemented in 8 weekly workshops. This method starts with an unsolvable exploratory problem, motivating students to learn the necessary knowledge. Workshops cover product architecture, disassembly documentation, part prioritization, legislation, directives, and human factors in repair design. The course, a master elective, has seen 25 to 50 students per run, working on client-based products to demonstrate improved circular economy fit.
This is the second IDE curriculum course using productive failure. Student evaluations (20 respondents) rated the course highly, with an overall grade of 8.5 out of 10 and a teaching, coaching, and feedback score of 4.68 out of 5. Students were highly engaged in making the circular economy actionable.
The paper will present the course, student outcomes, and qualitative learning experiences, focusing on the experiential learning aspect and the effects of productive failure on engineering courses.
Enhancing Ease-of-Disassembly Tools for Electronic Products
Insights from Assessing Computer Mice
Conference paper
(2024)
-
Yi-Hsieh Wang, Chi-Yi Tsai, Xiaoling Liu, Zhaoyang Hank Han, Ingrid De Pauw, Bas Flipsen
To make electronic products fit for circular economy strategies such as life extension, refurbishment, and recycling, ease of disassembly is a key design quality. Several tools are available to assess the ease of disassembly of products during the design process, such as the ease of Disassembly Metric (eDiM) and Hotspot Mapping (HSM). The eDiM method uses the time-to-dismantle as a unit for calculating the ease of disassembly. The longer it takes to reach a priority part, the lower the ease of disassembly. Hotspot mapping scores the different parts in the product architecture and ranks them on its failure rate (priority parts), activity, time-to-disassemble, embodied environmental impact, and embodied economical value. These tools help designers prioritize which parts of the product need to be redesigned to improve its circularity. The eDiM tool is quick and easy to use but is based on generic proxy times, which may not be applicable to specific fastener designs or product types. On the other hand, the hotspot mapping tool uses actual recorded times to accurately identify disassembly hotspots. Recording the time-to-disassemble is more accurate, but is also more time consuming and depends on the operator's experience. Therefore it is difficult to come up with reproducible numbers. It is crucial to find the right balance for these tools, to be able to accurately identify hotspots while maintaining the usability. In this paper, we research how to develop product-specific proxy times in order to reduce the effort required for assessing hotspots. To reach our goal, we conducted a series of experiments to measure the actual disassembly times of different computer mice, and compared them with the predictions from eDiM. The results indicate that the tools provide accurate results for the most dominant fastener type used in this type of product (Phillips screws) but largely deviate from actual results for some other common fastening techniques, such as adhesives. Consequently, generic proxy times could not be used to correctly identify the product design hotspots. The authors suggest specific modifications to the ease-of-disassembly tools to improve their applicability, thereby supporting the design of circular electronics.
...
To make electronic products fit for circular economy strategies such as life extension, refurbishment, and recycling, ease of disassembly is a key design quality. Several tools are available to assess the ease of disassembly of products during the design process, such as the ease of Disassembly Metric (eDiM) and Hotspot Mapping (HSM). The eDiM method uses the time-to-dismantle as a unit for calculating the ease of disassembly. The longer it takes to reach a priority part, the lower the ease of disassembly. Hotspot mapping scores the different parts in the product architecture and ranks them on its failure rate (priority parts), activity, time-to-disassemble, embodied environmental impact, and embodied economical value. These tools help designers prioritize which parts of the product need to be redesigned to improve its circularity. The eDiM tool is quick and easy to use but is based on generic proxy times, which may not be applicable to specific fastener designs or product types. On the other hand, the hotspot mapping tool uses actual recorded times to accurately identify disassembly hotspots. Recording the time-to-disassemble is more accurate, but is also more time consuming and depends on the operator's experience. Therefore it is difficult to come up with reproducible numbers. It is crucial to find the right balance for these tools, to be able to accurately identify hotspots while maintaining the usability. In this paper, we research how to develop product-specific proxy times in order to reduce the effort required for assessing hotspots. To reach our goal, we conducted a series of experiments to measure the actual disassembly times of different computer mice, and compared them with the predictions from eDiM. The results indicate that the tools provide accurate results for the most dominant fastener type used in this type of product (Phillips screws) but largely deviate from actual results for some other common fastening techniques, such as adhesives. Consequently, generic proxy times could not be used to correctly identify the product design hotspots. The authors suggest specific modifications to the ease-of-disassembly tools to improve their applicability, thereby supporting the design of circular electronics.
Is coaching student design teams a secret? Not really. But it is complicated and the best way to learn it is to dive in and be open. Experienced coaches put this cheerfully illustrated book together to help you recognise many coaching situations and the way to respond to them. The book provides tools as well as more than ten practical examples of team workshops. Moreover, it provides a system to efficiently manage extended coaching projects with more teams. Feel supported and get coaching.
