Design Fail: The Paper Towel Dispenser

When I Sarah first met my classmate Jon at Georgia Tech, he apologized to her on my behalf. Apparently, by signing on to study Industrial Design, I was forever dooming her to a lifetime of product critiques and complaints. We would never again, he said, be able to walk through a department store in happy oblivion. Something there, probably multiple somethings, would always catch my eye and bother me so much that I would feel compelled to share my outrage with her. Being the wife of a designer, apparently, requires great patience.

His words proved pretty much as prophetic as you might have guessed, given that I'm now writing a blog entry about them. In an effort to spare my wife the effort of further eye-rolling, I am today sharing my burden with you instead (or rather, "in addition." She's already heard all this). After all, this is just the sort of topic "Contemporarily Insane" was first intended for.

Today's offender:

You'll notice that the top is disc shaped. It's a big button. The product description has this to say about it: "the spring-loaded knob makes it easy to tear off just one sheet." I actually stopped in the store to test this, because I didn't understand what it did to make tearing easier. Turns out it holds the roll in place and keeps it from turning. Now if it clicked into place, this would be an excellent feature, enabling one handed use. That's an issue in the kitchen fairly often: spill something from a pot that you can't put down just yet and you just need a quick paper towel to mop it up before it dries in place or before the spill runs over the edge of the counter, or maybe while trying to hold back pets and/or children with the other hand, or maybe even because you are actually one-handed. I'm sure those of you with kitchens can think of several other examples. A dispenser that facilitates one-handed use would be great.

This is not that dispenser. That spring loaded knob bounces right back up as soon as you let go. You need two hands to use it, one for the knob and one for the towels. So someone please explain to me how putting your hand on the knob is better than putting your hand directly on the paper towel roll. It seems worse to me. Besides adding the extra pressure to overcome the spring part, you also lose the tactile feedback that will tell you just how well you're holding the paper towels.

Nor does this seem like a case of designing for disabilities. There is nothing this knob adds to the act of tearing off a paper towel that makes life any easier for someone with arthritis, poor sensation, or even missing digits or limbs. There is no point in the tearing-off-a-paper-towel process where pushing down on a knob would be less painful or easier than making the exact same gesture directly to the towel roll. Remember, the addition of the spring means MORE strength is required for the same action.

So what does it do? The only thing I came up with is that it could prevent someone with messy hands from unnecessarily dirtying additional towels still on the roll. None of the marketing mentions that, however, and the knob isn't wide enough to keep dripping liquids from falling onto the roll anyway.

Either I'm missing something crucial (and I spent some time going over this thing to find it, much to my wife's chagrin), or this is a case of really bad design. If it is what I think it is then I'm offended on a number of levels. It wastes materials and effort. It attempts to convince consumers to spend more for a feature they do not need and,if I'm interpreting correctly, actually makes the act more difficult. Then it compounds its sins by requiring additional design and complexity to mitigate its own negative impact (the reviews and the marketing all praise the quick release button system that makes it easy to remove the knob and replace the roll - a whole set of "easy" actions that would have been entirely unnecessary if the knob were never added in the first place).

I generally like Simple Human products and the rest of the design of this piece seems well thought out (the heavy base that keeps the whole from tipping when tearing a sheet, the little ridges that keep the roll from unraveling), so I'm having a hard time convincing myself I really understand what's going on here. The kind of design it appears to be only emerges through negligence or as a deliberate attempt to mislead consumers into buying unnecessary gadgetry. One is disappointing and the other unforgiveable. Both are unacceptable.

Look What I Made (episode 2)

The semester is drawing to a close (thus the return to blogging). I thought I'd take the opportunity to share with you what I've been doing in my secret lair.

This studio, in contrast to the last one, was essentially one big full class project. We actually had a client this semester, which is a very different experience than designing for an abstract academic principle. We've tried to set such a thing up on previous semesters, but ran into conflicts over who owned the rights to our work. This time, with this client, the school was able to reach an agreement, so in February (a bit later than originally intended) we got started working for ACS, in particular the division that builds equipment for airport parking ticketing operations. Most of you have seen their handiwork at Atlanta, Dulles, Reagan, and other major airports. They're the top supplier for the top airports in the nation and were looking to improve their product for a variety of reasons.

We spent the semester on the problem and eventually developed three potential solutions. We all worked on the background development and early concept work. When it came time to work on the final solutions, I had a more direct hand in shaping two of them: Monolith and Organic. Ask me about them sometime and I'll be happy to tell you more. Hopefully we will be seeing one of these coming to a major airport within a year or two.




My Interaction Design class is the only other class that worked towards a physical product this semester. There were seven of us in this class and together we produced three pieces for an end-of-year exhibition titled "Play." This exhibition was focused on using the principles of interaction to modify and expand upon the experience of iconic American toys. My group (there were three of us) used the concept of "affordance" to develop a giant Simon game. Instead of pushing buttons, players jump on them. With an eight foot diameter, this version of Simon encouraged 4 (and sometimes more) people to play together. The exhibition was a success and the Simon (once we worked out a double-press problem in the software) gathered lots of players.

