Answer to CEED 2014 Product Design part

You are here Answers >> CEED 2014 product design part

Design Problem solving is an important part of CEED exam and it combines application of your creativity with sketching. So, we will see one more example - by way of solution or answer to CEED 2014 Product design part for now.

Question :

Present road side waste containers are normally dirty, stinking and spilling over. Design roadside waste container bin(s) to be used in public places for segregation of the following categories of waste. 

1. Different types of packaging 
2. Wet and Dry organic waste 
3. Organic food waste 
4. All other kinds of leftover.

The container(s) should be rugged, movable so that the waste can be transported for periodic disposal. 

• Present your design proposal
• With a neat freehand sketch showing the form.
• An exploded view drawing
• Indicate the materials and processes used in manufacturing.
• Support your design with a brief note on the design decisions taken.

Evaluation criteria 

1. Identification of problem areas 
2. Design insights and creativity 
3. User Centric Design considerations 
4. Sustainability parameters recycle, reduce, regenerate, refuse 
5. Ability to meet specific requirements of hygiene, portability and Indian conditions 
6. Originality of ideas 
7. Appropriateness of materials to be used in the manufacturing of the final product.

(Appeared as question no. 6 in CEED 2014 exam paper)

Let me discuss a little about the importance of 'evolution criteria' before proceeding to the actual design. 

The examiner puts his focus completely on the evolution part and he checks whether your designed product meets the requirement or not, and if it met, then to what extent !. So, you should care for that and give much concern to the question, the requirements and the evolution criteria. 

To confirm this, I did some experiments while writing CEED exam last year (2014). For the first question of CEED 2014 design part - that is to make a freehand sketch of a person opening a door, I knowingly skipped two evolution requirements, and due to which I received very less marks, even though I spent much time to make that sketch look good. I also spared part of the time (that I was supposed to use for the 50 marks design question) to make this sketch look great and I can say, it was one of my best try ever. But even then, I only got very less marks for that attempt ! 

Now I did the second experiment - for the 50 marks design question (I preferred product design question as I'm good at product design) I made simple rough sketch, but I took care to meet almost all the requirements of the question minding the evolution process. But unfortunately, since I already wasted some time attempting first sketch question, I couldn't make the rough sketch better, it went below rough ! But alas, I got unexpected marks - suitable enough to clear and get good score !

I therefore confirmed - those ideas that have been communicated with all the need of the question succeed greatly than any other attempt to make that - visually better; but no much concern on the requirements. So, please be careful and understand the question as well as the evolution process.

Let's now solve the design question giving care to the evolution process as well.

Identification of Problem Areas

1. Each kind of waste has some dead time - before which they should be processed - say dry waste can be disposed 3 or 4 days, while organic food waste is to be disposed within a day in order to avoid stinking smell. So, the dustbin could be capable of individual wastes at different times
2. Most of the time, dustbin with wet and organic wastes requires periodic cleaning, pesticide control and other hygienic control steps to avoid unhygienic conditions. So, they need to be processed for some part of time. While dry and solid waste dustbins can be serviced after even a month. So, the dustbin should accommodate replaceable individual parts, without making the need for moving the entire dustbin thus eliminating the waste of men, machine and money !
3. The dustbin should be movable, in other sense portable to make it usable wherever required in roadside.
4. Since it is required to make the dustbin portable, it should therefore be simple, light weight and probably be handled with ease with minimum number of accessories.
5. The dustbin should not be easily accessible by animals, insects and any other foreign disturbances.
6. It should be unique to make it attractive and user-friendly.

Materials and process used in manufacturing

• All the body parts were supposed to be made with PVC - poly vinyl chloride and extrusion process were employed to make them
• The bottom circular trolley was proposed to be made with Mild Steel (MS) material coated with corrosive paints so as to make it strong, load-bearable and of course corrosive to environment.

Design Decisions taken

1. These dustbins were designed so that individual parts can be mounted or dismantled with ease.
2. All the individual dustbin parts (of 4 categories) were replaceable and any one or all can be changed with other similar dustbin parts, so as to make it continuous usage
3. The dustbins were designed with less ground or width requirement so as to occupy less space but accommodate more waste.
4. The dustbin is portable with the help of the circular trolley accessory at the bottom of the product
5. Simple but tight fit lids were arranged for the individual dustbin product to keep it in closed position always so as to dis allow external/foreign contaminates into the bin as well as avoid disturbances to general public due to smell, insects and flies
6. The dustbin can also be used without the need for the trolley also (if required) - if it is to be placed in some fixed location, so it's a multi purpose usage product
7. These dustbins were designed to eliminate much of the maintenance cost as well as physical requirement - by the provision of individual replaceable bin.  
8. Attractiveness and uniqueness will make the users feel the need for dustbin usage and hence they might not throw the wastes here and there - thus directly eliminating additional efforts and costs. 
9. The dustbins were given tapering shape to make the top opening more for easy throwing of wastes as well as for easy maintenance

Below are shown my illustrations for the dustbin question.

Latest update: Tips for Exploded view drawing

Note : 

• I used Adobe ideas software (iPad app) to do the above illustrations - just for my own convenience and practice. But this is not allowed in your exam and you need to really do this with pencil and importantly with freehand. 
• Because of less time, I avoided showing complete exploded or part views - I instead showed views for some parts only; just to save my time (in this page and not during my exam)
• I also didn't show rough sketches here, while I recommend you to do so.
• In my exam, I also showed some details and shadings - very roughly

As we had gone through the Multi-purpose design aspects, I would like to share my ideas and thoughts (you may call it tips) that you might find useful while attempting similar design problems.

1. First things first, The better way to deal with this type of problem is to try rough sketching first (instead of doing the perception and solution writing). Because when you start sketching, in the process you might get a better idea than what you had thought earlier. Suppose that you wrote the explanation and solution part first, then you might face difficulty in adding or changing the wordings. So better start with rough sketch, second comes writing part and then go for final sketch. Using pencil for sketching rather than colors will help to make easy changes.
2. I noted two pages for rough work and three pages for final answer in the question paper and I planned to use this papers as follows :

• I wish to use at least two papers (given for rough work) to show my rough sketches. Rough sketches should preferably be illustrated by a quick and simple pencil (part and overall) sketches. Preferably 5-10 mins can be spared for that.
• I will utilize the first page (given for final answer)  to write the problem perception and solution part. 
• Second page will be used for the overall drawing with construction and the third page for detailed part sketches.
• Note that rough sketches could be impressing the examiners and in there you can show the construction part in exploded view format. 

1. Exploded view are nothing but showing all the assembled parts individually. Just imagine and draw how the product looks if all the parts were removed like say removing bolts, connections etc. 
2. No need to go for detailed sketch, just a basic and simple rough sketch do a great job. I avoided showing exploded view and rough sketches for this question (in this page and not in exam) because of less time. You should be showing that in simple way. 
3. Exploded Sketching and rendering for this type of questions won't take much time (as there are no background themes or portraits to be drawn). So, utilize the time and try to give detailed drawings, especially the individual part sketches, like I did in my illustration for the design question - multi purpose walking stick design.
4. If you find time, you may try coloring also only if specified in the question.
5. You may reduce the number of 'identified problems', but let the problems be acceptable.

Like Stuff You Look blog on Facebook page to get connected with latest posts.

ALSO SEE :

Walking stick design problem solving

cooker problem identification and analysis

Birds nest and railway toilets problem analysis