...
Is coaching student design teams a secret? Not really. But it is complicated and the best way to learn it is to dive in and be open. Experienced coaches put this cheerfully illustrated book together to help you recognise many coaching situations and the way to respond to them. The book provides tools as well as more than ten practical examples of team workshops. Moreover, it provides a system to efficiently manage extended coaching projects with more teams. Feel supported and get coaching.
The Total Cost of Ownership Score
Unifying Repair with Durability and Improving Objectivity, Completeness, and Scalability
This paper introduces the Total Cost of Ownership Score (TCOS) as a comprehensive framework for evaluating and improving product repair, durability, and maintenance all together on a uniform scale. The scoring procedure, implemented through a spreadsheet, calculates a product's total cost of ownership per year based on likelihood of failure modes, repair costs per failure (parts, labor, and other), likelihoods of repair successes, and cost of replacing the product if repairs fail. Because costs and repair times vary substantially based on many factors, and likelihoods of device failures and repair successes are stochastic by nature, the uncertainties are large and must be displayed in final scores. However, preliminary results indicate that even with large uncertainties, the TCOS provides meaningful product comparisons and hotspot identification. The advantages of the TCOS include scoring quantitatively in units that both consumers and businesses understand and value, to drive market behavior; vast reduction of subjective judgments in scoring; measuring durability and repair on the same scale; universal applicability, enabling legislation or policy to scale across products easier; and enabling legislation to allow innovation rather than prescribing designs. The TCOS's two challenges are that the data required is not publicly available for most products, so it requires empirical product testing; and further development / negotiation is required to decide what standard assumptions can be applied as shortcuts to shrink the scope of empirical testing.
...
This paper introduces the Total Cost of Ownership Score (TCOS) as a comprehensive framework for evaluating and improving product repair, durability, and maintenance all together on a uniform scale. The scoring procedure, implemented through a spreadsheet, calculates a product's total cost of ownership per year based on likelihood of failure modes, repair costs per failure (parts, labor, and other), likelihoods of repair successes, and cost of replacing the product if repairs fail. Because costs and repair times vary substantially based on many factors, and likelihoods of device failures and repair successes are stochastic by nature, the uncertainties are large and must be displayed in final scores. However, preliminary results indicate that even with large uncertainties, the TCOS provides meaningful product comparisons and hotspot identification. The advantages of the TCOS include scoring quantitatively in units that both consumers and businesses understand and value, to drive market behavior; vast reduction of subjective judgments in scoring; measuring durability and repair on the same scale; universal applicability, enabling legislation or policy to scale across products easier; and enabling legislation to allow innovation rather than prescribing designs. The TCOS's two challenges are that the data required is not publicly available for most products, so it requires empirical product testing; and further development / negotiation is required to decide what standard assumptions can be applied as shortcuts to shrink the scope of empirical testing.
With the introduction of the new IDE bachelor in 2021 all courses underwent a revision to promote, amongst other, an autonomous learning attitude. The conventional approach of teaching engineering relied on direct instructions and problem-based learning and proved to be inadequate, as students struggled to apply their engineering knowledge in capstone design projects. Based on our research none of the student’s applied mechanics and materials and only a handful referenced to materials and manufacturing processes in their capstone project. To align with the new approach and to increase the application of engineering in capstone design projects, “productive failure” was introduced as a new didactical approach within our first-year course, Understanding Product Engineering (UPE, IOB1-2). Productive failure flips the traditional learning process and starts with an explorative problem which students cannot solve without the right knowledge. This is followed by an instruction explaining the missing concept. The approach engages students in active problem-solving, with the goal to increase the retention time of the theoretical concepts. We have developed our education around this using our in-house developed framework which includes lectures, workshops, and instruction videos facilitating the seamless integration of this approach into our own courses but also to disseminate it among our academic peers. Based on literature productive failure seems to increase the retention time but is not tested in the context of engineering design. To evaluate the retention time of productive failure and to compare it with the conventional approach of direct instructions, we developed a test to measure students’ retention of the taught knowledge. During the second-year follow-up course of Product Engineering (PE, IOB3-5) we started with an in-class formative entrance-test. An online multiple-choice test was created using questions mirroring those from the first-year final exam. We asked students to do this test with the uttermost care and fill it in seriously without gambling an answer. Students always had the opportunity to tick off the “I don’t know” box without consequences. Of the 282 students performing this test, 16% were repeaters, and 14% were students which transitioned from the previous bachelor program, having never taken the first-year UPE course. This paper will present the outcomes of this test and our findings into the possible retention time of our approach. This study will be repeated annually, serving as longitudinal study of our engineering education to continuously assess and improve our didactical approach.
...
