Toddler Table

ANGEL CHOU 6724608ARCHDRC 373 Submission B

CONTENTS

The Proposal

The Prototypes

The Failures

The Successes

The Transforming of Scale & Technology

The Selection

The Testing

The Processes of Refining

CHAPTER I : The beginnings of design

CHAPTER II : Experimenting

CHAPTER III : refining

Gallery and bibliography

2

3

4

5

5

6

6

7

8

1

CHAPTER I : the proposal

"...The vast majority of the artifacts we design are created for a particular group of users. Designers must understand something of the nature of these users and their needs whether it be in terms of the ergonomics of chairs or the semiotics of graphics..." (p.5) Observed by Lawson (1990)

The Little ClientInitial ideas were developing around making something for my 2 year old nephew Lucas. At his age he has the busiest hands and is constantly learning new things, discovering new objects and being a little scientist. I thought it would be interesting to make the object something that allows him to be creative, stimulates cognitive development, and being visually appealing.

The BriefTo design a piece of small children’s furniture that can be easily assembled, is visually stimulating and has consideration to the safety of children, with experimentation of lasercut and CNC technologies.

The SpecificationI thought of making a little table for creating things; whether it be drawing, playdoughing, painting or something else entire-ly. It would be able to store stuff; he would be able to put pencils, crayons, felt-tips, paintbrushes, small figurines or whatever is keeping his fingers busy. Also, it would have something stimulating visually; engravings, popu-out things, numbers or the alphabet. And there must be flat parts of the surface as typically table would. In all of these, I would have to consider ergonom-ics (in terms of scale, user-friendliness, stability), sustainable means (choice of material, recycling, lifespan) and assembly (safe, relativetly easy).

The DigitalI will be making prototypes firstly using lasercutting with MDF board but will definitely be transferring to using the CNC router to cut out the actual-sized furniture, out of wood.Rhinoceros 5 will be used to prepare these files and also be largely incorporated into the design process as the way to digitally visualise what the cutting would look like. Using this program will speed up the process considerably compared to if this were to be explored purely by analogue means (i.e. cutting and making the models by knife and only relying on drawing.).

the process

1. 3D Visualisation and preparation of lasercut/cnc file

2. assembling and assessing/critiquing prototype

3. making next prototype with improvements

REadingIn reading some of a recent thesis, I was interested by the question that Yusef (2013) posed regarding how explorations in fur-niture through new fabrication technologies could inform arhcitectural design.This is why I became interested in joints and how it could work with the client, brief and specifications for furniture, but also that what is successful could be explored further in architecture too.

2

CHAPTER I : The PrototypesPrototype 1

GOODThe centre base of the table is very sturdy and easily pieced together. Has much potential to be developed further and experiment with this type of joint.

BADThe joint allows the tabletop to be distorted as it doesn’t stay fixed in place.

NEXTNeeds better connection between base and tabletop. Also, could try to incorporate the specifications into the design.

Prototype 2.1 and 2.2

GOODHaving cut-outs in the tabletop orked and there is potential for interesting holes-cuts.

BADThere were problems with the joints of the legs to the table; the idea was that the joints would slide easily but also be stable in holding the tabletop, but the proportions were not right and the result were wobbly legs

NEXTNeeds to be stabilized by changing dimensions and proportions of the joints. Also could think of how to merge with previous prototype.

Prototype 3

GOODWhat worked is that there is a visual exploration of geometries and possible indentations and extended parts that could work to meet the specifications.

BADHave not actually made this physically and also it isn’t using the slot-joint that was successful.

NEXTTo use the ideas gained from this for the experimen-tation part - that indentations or engravings or other offsets could create pockets to put things in.

The Next PhaseAfter these initial prototypes and moving forward, I would be doing further experimentation with the right-angled slot joint which was the most successful out of these. With making more slot-joint prototypes, I can begin to incorporate the specifica-tions; the slot-joint which is functional in holding up the tabletop can also become a design opportunity.

CHAPTER II : The failures

Prototype Failure 1

WHY IT FAILEDWas experimenting with another way of doing the table top; smaller but more holes for support underneath it. The teeth and holes were too loose, and also the thickness of material is not enough for the sides to stand up on their own without more support.

WHAT WAS LEARNTDefinitely the criss-crossing of the slot joint works better.

NEXTIncorporate the cross slot-joint with this way of holding up the table-top.

Prototype Failure 2

WHY IT FAILEDThis again didn’t account for the practicalities of weight; the 6mm MDF is heavier and the tiny ‘bridges’ and notches need to be longer and on ei-ther side of each of these 4 pieces of tabletop.

WHAT WAS LEARNTThis doesn’t work well with the cross slot-joint because it takes away what was successful about the joint; that it held up the central axis of the tabletop.

NEXTThough this could be further investigated and de-veloped, I chose not to because it was defeating the purpose of the initial direction the slot-joint was going.

The ExperimentingDuring the experimenting process, there were prototypes that failed terribly due to different reasons which have informed the next prototypes to make. The successful ones also were indicators what could be done and possiblilities of making it more refined. Through this trial and error, design modifications were made and understanding of the limitations and parametres of technology was gained. I will be continuing with using lasercut on MDF board for these experimentations. The thickness could differ; both 3mm and 6mm would be used and it would affect sizing and scale of the models.

The Failed ExperimentsAlthough these were considered ‘failed’ experiments, they were critical in development of the design. They pointed towards better solutions and also shows some of what the limitations of design are with these joints.

