Hi Clive,
I think you are a bit confused on this. There seem to be primarily two
sorts of research findings that can be directly connected with design
activity:
1. Research leading to information of use by designers
2. Research leading to information about the activity of design (which is
also 'information of use by designers')
Research involving cultural studies, anthropology, ethnography, ergonomics,
colour perception, aesthetics, useability, just like research in the domains
of engineering, operations research, systems analysis and affective
cognition are all part of the first category where they are of specific use
by designers.
The paper I drew attention to also falls into this first category. If you
are a building systems designer specialising in piping, the content of the
presentation is useful design information derived from design-focused
research.
I agree with you that similar to, for example, typography, graphic design,
industrial design, and interior architecture, much of the use of
design-related information such as described in this paper is used in
technical decision-making on the part of the designer. Do you feel that
technical/non-technical is the criteria for determining whether something
should be regarded as design research or not. In which case, there is a lot
of Art and Design-related design research that must also be excluded.
Perhaps you are suggesting that the only form of valid design research is
'research ABOUT design activity'? I've suggested much the same in the past!)
This however would also exclude much research that is reported in
design-related journals.
Thoughts?
Terry
________________________________________
From: Clive Dilnot [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, 21 November 2006 9:48 AM
To: [log in to unmask]; Terence Love
Subject: Re: Gender and conferences - touching base on reality
Terry,
I think a little category mistake has crept in here. The paper you present
us with, while no dount technically fascinating, is not in itself a design
research paper, in any sense of the term.
The paper provides technical background information which may, or may not,
be of use to designers involved in sound engineering piping practice.
It is itself, unambiguously, a technical paper.
This has less to do with its inherent subject-matter than the fact that the
issues the paper deals with can be dealt with perfectly satisfactorily
within a framwork of technical decision making. The configurational
dilemmas with the paper wrestles (" the mechanical grooved piping system as
an alternative to conventional piping methods of welding, flanging and
threading") can in theory be researched and resolved through the formation
of a mathematical equation that would perfectly specify the optimum practice
for a particular context.
We can of course surmise that in practcie Mr Reuben Ang will in practice
eschew expensive techncial resaerch (and even complex mathematics) and
deploy a bit of healthy commonsense in deciding on the applicability of his
"mechanical grooved piping system" as an alternative to conventional piping
methods.
We can see his paper as a rehersal of the factors that will bear on his
engineering judgement.
Bit since the configurational dilemma is so low in this case, and there is
such marked absence of a need of complex negotiation between qualitatively
incommensurable requirements, it is difficult, to put it mildly, to see this
as a paper in design-research.
Like it, or like it not, design-research is concerned with understanding
configurational dilemmas. Those are by no means confined to the
"art-and-design" reralm but it is there where, most often, we see them
emblematically displayed.
Clive
Clive Dilnot
Professor of Design Studies
Parsons School of Design
New School University
66 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10010
>>> Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> 11/20/06 8:12 PM >>>
Hello,
In design research, the work of designers and the role of gender, its
probably worth reminding ourselves that the vast majority of design work,
design research and content of conferences is less exciting than implied by
some of the posts in the recent discussions. An example is the following
conference presentation on summarising important design research information
for designing in current contexts a particular field of design:
The session is entitled "Sound Engineering Piping Practice for Modern
Building Services" and presented by Mr. Reuben Ang, Engineering Manager
Victaulic - Asia Pacific, Shanghai.
"Today's construction challenges include tight budget, tight schedule and
minimum allotted space for M&E services. The mechanical grooved piping
system is an alternative to conventional piping methods of welding, flanging
and threading. The talk will review the history of piping and the grooved
method invented more than 80 years ago and consider the following.
1. Methods for accommodating pipe offset such as couplings offering
designers a method to accommodate offsets due to misalignment or building
settlement.
2. Calculating and accommodating pipeline thermal growth.
3. Considerations for accommodating thermal expansion and contraction.
4. Vibration attenuation characteristics.
5. Prevention of the transmission of objectionable vibration induced
by piping systems to the building structure.
6. Seismic considerations."
The DRS and the Phd-design list tend to overemphasise the design research in
Art and Design domains of design. It may be worth reflecting on established
practices the other (majority) design research domains?
Best wishes
Terry
===
Dr. Terence Love
Tel/Fax: +61 (0)8 9305 7629
Mobile: 0434975 848
[log in to unmask]
===
|