With the introduction of the new IDE bachelor in 2021 all courses underwent a revision to promote, amongst other, an autonomous learning attitude. The conventional approach of teaching engineering relied on direct instructions and problem-based learning and proved to be inadequate, as students struggled to apply their engineering knowledge in capstone design projects. Based on our research none of the student’s applied mechanics and materials and only a handful referenced to materials and manufacturing processes in their capstone project. To align with the new approach and to increase the application of engineering in capstone design projects, “productive failure” was introduced as a new didactical approach within our first-year course, Understanding Product Engineering (UPE, IOB1-2). Productive failure flips the traditional learning process and starts with an explorative problem which students cannot solve without the right knowledge. This is followed by an instruction explaining the missing concept. The approach engages students in active problem-solving, with the goal to increase the retention time of the theoretical concepts. We have developed our education around this using our in-house developed framework which includes lectures, workshops, and instruction videos facilitating the seamless integration of this approach into our own courses but also to disseminate it among our academic peers. Based on literature productive failure seems to increase the retention time but is not tested in the context of engineering design. To evaluate the retention time of productive failure and to compare it with the conventional approach of direct instructions, we developed a test to measure students’ retention of the taught knowledge. During the second-year follow-up course of Product Engineering (PE, IOB3-5) we started with an in-class formative entrance-test. An online multiple-choice test was created using questions mirroring those from the first-year final exam. We asked students to do this test with the uttermost care and fill it in seriously without gambling an answer. Students always had the opportunity to tick off the “I don’t know” box without consequences. Of the 282 students performing this test, 16% were repeaters, and 14% were students which transitioned from the previous bachelor program, having never taken the first-year UPE course. This paper will present the outcomes of this test and our findings into the possible retention time of our approach. This study will be repeated annually, serving as longitudinal study of our engineering education to continuously assess and improve our didactical approach.
Conference paper
(2023)
-
A.A. van Oudheusden, A.J. Buijserd, E.L. Doubrovski, Bas Flipsen, Jeremy Faludi, R. Balkenende
Spare parts availability is crucial for extending the life of consumer products. However, long-term availability could lead to high stocks of spare parts, which might not be used. Instead, on-demand manufacturing of spare parts with additive manufacturing (AM) is a promising alternative. This paper presents a method to evaluate parts on their eligibility for AM spare parts. The parts evaluation is based on AM technology accessibility as well as part requirements. This method was tested by assessing all parts of the Dyson V11 broom-stick vacuum-cleaner and validated by printing and testing a selection of parts. For this, both plastic and metal spare parts were made through fused deposition modelling (FDM), stereolithography (SLA), binder jetting (BJ), material jetting (MJ), selective laser melting (SLM), selective laser sintering (SLS), and multi jet fusion (MJF), using both desktop FDM printers and off-site service providers. Based on these results, we conclude that currently only a small number of parts can be replaced by additive manufactured parts without considerable redesign efforts. AM parts can compete on price with the current stocked parts, but may be more expensive for other products. We also identified additional functional requirements for evaluating the eligibility of a spare part for AM.
...
Spare parts availability is crucial for extending the life of consumer products. However, long-term availability could lead to high stocks of spare parts, which might not be used. Instead, on-demand manufacturing of spare parts with additive manufacturing (AM) is a promising alternative. This paper presents a method to evaluate parts on their eligibility for AM spare parts. The parts evaluation is based on AM technology accessibility as well as part requirements. This method was tested by assessing all parts of the Dyson V11 broom-stick vacuum-cleaner and validated by printing and testing a selection of parts. For this, both plastic and metal spare parts were made through fused deposition modelling (FDM), stereolithography (SLA), binder jetting (BJ), material jetting (MJ), selective laser melting (SLM), selective laser sintering (SLS), and multi jet fusion (MJF), using both desktop FDM printers and off-site service providers. Based on these results, we conclude that currently only a small number of parts can be replaced by additive manufactured parts without considerable redesign efforts. AM parts can compete on price with the current stocked parts, but may be more expensive for other products. We also identified additional functional requirements for evaluating the eligibility of a spare part for AM.
In September 2021, the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering (IDE) introduced a revamped bachelor's programme that emphasizes design for higher complexity, teacher as a coach, and autonomous learning. The programme includes Understanding Product Engineering (UPE), which teaches first-year design students about product embodiment, manufacturing, and mechanics of materials. However, the traditional approach of teaching engineering using direct instructions and problem-based learning was ineffective, as students failed to apply the engineering knowledge in their capstone design projects. To address this issue and promote autonomous learning, the Productive Failure (PF) pedagogical framework was introduced as the main pedagogical framework in UPE. However, the general approach of the PF pedagogy as described by Kapur, lacked a translation into an effective design of the workshops. To address this, this paper proposes a hands-on model based on constructive alignment, where learning objectives, activities, and assessment are designed side-by-side. This paper presents our didactical model, which was developed in an agile way during the second run of UPE. The hands-on model proposed aids in applying the PF pedagogy in engineering courses and consists of a method to develop workshop assignments and a didactical approach to guide and coach students through the workshop process.