4

CHAPTER II : The successes and the transforming of scale and technology

The Successful OnesThese were the successful prototypes during the experimenting process which were not perfect, but were developments that could at least stand up and

TRANSFORMATIONThe next big step is transferring this to another digital means; the CNC router, and also to another material; plywood. This means potential changes will be made to the design to accommodate to the shift. In scale, it would be life-sized so would have to consider the real dimensions that the table would be and refer back to the brief and specifications; would have to accommodate to the small stature of my 2 year old nephew.

Prototype Successes 1, 2.1 and 2.2

GOODPrototype 1 was confirming the direction of design and coming to a solution after the Prototype Failure 1. Prototype 2.1 and 2.2 were successful because the joint slots were finally perfectly size to the 3mm thickness of MDF and so the slots for the tabletop fitted snugly.

BADNot so good was the random wavy edges of Proto-type 2.2; perhaps symmetry looks better aesthetically.

NEXTGiven the opportunities with the tabletop joints and how well the cross slot-joint work, could develop more interesting designs and meet the specifications.

Prototype Successes 3.1 and 3.2

GOODFinally developed into a design that meets the spec-ifications by having one of the two slotted pieces become 3x as thick as the other which gives potential for holes to be drilled in them to allow for storage of things. Also, took away and played with parts of the two slotting pieces.

BADHad to make an adjustment to the tabletop - that the holes in it (for the 3x-thicker slotted piece) would have to be slightly wider (at least 0.2mm) due to some width difference of the actual material once they have been stuck together.

NEXTTransferring to actual size and will be making modifications according to change in material and technology used.

5

CHAPTER III : The selection and the testing

The MaterialSelecting the type of plywood was a long process itself. Things to consider included which company to buy from, the cost, quality and aesthetics. I ended up choosing the Birch BB Select 13 ply from Plytech which was more cost-efficient and relatively good quality. The ply thickness was 18mm so everything about the measurements and design of the final furniture would be worked around that; the slot joints for the tabletop and the slotted pieces would also have to work to the measurements.

The TestingBefore making the file for the final furniture, would have to do some test cutting to find out the actual differences that are pres-ent in this shift from lasercutting MDF to CNC cutting plywood. I would test out the joints between the tabletop and the slot-ted-pieces, especially the 3-piece one, and also between the two pieces that slot together to form the ‘legs’ that hold up the table. Moving on to the CNC means there would be notches made beside the slots (alternative is manual sanding) by the rounded drill in order for the 90 degree angle of the adjoining piece to fit in.

Test Cuts

GOODThis showed how the notches would look, and gave some idea of the actual sizing. Also it showed all the implications and produced effect of CNC cutting and informed me of the difference of the ‘buffer space’.

BADThe buffer space of the previous lasercut models (0.2mm) was definitely too small to make a difference in terms of allowing a ‘buffer space’ for the slots to fit into each other, and therefore I had to manually sand down the slotted piece so that it would fit.There was also some unknown error with the drill that caused rough fringes and splitting of one side of the plywood and so much more sanding was necessary to smooth it out, but unfortunately the rips would still be very visible.

WHAT I LEARNEDLess joints the better because joints always means that if not measured correctly, it would not fit and would require manual adjustments like sanding down to the right dimensions.Needs wider buffer space between the hole and the matching piece that would slot in; at least a 2mm difference between the slot/hole and the joint height and width.

NEXTRedo the file for CNC-cutting the final with what I learned from the testing.

Selection of ply from plytech - the 3rd was selected; birch plywood

6

1.The Sanding

WHYThe result of the CNC cutting is rough fringes and edges and also I had to break off the small pieces of ‘support’ which prevents the cut-outs from flying out while the shapes were being cut, but they leave protruding pieces that require sanding down.

PROCESSDifferent tools were used for sanding different parts, for example the outer edges can be sanded by the rotating disk sander which works very fast, while the inner edges needed to be manually sanded down by files, sanding blocks and the hand drill spindle sander. There was some offsetting of the adjoining pieces which did not fit into the slot (for the 3x thicker piece) and required much sanding off (around 1-2mm). To finish, all surfaces were sanded by the orbital sanders.

CHAPTER III : The Process of refining

Final SummaryThe testing through making and re-making process has been made me more aware of how to best use technologies, their constraints but also the possiblities. It has helped me understand more about how materials work and used and practicalities of particular design decisions, like the slot-joint which I have used in this project. Also, I can definitely see how improvements and alternative explorations could be done and that it can lead on to inform architectural design and structural considerations too.

As Lawson (1990) states that “the division of labour between those who design and those who make has now become a keystone of our technological society” (p.15), I can now understand why this is such an issue because if designers never make or see for ourselves the proces which goes into realising a design (in full scale), then we would never fully understand what limitations or possibilities there are or how new technologies can be used to aid or even inform design decisions.

2. The Varnishing

WHYUsing varnish would protect it from wear and tear and also finish off the sanded surfaces. I chose not to stain but just use a clear varnish because I liked the light colour of the birch plywood - it seemed to suit being a childrens’ furniture so 2 layers of slight gloss would be enough.

PROCESSFirstly, the surface would have been already sanded and cleaned of dust for the first coat.After the first coat, the wood absorbs much of the varnish and becomes bristly again so after 2 hours for drying, some light sanding using finer sanding paper is necessary.Dusting it off again, the second coat is ready to go on, and this time less varnish is needed and the brushstrokes matter - needs to be even as this is the coat that shows!

process of varnishing

7

Link to video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh2fnOSKMUM

Gallery

BIBLIOGRAPHY- Lawson, Bryan. (1990). How Designers Think. London: The Arhcitectural Press Ltd.

-Yusef Patel. (2013). Furniture to Architecture : an experiment into detail (masters the-sis). University of Auckland, New Zealand.

8