Blender redesign
From DDL Wiki
(→Top Design Concepts) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
= Top Design Concepts = | = Top Design Concepts = | ||
| + | After doing our user research and observations, we identified several problem areas. We decided on the following three main design upgrades that would improve a user's blender experience. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Pitcher/Base Interface == | ||
| + | A major difficulty while using a blender was keeping the pitcher and base well attached. Even with the existing trend of a high lip on the base to keep the pitcher from coming out, the interface was poor. Several blenders we looked at failed to show where the pitcher and base had to line up to have a good connection. We propose that a locking mechanism be used whereby the user would insert the blender at certain markings and would twist the blender in to place. The pitcher would only be able to connect to the base with one orientation and would be difficult to topple over when in use. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Pitcher Shape/Insulation == | ||
| + | This design focuses on the shape of the blender and increasing the ease of cleaning. The shape of the blender greatly affects the ability of the user to clean the pitcher thoroughly. A more rounded, larger blender would be help solve this problem. While discussing pitcher redesigns, we thought up the concept of possibly insulating the pitcher with a material similar to that used in heat/cool packs. This would decrease the heat transfer through the pitcher greatly. It would be a disadvantage to decrease the surface area so logically, increasing the heat transfer coefficient by using an insulating material would benefit our design. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Cover/Shape Addition == | ||
| + | A consumer frustration seen across the board was the effectiveness of the blender at pulling large piece of material down to the blades. One of the blenders that we looked at had blades designed to create a wave motion that would pull the contents continuously. This was an improvement over the other ones that we looked at however the user still had to stop blending and use a spoon to push the unblended materials down. Our design would feature a circular metal plate with holes in it that could be pushed down from the top that allows liquid to pass through but forces larger pieces towards the blades. | ||
= PUGH Chart = | = PUGH Chart = | ||
Revision as of 11:54, 12 October 2007
Contents |
User Testing
Top Design Concepts
After doing our user research and observations, we identified several problem areas. We decided on the following three main design upgrades that would improve a user's blender experience.
Pitcher/Base Interface
A major difficulty while using a blender was keeping the pitcher and base well attached. Even with the existing trend of a high lip on the base to keep the pitcher from coming out, the interface was poor. Several blenders we looked at failed to show where the pitcher and base had to line up to have a good connection. We propose that a locking mechanism be used whereby the user would insert the blender at certain markings and would twist the blender in to place. The pitcher would only be able to connect to the base with one orientation and would be difficult to topple over when in use.
Pitcher Shape/Insulation
This design focuses on the shape of the blender and increasing the ease of cleaning. The shape of the blender greatly affects the ability of the user to clean the pitcher thoroughly. A more rounded, larger blender would be help solve this problem. While discussing pitcher redesigns, we thought up the concept of possibly insulating the pitcher with a material similar to that used in heat/cool packs. This would decrease the heat transfer through the pitcher greatly. It would be a disadvantage to decrease the surface area so logically, increasing the heat transfer coefficient by using an insulating material would benefit our design.
Cover/Shape Addition
A consumer frustration seen across the board was the effectiveness of the blender at pulling large piece of material down to the blades. One of the blenders that we looked at had blades designed to create a wave motion that would pull the contents continuously. This was an improvement over the other ones that we looked at however the user still had to stop blending and use a spoon to push the unblended materials down. Our design would feature a circular metal plate with holes in it that could be pushed down from the top that allows liquid to pass through but forces larger pieces towards the blades.
PUGH Chart
| Description | Standard Blender | Pitcher/Base Connection | Pitcher Shape/Insulation | Cover Shape/Addition | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Criteria | Weight | ||||
| Durability | 5 | 0 | + | + | 0 |
| Easy to Use | 4 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 |
| Easy to Clean | 3 | 0 | 0 | ++ | - |
| Noise Level | 1 | 0 | 0 | + | - |
| Size | 2 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| Interfaces | 3 | 0 | ++ | + | ++ |
| Safety | 5 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 |
| Manufacturability | 3 | 0 | - | - | - |
| Cost | 4 | 0 | 0 | -- | - |
| + | 0 | 16 | 15 | 6 | |
| 0 | 9 | 4 | 2 | 4 | |
| - | 0 | 7 | 13 | 11 | |
| Total | 9 | 13 | 4 | -1 |