...
In September 2021, the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering (IDE) introduced a revamped bachelor's programme that emphasizes design for higher complexity, teacher as a coach, and autonomous learning. The programme includes Understanding Product Engineering (UPE), which teaches first-year design students about product embodiment, manufacturing, and mechanics of materials. However, the traditional approach of teaching engineering using direct instructions and problem-based learning was ineffective, as students failed to apply the engineering knowledge in their capstone design projects. To address this issue and promote autonomous learning, the Productive Failure (PF) pedagogical framework was introduced as the main pedagogical framework in UPE. However, the general approach of the PF pedagogy as described by Kapur, lacked a translation into an effective design of the workshops. To address this, this paper proposes a hands-on model based on constructive alignment, where learning objectives, activities, and assessment are designed side-by-side. This paper presents our didactical model, which was developed in an agile way during the second run of UPE. The hands-on model proposed aids in applying the PF pedagogy in engineering courses and consists of a method to develop workshop assignments and a didactical approach to guide and coach students through the workshop process.
3D Printing for Repair
An Approach for Enhancing Repair
Journal article
(2023)
-
A.A. van Oudheusden, J. Bolanos Arriola, Jeremy Faludi, Bas Flipsen, A.R. Balkenende
The availability and storage of spare parts are the main barriers to product repair. One possibility would be to 3D print spare parts, which would also enable the repair of products not intended to be repaired. Besides manufacturers, 3D printing spare parts is an interesting option for self-repair by consumers. However, the digitisation of spare parts for 3D printing is a challenge. There is little guidance on how to make a 3D-printed version of the original part. This paper establishes a framework through a literature review and experimental study to describe how to use 3D printing to produce spare parts for repair. Additionally, qualitative data coding was used to find the influence of previous experience, process implementation, and part complexity on the overall success of the 3D printing for repair (3DPfR) process. Our study showed that the 3DPfR process can be described as an iterative design for an additive manufacturing process that is integrated into a repair process. Additionally, it was found that the incorrect implementation of process steps was the most important predictor of the repair result. The steps that were performed incorrectly the most were synthesising design concepts (64%) and validating print quality (also 64%).
...
The availability and storage of spare parts are the main barriers to product repair. One possibility would be to 3D print spare parts, which would also enable the repair of products not intended to be repaired. Besides manufacturers, 3D printing spare parts is an interesting option for self-repair by consumers. However, the digitisation of spare parts for 3D printing is a challenge. There is little guidance on how to make a 3D-printed version of the original part. This paper establishes a framework through a literature review and experimental study to describe how to use 3D printing to produce spare parts for repair. Additionally, qualitative data coding was used to find the influence of previous experience, process implementation, and part complexity on the overall success of the 3D printing for repair (3DPfR) process. Our study showed that the 3DPfR process can be described as an iterative design for an additive manufacturing process that is integrated into a repair process. Additionally, it was found that the incorrect implementation of process steps was the most important predictor of the repair result. The steps that were performed incorrectly the most were synthesising design concepts (64%) and validating print quality (also 64%).
Disassembly
An essential enabler for repair
Elke keer dat Bas Flipsen meedoet aan het Repair Café in zijn woonplaats stuit hij op schroeven die moeilijk toegankelijk zijn omdat ze diep in een product verborgen zitten. ‘Ik raad iedereen aan die met circulariteit bezig is, zowel studenten als professionals, om aan repair cafés mee te doen’, zegt hij. ‘Want daar ervaar je hoe slecht productontwerp repareren bemoeilijkt.’ Het is een van de redenen waarom hij veel van zijn onderzoekstijd besteedt aan het begrijpen van demontage en het ontwikkelen van methoden die van pas komen bij product(her)ontwerp.
...
Elke keer dat Bas Flipsen meedoet aan het Repair Café in zijn woonplaats stuit hij op schroeven die moeilijk toegankelijk zijn omdat ze diep in een product verborgen zitten. ‘Ik raad iedereen aan die met circulariteit bezig is, zowel studenten als professionals, om aan repair cafés mee te doen’, zegt hij. ‘Want daar ervaar je hoe slecht productontwerp repareren bemoeilijkt.’ Het is een van de redenen waarom hij veel van zijn onderzoekstijd besteedt aan het begrijpen van demontage en het ontwikkelen van methoden die van pas komen bij product(her)ontwerp.
