4.7 Article

Design tools for interdisciplinary translation of material experiences

Journal

MATERIALS & DESIGN
Volume 90, Issue -, Pages 1228-1237

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2015.04.013

Keywords

Design tools; Design-driven materials innovation; Materials selection; Interdisciplinary dialogue; Technical properties; Sensory perception; Aesthetics; Material experiences; Psychophysics; Ethnography; Haptic encounter

Funding

  1. Thai Government
  2. Leverhulme Trust
  3. EPSRC
  4. AHRC
  5. European Union [310311]
  6. Arts and Humanities Research Council [AH/J013919/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/I00159X/1, EP/I00159X/2, EP/K020323/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. AHRC [AH/J013919/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  9. EPSRC [EP/K020323/1, EP/I00159X/1, EP/I00159X/2] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Designers increasingly have the opportunity to influence the development of materials as they emerge from the laboratory. In order for this to be successful, designers need to be able to communicate effectively with materials scientists so that materials can be developed with desired functionalities and properties. This paper reviews evidence in favour of using isomorphic sets of material stimuli as tools to bridge the disciplinary gap between designers and materials scientists. We show how these isomorphic sets and their accompanying experiments can be used to translate between the two communities, and to systematically explore the relationship between the technical attributes of materials and subjective experiences of their sound, taste and feel. This paper also explores the limitations of psychophysical approaches and other quantitative techniques for elucidating material experience, and suggests new possibilities for interdisciplinary collaborations that draw on ethnographic approaches. (c) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available