So that's two years down and one to go. This next one is the thesis year and it should be an interesting experience. I'll keep you informed.

UPDATE: And here's a video of the Simon in action one of my teammates just posted. We're into the double digits at this point, so there's little actual jumping anymore... We eventually made it to 17 before losing interest.

Look What I Made

In the ID program we make a lot of stuff. In an effort to broaden my repertoire of skills, and also to continue a path my Dad started me on when I was little, I took a class last semester called Wood Products and Processes. It began with basic woodworking skills and then progressed on to the use of some of the fancier machines. The place where I took this class is called the Advanced Wood Products Laboratory (AWPL). I always thought the name was sort of entertaining, largely because I associate wood products with craft fairs and that’s hardly advanced. Then I saw the equipment they get to play with.

AWPL is a full research facility and, along with machines to test the strength of various wood products, they have a full suite of production level woodworking machines. One small corner is devoted to things like tablesaws, bandsaws, planers, jointers, and the like. The rest of the shop is a little more complex. The AWPL has a deal with a machine company that works essentially like this: the company stores their new zillion dollar machines at AWPL and lets AWPL use them whenever and however they want; AWPL personnel, in return, train the company’s clients on how to use the machines. The actual machines at the AWPL change over time as existing machines are sold to the customers and new ones come in from the company. There is always at least one computer controlled router, at least one double-sided belt sander wide enough for whole sheets of plywood (not that you’d use it on plywood), and a host of other miscellaneous machines.

Our first project for the class used none of the big stuff. Indeed, I did much of my work at the architecture shop that had the twin conveniences of being next to my studio and open on weekends. The goal was to make a splined box with veneer tops and in the process learn about
jointing, planing, miters, dados, splines, veneering, basic finishes, and general assembly. Alan, our instructor, also used this as an opportunity to teach us one of his fundamental principles of wood work: “If you don’t think you’ll be able to hide it, make it stand out.” The splines on my box are deliberately obvious for this reason. If you try to hide it (very difficult) and fail, it will look like a mistake. If you emphasize it, it will look like a deliberate feature. We’ll call this The Alan Principle because I’m going to refer to it again.

The sides are poplar, the top and bottom are veneered with walnut, and the splines are made from aromatic cedar. The whole piece is finished with several layers of tung oil (three, I think, but I’m not sure). I designed it with my mother in mind and gave it to her for Christmas.

The next project made use of the computer-numeric-controlled routers (cnc). It was an attempt to familiarize us with the cnc so we were not allowed to do any other kind of machining. The entire piece had to be tab-in-slot or slot-in-slot construction, no screws, bolts, or any other addons, and needed to come from a single 2 foot by 4 foot sheet of wood. I made a cord-hider to deal with the rat nests under my computer and behind my entertainment setup. It’s made of half-inch birch plywood, again finished with several coats of tung oil.

The final project was a full piece of furniture, meant to be a flatpack, knockdown piece. In other words, it needs to be able to ship flat (the actual requirements were “fit flat in the trunk of a car”) and to be easy for the customer to assemble and disassemble. Ikea is the prime example of this, but much higher quality furniture is possible. I made this as a gift for Sarah and worked with her (with some inspiration from Jo) to come up with the basic design. After which, I kicked her out of the design process so there would be at least some surprise.

I used walnut plywood for the sides and top, and poplar plywood for all the horizontal surfaces and the inlays. The top opening is for glasses. You cannot see it in the pictures, but there are channels built into the top piece to hang stemware. It’s also tall enough for pints or other glasses to stand upright in the opening. The second opening contains a series of grooves that will each hold a wine bottle. They’re subtle but secure. The cabinet portion is tall enough to hold a variety of other bottles.

For the finish, I was getting a bit tired of tung oil. I made about twenty four samples of possible finishes using various dyes, stains, and topcoat layers. I showed them to Sarah and she picked… the tung oil. This time, though, there’s also a few layers of high-durability polyurethane on top of that to protect the wood from spills (alcohol does terrible things to most wood finishes) and other damage. There are blue highlights around the edges of the inlays, inside the wine bottle grooves, and inside the stemware channels. The inlays are deliberately raised away from the face, another application of the Alan Principle.

I also used the lasercutter to add two personal inscriptions inside the doors: one for myself,

and one for Sarah

(I only wish this had occurred to me earlier so I could have done the same with Mom’s card box).

For more creations by my classmates, check out the AWPL Gallery Page. I did pretty well in this class, but some of my classmates were amazing.

I thoroughly enjoyed this class and definitely got a lot out of it. Not the least of which is access to the cnc router and the rest of the AWPL equipment any time I need it. If you've got a project for me, let me know.

Johnny Lee!

Johnny Lee is awesome. More awesome possibly than even I am. That's pretty awesome. Want proof? Watch the video below.