Opportunities For 3D-printable Spare Parts
Estimations From Historical Data
Conference paper
(2022)
-
Karl Samenjo, Alma van Oudheusden, Julieta Bolanos Arriola, Bas Flipsen, Jeremy Faludi
The Sharepair project aims to decrease the waste of electronic and electric consumer products and increase their useful life, by supporting repair communities and scaling up citizen repairs through digital tools. One of the focus areas of this project is to support the discovery or manufacturing of spare parts. With a 3D CAD model of a part and a 3D printer, repair communities could manufacture spare parts. This paper discusses the possibilities of identifying repairs, within repair communities, that can be met through 3D printed spare parts. To understand and identify these possibilities, the repair entries expressed in the Open Repair Database (ORD) from the Open Repair Alliance were examined. The analysis aimed to identify documented examples of repairs that have broken or missing parts, and estimate how many may be suitable for replacement by 3D printed versions. The ORD includes 41,874 repair data entries from 229 repair communities (Repair Café, Restart Project, Fixit Clinic, and Anstiftung) in eighteen countries. Repair entries include information such as product category, brand, model, repair status and notes regarding the repair process and result, all in different languages.
The analysis identified a list of the most commonly repaired product categories, brands, and models, as well as an estimate that between 7.5% and 29% of products in repair cafes that are not repaired today could be repaired with 3D printed spare parts. The analysis also showed that the data and information about the repairs is inconsistent, open to interpretation and often too limited to precisely pinpoint opportunities for 3D printed spare parts. Specifying the product parts that need repair or replacement and their functional requirements would be key to a successful identification. Thus, the study proposes recommendations to improve the process of capturing repair information that specifies the repair needs that can be met by the use of 3D printing.
...
The Sharepair project aims to decrease the waste of electronic and electric consumer products and increase their useful life, by supporting repair communities and scaling up citizen repairs through digital tools. One of the focus areas of this project is to support the discovery or manufacturing of spare parts. With a 3D CAD model of a part and a 3D printer, repair communities could manufacture spare parts. This paper discusses the possibilities of identifying repairs, within repair communities, that can be met through 3D printed spare parts. To understand and identify these possibilities, the repair entries expressed in the Open Repair Database (ORD) from the Open Repair Alliance were examined. The analysis aimed to identify documented examples of repairs that have broken or missing parts, and estimate how many may be suitable for replacement by 3D printed versions. The ORD includes 41,874 repair data entries from 229 repair communities (Repair Café, Restart Project, Fixit Clinic, and Anstiftung) in eighteen countries. Repair entries include information such as product category, brand, model, repair status and notes regarding the repair process and result, all in different languages.
The analysis identified a list of the most commonly repaired product categories, brands, and models, as well as an estimate that between 7.5% and 29% of products in repair cafes that are not repaired today could be repaired with 3D printed spare parts. The analysis also showed that the data and information about the repairs is inconsistent, open to interpretation and often too limited to precisely pinpoint opportunities for 3D printed spare parts. Specifying the product parts that need repair or replacement and their functional requirements would be key to a successful identification. Thus, the study proposes recommendations to improve the process of capturing repair information that specifies the repair needs that can be met by the use of 3D printing.
In September 2021 the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering has implemented a completely revised bachelor. Important differences between the old and the new bachelor are its focus on design for higher complexity, the teacher as a coach, and the need for students to learn in an autonomous way. Within the bachelor, first year engineering students are introduced to the world of physical embodiment of products. This includes materials and design, manufacturing techniques, functional analysis, product architecture and mechanics modelling. In the past years we used a classical approach in teaching mechanics of materials using direct instructions and problem-based learning as the learning approach. Unfortunately, many design coaches observed that the acquired engineering knowledge was applied superficially or even left out of scope in students' design projects. The complete overhaul of the bachelor and the seemingly short retention of topics related to product engineering, made us change our learning approach from Direct Instruction to Productive Failure (PF). Making mistakes is an important condition for learning, and Productive Failure incorporates this while promoting autonomous learning. In essence, Productive Failure is a method that fosters effective learning and fits very well with a general design approach of iterative and explorative learning. During the development of UPE, we designed several workshops in a PF kind of fashion and applied it in the 2021 course. During the run we came across several hurdles in teaching, related to workshop design, and the impact of changing learning culture, and the teachers' role. This paper will discuss our findings when applying Productive Failure in our own class which is used to improve the course and line up the educational team in becoming productive-failure teachers.
...
