Page 46 - William Brown 2017

Review and Reflect Designing and Modelling
Introduction
With the prototype and final design finished and manufactured, the
last stage is to review my product and see if there are any areas for
improvement and to see which areas worked well. I will base the
improvements on some of the feedback I have been given over the
course of the designing and manufacturing as well as adding or
subtracting areas that I personally feel will make The Pukka Rucka
a better product.
As I am an avid rugby player myself, I have looked into every detail
of how to make The Pukka Rucka the best at focussing on
improving the body technique in the ruck. I spoke to both rugby
coaches, players and physios to gain the best information into this
specific area.
Research
At the beginning of this project I gathered research information
about the ruck itself and why it is useful for a piece of training
equipment to help the body technique in the ruck. I then looked at
existing products that specifically target the jackal position in the
ruck. From there, I spoke to experts and clients to gain a further
insight into what the product must have to make it the best at what
it is supposed to do.
Positives:
 With my rugby background, it was easy for me to find and
interview experts and clients who knew about the breakdown in
rugby. The most help was breakdown expert Clive Bell who told
me what body angle/shape is the strongest.
 My client James Parry is a high level rugby player who prides
himself on being successful at the breakdown. He gave me a
proper demonstration on how the jackal should be performed and
what he would look for in a product that targets the breakdown.
 There is an obvious gap in the market for my product. Rugby,
although it is a popular sport, the breakdown has been looked
over and requires something to aid the technique in training.
Negatives:
 Existing products, it's a bonus for me that the only existing
products that are aimed at the breakdown, don’t really help the
technique. However, it is bad because I couldn’t get inspiration
from exiting products to improve on and make better, so I had to
more or less start from scratch and come up with this product by
my own accord, which is god but very time consuming.
CAD Software
After research, the next stage was the designing and modelling
of my product. This stage included drawing thumbnails, lots of
little sketches to try and create inspiration or designs I could go
onto develop. Once I had chosen my top designs, I made
realistic models of them from foam board, acrylic and wood and
added working mechanisms to show how the product would
work if I were to make it for real. After designing the models, I
advanced my sketches into more detailed designs and then
presented these designs to my expert and client. From their
feedback I chose the design which received the best feedback.
Positives:
 I created small scale models for each chosen design I drew.
This allowed me to present the logistics of the mechanisms
and how the user would interact with the model.
 The models were made out of either foam board, wood or
acrylic. All of which were easy to make, so the process didn’t
take too long.
 The thumbnail sketches I drew all were able to be developed
further, leaving me with a few options of which design to
take forward and show my expert and client.
Negatives:
 As the models were not to fully detailed, it was difficult to
visualise how I would construct some of them and what
materials and little parts I would need to manufacture them.
Testing the models
Once I had decided on which design I was going to use, I made a
small scale model and a full size segment of the mechanism which
will be developed. The small scale model (above- wooden man with
yellow panels) allowed me to see how the person would interact with
the product and I videoed the movement the person would make.
The more advanced life size segment of the mechanism (pictured
above with the rugby ball) was very useful for the future development
of my product. The mechanism involved putting three bits of plywood
together and slotting an aluminum bar through the panel. This panel
pivots at a point and opens up a lid to reveal the ball. When I went on
to manufacture my product, I used this model to help scale out the
mechanism.
The CAD process was about taking the final design idea and
turning it into a lifelike computer generated image. This was the
first time other than my own sketches that I saw what my
product would actually like in a 360 degree 3 Dimensional
image with colour/material options.
Positives:
 In this process I added the proper dimensions to each
component of the product and was able to print off the life
size outlines of components to help in the manufacturing
process. For example, when making the panels, I used the
printed outlines the be used as a template and cut the
plywood into shape at full size.
 The use of rendering to create a coloured version of my
product was extremely useful and I was able to use these CGI
products in the marketing pages.
 The aesthetics of the product were able to be seen for the
first time and I could have edited any areas if I thought they
needed reconstructing in order to make the product look
better or better function.
Negatives:
 Some of the shapes I had drawn and wanted to create on CAD
were not able to be recreated. For the panels I wanted more
of a lip at the bottom for the aluminium bar to push the ball
further. However, due to the tools and the way it was drawn
on CAD, it was not possible to exactly copy my hand drawn
design.
Never the less, despite one error in the CAD development stage,
this stage as a whole was vital and worked well in the creation
and development of my product. It allowed me to see what I had
designed in a lifelike image that could be colour edited.
William Brown 45