I spotted this on one of the design blogs I read (Core77, if you must know - their writeup on the video is a nice compliment). I sort of skimmed past it, but the name caught by attention and I backtracked. It was indeed my friend from UVa! I was very excited to see someone I know. Then I watched the video. Then I shared the video with every person in my class, probably twice. Then I read his website, checked out his projects, and browsed his photos. A day later, one of my professors passed around a copy of Make magazine during a discussion and there, on page 84, was Johnny's $14 steady cam. I'll say it again, Johnny Lee is awesome.

Who is Johnny Lee? Many of my readers know him, or have met him even if they don't remember it. I went to UVa with him, we were both in the Rodman Scholars together and shared a number of classes. Even before he got there, he had already patented a 360 degree camera and continued to awe the Rodmans from that point forward (a pretty impressive group themselves). Watch carefully at the minute mark in the video above and you'll spot the electric cello he designed and built in a group project our freshman year. He's at Carnegie Mellon now, pursuing his doctorate (it doesn't stand a chance). Aside from being incredibly intelligent, he's also one of the nicest people I know (and I know a lot of nice people). I'm delighted and excited for him that he's doing so well.

With this video, it's entirely possible he just revolutionized video gaming. I can't wait to see what he does next.

My Other Life

This is one of the projects that has absorbed my attention this month (and which, you should infer, are preventing any serious blogging):



It's for my 3D Computer Modeling class. I made everything you see in there and then added and modified skins as necessary. I still have a few to go (the book covers to the right, for instance, aren't supposed to look like cardboard) and some general tweaking to get the look right.

Here is the other:



It's a heads-up-display built into a pair of safety glasses to assist the homeowner with repairs and upgrades.

This one is actually the bigger of the two projects. It looks less impressive here because most of the work is going into the physical model. Also, I need to work on designing the interface and creating the presentation to go along with it.

I did get a chance to play with the laser-cutter today when making the goggles depicted above. Now that is an impressive piece of equipment. It was my first experience with a machine that is NOT from the project-ruining family (or at least hides its connections very well). I loved every minute of it. Having that victory early in the day helped me get through my actual encounter with real project-ruining machines later (the bandsaw version claimed at least two models today and would have claimed my third if I hadn't realigned my intentions to more closely match what I actually produced).

EDIT:
This is the final version of the desk scene.

(Bruce you might recognize that top book...)

The Project-Ruining Machine

We have a number of fascinating and useful machines in our shop. Today I wish to talk about a personal favorite: the project-ruining machine. This particular machine performs a variety of tasks but its chief purpose is to completely ruin your project at exactly the wrong time. Actually, it’s not a very difficult job. Sometimes you can even get it taken care of without a machine, but the machine adds a certain finesse. There’s something elegant and efficient about the way the project-ruining machine can turn a simple twitch of the hand into complete devastation.

When I was first introduced to the project-ruining machine, I thought “That looks remarkably like a belt sander.” I was, however, assured by my professor that while it could function as a belt sander from time to time, it was in fact a project-ruining machine. It has a remarkably intuitive interface: simply apply your project to the sander at the wrong angle (easy to do since there are so many wrong angles compared to correct angles), or fidget on your approach, or press a little too hard on one side. The only way to cause the machine to malfunction such that it fails to ruin your project is to approach it at just the right angle, without jitters, and with even pressure. Fortunately, even if you do mess things up and fail to ruin your project the first time, the project-ruining machine generally gives you plenty of chances and really, it only needs to succeed once.

If the belt sander version isn’t what you’re looking for, the project-ruining machine actually comes in a wide array of shapes. For instance, our shop has project-ruining machines that look like table saws, band saws, chop saws, orbital sanders, jig saws, milling machines, drill presses, lathes, and of course several varieties of belt sander. Once I knew what to look for I discovered that the project-ruining machine is pretty much the only machine our shop offers – one machine, nearly infinite varieties.

I have not quite got the knack of it yet. So far I have (mostly) failed to ruin my models, but I look forward to the day when I, too, get to hear that minor change in pitch, sense that brief twitch, and experience that tremendous sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach as I realize I have successfully used one of the project-ruining machines to nullify more than thirty hours of work in a single instant. What an impressive machine.

The Phrase of the Day: High-speed Delamination

Yes, this really is the sort of thing one has to worry about in shop, specifically on the lathe. If you have prepared well it shouldn't be an issue. But a phrase like that sticks with you. It's the sort of thing that pops into your head as you turn on the lathe and make your first approach, "If I'm not careful, my project could undergo high speed delamination, and that would be bad." "High-speed delamination" is just one way to explain the event in question. Others include "coming apart explosively and flying about the room" or, for those pressed for time, a string of expletives will also do.

An Example

Here's a quick look at something I'm learning to do at school.




I drew the outline by hand, smoothed it out in Adobe Illustrator, and then rendered it in Photoshop. If any of my dear readers have something similar they need or would like to see, let me know. I need all the practice I can get.