In September 2021 the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering has implemented a completely revised bachelor. Important differences between the old and the new bachelor are its focus on design for higher complexity, the teacher as a coach, and the need for students to learn in an autonomous way. Within the bachelor, first year engineering students are introduced to the world of physical embodiment of products. This includes materials and design, manufacturing techniques, functional analysis, product architecture and mechanics modelling. In the past years we used a classical approach in teaching mechanics of materials using direct instructions and problem-based learning as the learning approach. Unfortunately, many design coaches observed that the acquired engineering knowledge was applied superficially or even left out of scope in students' design projects. The complete overhaul of the bachelor and the seemingly short retention of topics related to product engineering, made us change our learning approach from Direct Instruction to Productive Failure (PF). Making mistakes is an important condition for learning, and Productive Failure incorporates this while promoting autonomous learning. In essence, Productive Failure is a method that fosters effective learning and fits very well with a general design approach of iterative and explorative learning. During the development of UPE, we designed several workshops in a PF kind of fashion and applied it in the 2021 course. During the run we came across several hurdles in teaching, related to workshop design, and the impact of changing learning culture, and the teachers' role. This paper will discuss our findings when applying Productive Failure in our own class which is used to improve the course and line up the educational team in becoming productive-failure teachers.
In our Integrated Product Design master at the Delft faculty of Industrial Design Engineering we see a growing diversity in our student population. Besides a growing number of different nationalities there are also significant differences in prior education, competences, and socioemotional aspects. Within the Advanced Embodiment Design (AED) course, students work in teams on a client-based design project for one full semester. In 2018-2019, 22 student-teams started out their endeavour, coached by eight coaches. Within the course an important learning objective we want to offer students is the opportunity to experience and perform in a successful team, acknowledge all students' input, and experience a successful result. During the process of embodiment design, the project teams come across several hurdles which challenges team performance and their project progress, and thereby influences the project results. To maximise the performance of student design-teams we have conducted two studies researching the challenges these teams come across over the course of the semester. One study was based on the coaches' experiences during the project (Flipsen & Persaud, 2016), and the other one on the students' individual reflections on the project (Flipsen, Persaud & Magyari, 2021). The challenges our students come across are analysed and relate to becoming a team, doing the project right, and finalising the project successfully. The results of both studies are used to develop a framework supporting coaches in maximising the performance of multi-diverse design teams. The framework is built around the Theory U (Scharmer 2016), a model describing how teams work with each other, following the right path to success (presencing) or off-tracking by muddling through, or by absencing. To track the different team's performances, we use a project-group tracking-system existing of seven Key Performance Indicators combined with a coach journal. The combination of KPI's help the team of coaches to pinpoint lower performing teams and intervene when needed. In this paper we will present the framework, consisting of (i) preparatory activities to initiate trust, teambuilding, and a successful student cooperation, (ii) a system to track the student-teams' health and performance and pinpoint troublesome groups, and (iii) responsive activities related to the hurdles teams might come across and how to reverse them. To assist the individual coach, we have developed several responsive activities the coach can use to intervene, slowing down the process of dysfunctionality and revert the process towards highly performing teams. The activities are tested in the two cohorts following our initial studies in 2018-2019.
...
In our Integrated Product Design master at the Delft faculty of Industrial Design Engineering we see a growing diversity in our student population. Besides a growing number of different nationalities there are also significant differences in prior education, competences, and socioemotional aspects. Within the Advanced Embodiment Design (AED) course, students work in teams on a client-based design project for one full semester. In 2018-2019, 22 student-teams started out their endeavour, coached by eight coaches. Within the course an important learning objective we want to offer students is the opportunity to experience and perform in a successful team, acknowledge all students' input, and experience a successful result. During the process of embodiment design, the project teams come across several hurdles which challenges team performance and their project progress, and thereby influences the project results. To maximise the performance of student design-teams we have conducted two studies researching the challenges these teams come across over the course of the semester. One study was based on the coaches' experiences during the project (Flipsen & Persaud, 2016), and the other one on the students' individual reflections on the project (Flipsen, Persaud & Magyari, 2021). The challenges our students come across are analysed and relate to becoming a team, doing the project right, and finalising the project successfully. The results of both studies are used to develop a framework supporting coaches in maximising the performance of multi-diverse design teams. The framework is built around the Theory U (Scharmer 2016), a model describing how teams work with each other, following the right path to success (presencing) or off-tracking by muddling through, or by absencing. To track the different team's performances, we use a project-group tracking-system existing of seven Key Performance Indicators combined with a coach journal. The combination of KPI's help the team of coaches to pinpoint lower performing teams and intervene when needed. In this paper we will present the framework, consisting of (i) preparatory activities to initiate trust, teambuilding, and a successful student cooperation, (ii) a system to track the student-teams' health and performance and pinpoint troublesome groups, and (iii) responsive activities related to the hurdles teams might come across and how to reverse them. To assist the individual coach, we have developed several responsive activities the coach can use to intervene, slowing down the process of dysfunctionality and revert the process towards highly performing teams. The activities are tested in the two cohorts following our initial studies in 2018-2019.
The Circularity Calculator
A tool for circular product development with Circularity and potential value capture indicators
Most products require a redesign to be viable in a circular economy. For instance, by implementing design for disassembly, remanufacturing, recyclability, and using long-lived components. Typically, different solutions can be chosen to improve a products' circularity, and different strategies can be aimed at keeping the product, its components, and materials in the loop.
