前 言/ Introduction
这是我为我的硕士学位的第二学期课程《模型方法在设计实践中的应用——通过边界对象和中介设备进行创新》而完成的项目。
该项目以“包容性移动”为主题。
我选择了餐馆和食堂中传送食物的托盘为研究对象，旨在探索可以供用户单手使用的托盘的结构。
/
This is a project I completed for the semester 2 of my master's degree course "Prototyping and design practice: innovation through boundary objects and intermediary devices".
The topic of the project is "inclusive mobility".
I chose trays that carry and transfer food in restaurants and canteens as the design object to explore new structures that users can use it with only one hand.
第一部分/Part 1
首先，为了评估我的草模，我预先设定了十条评判标准。
我在第一部分制作了15个草模。
一开始我使用白色泡沫板作为主要材料，后来我发现3mm厚度的瓦楞纸板也能代替，并且价格低廉，可以降低成本。在连接纸板部件的方法上，一开始我想用热胶枪和UHU胶水，但在制作过程中我发现胶带更适合纸板的材质，可以使纸板连接得更牢固。
我在尝试自己对草模进行测试的时候，作为其设计者，我能清楚地知道每个部件的使用方法和存在意义，但当我邀请工作室的同学们对其进行测试时，我发现他们对托盘的使用方法一开始并不是完全掌握的，而且有时是我完全意想不到的使用方法，这在我——一个设计者的内心中，被定义成错误的使用方法，而在他们的心中，这是他们对使用该草模的第一反应。这也给了我一定的启发，是否应该使设计更加符合人的本能想象，但人的本能想象也是由于建立在不同的生活背景下而非常不同的。我认为在后续步骤中我应该调整设计，使其具有指向性特征，比如唐纳德诺曼在日常用品的设计一书中表述的那样，门如果没有任何把手那就意味着用户需要将其推开而不是拉开。通过草模制作过程，我认识到被设计的物品本身并不是设计的唯一关注对象，而其作为一种对话现象，需要被投入更多的精力来研究。
以下我详细阐述了制作每个草模的动机：
/
First, in order to evaluate my prototypes, I have set ten criteria in advance.
I made 15 prototypes in the first part.
At the beginning, I used white foam board as the main material, but later I found that 3mm corrugated board can replace it, and the price of corrugated board is lower, which can reduce the cost. In the method of connecting the cardboard parts, I wanted to use hot glue gun and UHU glue at the beginning, but in the process of making, I found that the tape was more suitable for the cardboard material, which could make the cardboard connect more firmly.
When I tried to test these prototypes, as its designer, I could clearly know the using method and significance of existence of each part. However, when I invited my colleagues in the studio to test it, I found that they did not completely grasp the using method of the tray at the beginning, and sometimes their using method was completely unexpected to me. In my mind, as a designer, some were defined as wrong using methods, but in their minds, it was their first reaction to using the prototype. This also inspired me to some extent, whether the design should be more in line with people's natural imagination, but people's natural imagination is also very different due to the different life backgrounds. I think in the following steps I should adjust the design to make it more directional, as Donald Norman put it in the design of everyday objects, the door, if there's no handle, means that the user has to push it rather than pull it. Through the process of prototype making, I realized that the object being designed is not the only concern of the designing process, and as a dialogical phenomenon, it needs to be studied with more efforts.
Below I'm telling a story about how I made each prototype and the motivations of why I made them. They are all related to each other.
第二部分/Part 2
在这部分中，我将视线重新回归到问题本身，并再次重新审视之前提出的几个问题：为什么要对普通托盘进行再设计？再设计针对的是哪一个特定的方面？再设计的目标用户群体是哪些人？同时我也提出了新的问题，即第一部分中为了探索而探索的方案真的适用那些情景么？
提出这个问题的背景是，当我与被测试者交流时，他们中的大多数都反映，最常见的使用托盘的方法即用手掌从托盘底部托着托盘在是省力的最简单的方法，这也使我在设计过程中第一次产生了犹豫与困惑。后来我发现这种犹豫与困惑是因为我从一开始就没有确立好探索的主题，其不应该是如何使食物托盘更加适合单手使用，而应该是如何使食物托盘在单手使用时更能给予用户安全感。意识到这点后，我对于迭代设计过程更加有了信心。
在这次迭代设计过程中，我界定探索的领域为手或身体其他部位与托盘的交互部分，所以托盘防止食物滑落的凸起的边缘在草模制作中不予体现。
我首先根据测试者在用户测试中的体验评价在之前制作的15个草模的选择出了3个，即草模 1, 草模 7和草模14，它们是我认为最具有进行迭代设计价值的三个草模。然后我分析了他们各自最具有迭代设计价值的特点并大致规划了他们不同的迭代设计方向：
草模 1: 这个草模采用在托盘上添加把手的方法改变了常规情况下手部与托盘的交互方式，但不符合某些高档餐厅的送餐礼仪，不适合端庄、正式的场合使用。未来可以针对改变手部或其他身体部位与托盘交互的方式进行更深的探索，也要思考如何在使其符合送餐礼仪的情况下进行更隐晦的设计。
草模 7: 与普通托盘相比，这个草模的抓握的使用方式可以增加用户在单手使用时的安全感，但由于把手位于托盘中间位置，如果食物在托盘上摆放的位置不位于正中央或不平均时，该设计就没有意义。未来可以针对如何使手部能够更灵活地控制托盘并能自如地适应托盘重心位置进行探索。
草模 14: 通过在其底部增加了两个三棱柱结构，这个草模使手部只托举托盘一侧便可以直接对托盘中心施力，但用户仍然需要用两只手完成将托盘从桌子上抬起来的动作。未来可以寻找更多巧妙的结构来辅助减少手部肌肉张力，同时也要满足单手就能从桌子上将托盘举起的条件。
接下来，我根据大致规划的不同的设计方向为每个选出的草模分别制作了3个迭代性质的草模：
/
In this part, I return to the original problem and revisit the previous questions: why redesign the common tray? What specific aspect is the redesign aimed at? Who is the target user group of redesign? At the same time, I also raise a new question: is the exploration in part 1 really applicable to those situations? The background of raising this question is that when I communicated with the test subjects, most of them told me that the most common way to use the tray was to hold the tray from its bottom, which is the simplest way to save effort. This made me hesitate and confused in the design process for the first time. Later, I found that this confusion was because I had not established the right theme of exploration from the very beginning. It should not be about how to make the tray more suitable for single-handed use, but how to make the food tray more secure for users when used with only one hand.Having realized this, I became more confident in the iterative design process.
