Re-distributed manufacturing presents a number of opportunities and challenges for New Product Development in a future Circular Economy. It has been argued that small-scale, flexible and localised production systems will reduce resource consumption, lower transport emissions and extend product lifetimes. At the same time smart products within the Internet of Things will gather and report data on user behaviour and product status. Many sustainable design tools have previously been developed but few are able to imagine and develop visions of how future sustainable product service systems might be manifested. This paper introduces the concept of Consumer Intervention Mapping as a tool for creating future product strategies. The tool visualises the points within a product's lifecycle where stakeholders are able to intervene in the product's expected journey. This perspective enables the rapid construction of scenarios that explore and describe future circular product service systems. Validation of the tool in three workshops is described and the outcomes are presented. Consumer Intervention Mapping is successful in creating scenarios that describe existing product service systems and new product concepts adapted to a Circular Economy paradigm. Further work is required to refine the tool's performance in more focused and reflective design exercises.

This study electrically characterizes three types of commercially available conductive three-dimensional (3D) printing filament for use in 3D printed functional devices. The three plastics were carbon dispersed acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), carbon dispersed polylactic acid (PLA) and graphene dispersed PLA. The method of 3D printing used was material extrusion and prints were made in both single and dual extrusion modes. The plastics were found to be piezoresistive, enabling them to be characterized as strain sensors. The electrical characteristics of these materials enabled the measurement of strain using low cost, readily available prototyping equipment and minimising the requirement for dedicated instrument components (e.g. Wheatstone bridges). Increasing the thickness of the plastics improved conductivity. However, this also decreased the reliability and reproducibility of strain sensor data due to a complex internal 3D structure. The recommendation for reliable use in prototyping and manufacturing is to print tracking (under 0.8mm thickness) to produce resistance measurements that are predictable and follow a linear regression up to R2 = 0.9991. A dual extruded 3D print was fabricated as a final demonstration. A force sensing resistor (FSR) interface was created. The final demonstration uses a PIC18F45K20 microcontroller to process sensor inputs, outputting to an alphanumeric LCD.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand how Design for Additive manufacturing Knowledge has been developing and its significance to both academia and industry. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, the authors use a bibliometric approach to analyse publications from January 2010 to December 2020 to explore the subject areas, publication outlets, most active authors, geographical distribution of scholarly outputs, collaboration and co-citations at both institutional and geographical levels and outcomes from keywords analysis. Findings The findings reveal that most knowledge has been developed in DfAM methods, rules and guidelines. This may suggest that designers are trying to learn new ways of harnessing the freedom offered by AM. Furthermore, more knowledge is needed to understand how to tackle the inherent limitations of AM processes. Moreover, DfAM knowledge has thus far been developed mostly by authors in a small number of institutional and geographical clusters, potentially limiting diverse perspectives and synergies from international collaboration which are essential for global knowledge development, for improvement of the quality of DfAM research and for its wider dissemination. Originality/value A concise structure of DfAM knowledge areas upon which the bibliometric analysis was conducted has been developed. Furthermore, areas where research is concentrated and those that require further knowledge development are revealed.

research investigates the role of product design in patient compliance, specifically focussing on personalisation and co-design. She brings expertise in co-design to her current role at DCA, incorporating co-creation and participatory methods into professional practice.

No abstract

Sustainable and Responsible Design (SRD) harnesses design’s potential to address eco-social problems and in doing so challenge the status quo of design education by reframing the social and ecological consequences, boundaries and agencies of design. This critical and transdisciplinary approach frays the edges of traditional design disciplines with embedded and reflexive modes of learning. We describe characteristics of SRD education and present theories of learning to empower students in this complex terrain. The learning associated with SRD education is ecologically engaged, participative, critical, expansive and designerly. We recount case studies of our own experiences advancing sustainable and responsible undergraduate design education in the UK. We identify path constraints such as disciplinary fragility, appropriation, and power dynamics in the design school. The push for a revision of priorities generates tensions where there is often greenwashing rhetoric of sustainability and inclusivity. We describe strategies and tactics to address these tensions. We highlight the agency we have as educators and designers and argue that design education can only meaningfully participate in response to the challenges presented by climate change, other types of ecocide, and social problems when educators make substantive commitments to supporting sustainability literacies and design approaches that serve the interests of diverse stakeholders.

Sustainable and Responsible Design (SRD) harnesses design’s potential to address eco-social problems and in doing so challenge the status quo of design education by reframing the social and ecological consequences, boundaries and agencies of design. This critical and transdisciplinary approach frays the edges of traditional design disciplines with embedded and reflexive modes of learning. We describe characteristics of SRD education and present theories of learning to empower students in this complex terrain. The learning associated with SRD education is ecologically engaged, participative, critical, expansive and designerly. We recount case studies of our own experiences advancing sustainable and responsible undergraduate design education in the UK. We identify path constraints such as disciplinary fragility, appropriation, and power dynamics in the design school. The push for a revision of priorities generates tensions where there is often greenwashing rhetoric of sustainability and inclusivity. We describe strategies and tactics to address these tensions. We highlight the agency we have as educators and designers and argue that design education can only meaningfully participate in response to the challenges presented by climate change, other types of ecocide, and social problems when educators make substantive commitments to supporting sustainability literacies and design approaches that serve the interests of diverse stakeholders.