When developing products for a circular economy, designers and manufacturers want to assess their solutions and choose between alternatives early in the design process. This paper describes the Circularity Calculator, a tool that has been developed to help designers assess the potential resource circularity and value capture of products in the first design stages. The tool provides quantitative indicators that help determine whether and which circular strategies are potentially viable for the company.
This paper discusses the methodology behind the Circularity Calculator, which uses four KPIs that have been developed for assessment; a Circularity indicator, Value Capture indicator, Recycled Content indicator and a Reuse Index. We will explain how the dashboard interface is used to model a linear and circular product system which can be compared on its economic potential. The tool is illustrated with an example concerning the analysis of a household blender. ...
When developing products for a circular economy, designers and manufacturers want to assess their solutions and choose between alternatives early in the design process. This paper describes the Circularity Calculator, a tool that has been developed to help designers assess the potential resource circularity and value capture of products in the first design stages. The tool provides quantitative indicators that help determine whether and which circular strategies are potentially viable for the company.
This paper discusses the methodology behind the Circularity Calculator, which uses four KPIs that have been developed for assessment; a Circularity indicator, Value Capture indicator, Recycled Content indicator and a Reuse Index. We will explain how the dashboard interface is used to model a linear and circular product system which can be compared on its economic potential. The tool is illustrated with an example concerning the analysis of a household blender. ...
Most products require a redesign to be viable in a circular economy. For instance, by implementing design for disassembly, remanufacturing, recyclability, and using long-lived components. Typically, different solutions can be chosen to improve a products' circularity, and different strategies can be aimed at keeping the product, its components, and materials in the loop.
When developing products for a circular economy, designers and manufacturers want to assess their solutions and choose between alternatives early in the design process. This paper describes the Circularity Calculator, a tool that has been developed to help designers assess the potential resource circularity and value capture of products in the first design stages. The tool provides quantitative indicators that help determine whether and which circular strategies are potentially viable for the company.
This paper discusses the methodology behind the Circularity Calculator, which uses four KPIs that have been developed for assessment; a Circularity indicator, Value Capture indicator, Recycled Content indicator and a Reuse Index. We will explain how the dashboard interface is used to model a linear and circular product system which can be compared on its economic potential. The tool is illustrated with an example concerning the analysis of a household blender.
When developing products for a circular economy, designers and manufacturers want to assess their solutions and choose between alternatives early in the design process. This paper describes the Circularity Calculator, a tool that has been developed to help designers assess the potential resource circularity and value capture of products in the first design stages. The tool provides quantitative indicators that help determine whether and which circular strategies are potentially viable for the company.
This paper discusses the methodology behind the Circularity Calculator, which uses four KPIs that have been developed for assessment; a Circularity indicator, Value Capture indicator, Recycled Content indicator and a Reuse Index. We will explain how the dashboard interface is used to model a linear and circular product system which can be compared on its economic potential. The tool is illustrated with an example concerning the analysis of a household blender.
This guide takes the reader through the 3D Printing for Repair (3DP4R) process. It consists of guidelines and tools to create a 3D printable version of spare parts needed for a product repair. 3D printing a spare part is more than just printing the original part. Instead, it is an iterative process in which the part is analysed, redesigned, manufactured, and tested, in order to come to a final part. This guide will describe these four phases in detail. The guide is meant for anybody who is interested in trying to manufacture spare parts with 3D printing technologies, remakers, tinkerers, volunteer repairers, professional repairers, and everyone who is interested in repair initiatives.
...
This guide takes the reader through the 3D Printing for Repair (3DP4R) process. It consists of guidelines and tools to create a 3D printable version of spare parts needed for a product repair. 3D printing a spare part is more than just printing the original part. Instead, it is an iterative process in which the part is analysed, redesigned, manufactured, and tested, in order to come to a final part. This guide will describe these four phases in detail. The guide is meant for anybody who is interested in trying to manufacture spare parts with 3D printing technologies, remakers, tinkerers, volunteer repairers, professional repairers, and everyone who is interested in repair initiatives.
Circular Design of Composite Products
A Preliminary Framework Based on Insights from Literature and Industry
Composite materials are an attractive material choice as they enable lightweight, low maintenance products with a long lifespan. But closing the loop for these materials in a Circular Economy (CE) is challenging, especially for thermoset composites. In a CE, products should be designed for minimal impact while preserving their environmental and economic value for as long as possible. However, design strategies for composite products in a CE are currently largely unexplored.
