I wouldn't equate "model" and "prototype." The "all singing all dancing"
thing is a prototype. Even so, however, and depending on context, it still
won't be identical to the "production" item, but at least it can be an
attempt. Models are different. Other than that, what you write makes
perfect sense.
Cheers.
Fil
On 10 May 2010 08:10, Self, James A <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Fil,
>
> Unless, of course, the purpose is to represent design intention as the
> exact expected outcome. Often designers will insist on an 'all singing all
> dancing' model/prototype to retain control over the final designed artifact.
> This seems particularly important now because of the remote location of
> manufacture.In this respect the model must necessarily be indistinguishable
> from the thing being modeled. In practice, RP technologies have made this a
> reality. The model/prototype becomes a control or benchmark, through which
> the artifact is manufactured. The model will be fully functional and
> indistinguishable from the manufactured product. But yes, their are a
> variety if different models/prototypes used to support different stages in
> practice for different purposes; lots will necessarily be distinguishable
> from the final artifact - conceptual/developmental models - leaving room for
> interpretation and design change/evolution.
>
> James.
>
>
>
> James Self
> Doctoral Researcher
> Design research Centre,
> Kingston University London
> email: [log in to unmask]
> Tel: +44 (0)20 8547 9771
> Mob: 077241 91667
> ________________________________________
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
> research in Design [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Filippo A.
> Salustri [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 09 May 2010 23:30
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Theory Construction Challenge
>
> That was my point: if a model were perfect in every way with respect to the
> thing being modelled, then it would /be/ the thing in that it would be
> completely indistinguishable from the thing being modelled. Since your
> students are looking at 3d form, then that is the purpose of the model -
> and
> some (hopefully most) will be "perfect" in that regard. But they're still
> incomplete with respect to the product itself.
>
> The key is that a model doesn't even have to be perfect or complete. It
> only needs to address those aspects necessary for achieving the model's
> purpose.
>
> Cheers.
> Fil
>
> On 9 May 2010 15:01, Mark Evans <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Phil
> >
> > Thanks for the definition of a model:
> >
> > "Model: an incomplete/imperfect representation of a thing intended for
> some
> > specific purpose".
> >
> > Interestingly, on Wednesday 70 of my second year industrial design
> students
> > will be submitting appearance models of their product proposals with the
> key
> > criteria for assessment being that they perfectly represent 3D form. And
> woe
> > betide anyone that submits something that's incomplete e.g. has a
> > button/logo missing.
> >
> > But yes, there will always be differences with a production item, however
> > minor, and they'll certainly be incomplete as they won't embed any
> > functionality; other than appearance of course.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
> Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
> Ryerson University
> 350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON
> M5B 2K3, Canada
> Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
> Fax: 416/979-5265
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/ <http://deseng.ryerson.ca/%7Efil/>
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>
--
Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University
350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON
M5B 2K3, Canada
Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
Fax: 416/979-5265
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/
|