In this iteration design process, I defined the field of exploration as the interaction between hands or other parts of the body and the tray, so the raised edges of the tray to prevent food slipping are not reflected in the prototype making.
Below I'm telling a story about how I made each prototype in the iterative design process and the motivations of why I made them.
First of all, based on the experience evaluation of the tester in the user test, I selected three prototypes out of the 15 models I made before, namely prototype 1, prototype 7 and prototype 14. They are the three prototypes that I think are most valuable for iterative design. Then I analyzed their characteristics most valuable for iterative design and roughly set their different iterative design directions:
Prototype 1: I made the prototype using the method of adding handle on the tray to change the way that hands interact with the tray under normal circumstances, but it does not conform to the food delivery etiquette of some high-end restaurants and is not suitable for formal occasions. In the future, there could be further exploration of changing the way the hands or other body parts interact with the tray, as well as thinking about how to make more subtle designs in line with meal delivery etiquette.
Prototype 7: Compared with the ordinary tray, the grip way of using this prototype can increase the user's sense of security when using with one hand. However, since the handle is in the middle of the tray, if the food is not placed in the center or not evenly placed, the design will be meaningless. In the future, there could be explorations on how to make our hands more flexible to control the tray and adapt to the position of the center of gravity of the tray.
Prototype 14: By adding two triangular prisms to the bottom, the prototype makes it possible to apply force directly to the center of the tray with only one hand lifting the tray, but it still requires two hands to lift the tray from the table. In the future, more ingenious structures could be found to help reduce muscle tension in the hand, while also meeting the requirement that a single hand can lift a tray from a table.
Next,according to the different design directionIgenerally set before I made three iterative prototypes for each selected prototype respectively:
反思/Reflection
在完成整个草模项目后，我对整个过程进行了反思。与我本科阶段做过的类似的项目相比，我在思考方法和创新能力上有一定的进步，但我认为我对迭代设计这个概念的理解还不够透彻。在第二部分中，我对这个阶段应有的的托盘结构的探索低于期望值，我只是在有限的选择范围内进行了小的迭代改动。其实可以跳脱传统的托盘形态来进行更远的探索。整个过程还是缺乏更深的创造力的。
其次，在设计过程中并没有进行足够的用户调研，所以可能会导致结果与市场需求间的偏差。
设计还有一定的局限性，因为在这个项目中我只考虑了托盘与用户手部之间的交互，而对托盘的大小、圆角、厚度、材料等没有具体的考虑。
/
After finishing the prototype project, I reflected on the whole process. Compared with similar projects I had done in my undergraduate study, I achieved some progress in designing method and innovation ability. However, I think my understanding of the concept of iterative design is not thorough. In the second part, the development seems less than anticipated for this level of product at this level of design exploration -- more could be done to push developments further, rather than remaining in the conventional realms of the trays. The design process lacked deeper creativity.
Besides, there is not enough user research in the design process, which may lead to the deviation between the results and the market demand.
The design has some limitations, because in this project, I only considered the interaction between the tray and the user's hand, but did not take into account the size, rounded corners, thickness and materials of the tray.
未来展望/Envision
在未来，我希望我可以继续对这个主题的探索，并且尽可能地将其作为一个有市场需求的商业项目来进行，因为它在一定程度上解决了用户现存的一些痛点，所以除了对托盘结构进行再迭代设计，我还需要对托盘的其他特性进行考量，如厚度、高度、材料和制作工艺等。有深度的用户调研和市场调研也需要进行。
/
In the future, I hope I can keep exploring this topic, and conduct it like a business project as much as possible, because it solves a pain point for users and there is a certain market demand for it. In addition to the re-iterative design of the tray structure, I also need to consider other characteristics of the tray, such as its thickness, height, materials and manufacturing process. In-depth user and market research is also needed.