Insights from literature on design for a CE as well as on composites recovery are combined to create a set of design principles for composites in a CE. In addition to well-known long life, lifetime extension and product recovery approaches, literature indicates the potential value of structural recycling. Structural recycling preserves most of the functional value of the product, which is largely lost in
materials recycling. Experts from composites industry were interviewed in focus groups to further explore CE strategies and design principles for a set of reference products, such as car interior components. The resulting framework connects Circular strategies to design principles for composite products and supports design of new composite products for use, reuse and recycling in a CE.
...
Composite materials are an attractive material choice as they enable lightweight, low maintenance products with a long lifespan. But closing the loop for these materials in a Circular Economy (CE) is challenging, especially for thermoset composites. In a CE, products should be designed for minimal impact while preserving their environmental and economic value for as long as possible. However, design strategies for composite products in a CE are currently largely unexplored.
Insights from literature on design for a CE as well as on composites recovery are combined to create a set of design principles for composites in a CE. In addition to well-known long life, lifetime extension and product recovery approaches, literature indicates the potential value of structural recycling. Structural recycling preserves most of the functional value of the product, which is largely lost in
materials recycling. Experts from composites industry were interviewed in focus groups to further explore CE strategies and design principles for a set of reference products, such as car interior components. The resulting framework connects Circular strategies to design principles for composite products and supports design of new composite products for use, reuse and recycling in a CE.
Circular design of composite products
A framework based on insights from literature and industry
Composite materials are an attractive material choice as they enable lightweight, low-maintenance products with a long lifespan. Recycling these materials, however, remains a chal-lenge. Homogeneous material composition and the use of thermoset matrices complicate repro-cessing, and result in low-grade recyclate. This means that closing the loop for these materials in a circular economy remains challenging, especially for glass fibre-reinforced thermoset composites. For a circular economy, products need to be designed to preserve product functionality, material properties, and economic value for as long as possible. However, recovery strategies, design aspects and their interconnectedness are currently largely unexplored for products containing fibre-rein-forced polymers. The aim of this study was to identify circular strategies and determine design aspects for products containing composites. To achieve this, we conducted a systematic literature review and consulted experts. The circular strategies are largely similar to generic circular economy strategies as far as product integrity is concerned. However, on a material level, we identified addi-tional approaches, the most notable of which is structural reuse, which preserves the material quality and thereby value. The design aspects were clustered and positioned along the product design process to support implementation. Finally, the strategies and design aspects we identified were brought together in a framework to support product design and design research for products containing composite materials in the context of a circular economy.
...
Composite materials are an attractive material choice as they enable lightweight, low-maintenance products with a long lifespan. Recycling these materials, however, remains a chal-lenge. Homogeneous material composition and the use of thermoset matrices complicate repro-cessing, and result in low-grade recyclate. This means that closing the loop for these materials in a circular economy remains challenging, especially for glass fibre-reinforced thermoset composites. For a circular economy, products need to be designed to preserve product functionality, material properties, and economic value for as long as possible. However, recovery strategies, design aspects and their interconnectedness are currently largely unexplored for products containing fibre-rein-forced polymers. The aim of this study was to identify circular strategies and determine design aspects for products containing composites. To achieve this, we conducted a systematic literature review and consulted experts. The circular strategies are largely similar to generic circular economy strategies as far as product integrity is concerned. However, on a material level, we identified addi-tional approaches, the most notable of which is structural reuse, which preserves the material quality and thereby value. The design aspects were clustered and positioned along the product design process to support implementation. Finally, the strategies and design aspects we identified were brought together in a framework to support product design and design research for products containing composite materials in the context of a circular economy.
Composite materials offer many advantages during the use phase, but recovery at the end of a lifecycle remains a challenge. Structural reuse, where an end of life product is segmented into construction elements, may be a promising alternative. However, composites are often used in large, complex shaped products with optimised material compositions that complicate reuse. A systematic approach is needed to address these challenges and the scale of processing. We investigated structural reuse taking wind turbine blades as a case product. A new segmentation approach was developed and applied to a reference blade model. The recovered construction ele- ments were found to comply to geometric construction standards and to outperform conventional construction materials on specific flexural stiffness and flexural strength. Finally, we explored the reuse of these construction elements in practice. Together, the segmentation approach, structural analysis and practical application provide insights into design aspects that enable structural reuse.
...
Composite materials offer many advantages during the use phase, but recovery at the end of a lifecycle remains a challenge. Structural reuse, where an end of life product is segmented into construction elements, may be a promising alternative. However, composites are often used in large, complex shaped products with optimised material compositions that complicate reuse. A systematic approach is needed to address these challenges and the scale of processing. We investigated structural reuse taking wind turbine blades as a case product. A new segmentation approach was developed and applied to a reference blade model. The recovered construction ele- ments were found to comply to geometric construction standards and to outperform conventional construction materials on specific flexural stiffness and flexural strength. Finally, we explored the reuse of these construction elements in practice. Together, the segmentation approach, structural analysis and practical application provide insights into design aspects that enable structural reuse.