The aim is to explore the overlaps between re-distributed manufacturing, remanufacturing, open design, open innovation, open source and circular economy topics, in more depth.
Here we can discuss the plan for the workshop. The attendees will be a mix of academics and industry, so I think the workshop can really help to build knowledge on our interests.
Some initial questions Iād like to address:
What is the relationship between redistributed manufacturing and circular economy?
What is the role of community-based digital fabrication workshops (eg housing additive technologies) in bridging between these areas?
How can open design, open innovation and open source, contribute to a RDM / CE?
How can redistributed manufacturing practices scale circular economy activities in business-to-consumer sectors?
Hi Sharon, I really donāt know how remanufacturing is discussed right now. Especially not in the realm of academia.
So I guess I canāt contribute much there. But how about, you give a small input on it. The current state of ideas, examples and problems. And then I give a small one on Open Source.
And then we have an open discussion on
āHow can open design, open innovation and open source contribute to RDM?ā
I think it doesnāt matter if we donāt have all the answersā¦thatās the whole reason for having the session.
Also, re-distributed manufacturing and remanufacturing are two different things.
Here, I am talking about redistributed manufacturing (RDM), which is about localisation and reshoring manufacturing to the āWestā, driven by the upsurge in additive technologies (3D-printing) as well as the increasing digitisation of manufacturingā¦which is very relevant for what we are doing and I think we need to have a handle on this topic, to be credible.
Remanufacturing, on the other hand, is a standardised industrial process where products are disassembled (often to component level) and are reassembled into new products, in as good as new or better than new condition. Often, these products are sold with a new product code and with the same warranty as the first product.
For the workshop, I think what you suggest is good, but I do want to have a bit more structure around the open discussion, to make it a slightly more rigorous research excercise so that we get some answers to the questions we want answers toā¦
I will think about the hierarchy of questions in more depth so there is a logical progression. I donāt think we can answer all of these, but perhaps start to more fully understand some.
I think these activities can contribute to the research objective we set out in Berlin during the summer. This and hopefully I will have a Masterās student soon.
Iāll email again and see how much time we can have and how many people are likely to attend these workshops.
Update: this is the overview that will be sent out to the participants. I am happy with it apart from question three, which I think is too broad.
Workshop Title:
Design, Open Source, Redistributed Manufacturing and Circular Economy
Content:
The workshop aims to explore the overlaps between re-distributed manufacturing in relation to open design, open innovation, open source and circular economy topics.
After a short introduction, the participants, broken into groups, will discuss sub-questions and will finally come together for feedback and a group discussion at the end.
Questions are:
What is the role of redistributed manufacturing in the circular economy?
What is the role of community-based digital fabrication workshops (eg housing additive technologies) in bridging between these areas (RdM and CE)?
How can open design, open innovation and open source, contribute to redistributed manufacturing and circular economy?
How can redistributed manufacturing practices scale circular economy activities in business-to-consumer sectors?
Thoughts: Prima stuff!
/ SFB sounds like a great occasion ā I might have missed bits of information on: How much time do you have for this WS? Are people signing up or is it drop-in? Is it a parallel session ? Estimated guestimated numbers? ā¦
= this would focus some thoughts better
WS title:
Might be good to add RDM to the title?
Content:
Exploring the overlaps RDM, OD, OS, CE is great ā overlaps could be extended to ārelationshipsā (which is more complex, as this involved interactions in various levels (aka Feynman < for Sharon:)
For the Introduction - the most accessible āeasyā RDM case study example is https://openmaking.is/ (open desk) (have good field guidesā¦)
combined with a small case study - Larsā lamp?.
Possibly form arguments around themes [#process, #material, #skills_knowledge ā¦ #standards (openstructures ecosystem āStructural build-up of OS structuresā might be an interesting conversation starter) ā¦] to AGREE or DISAGREE with or āFREESTYLEā
The method #Sustmake (adopted āworldcafeā) could work super well - depending on numbers ect
(1) One question per table
ā¢ questions above (will add my notes
ā¢ to discuss and map in balanced group sizes (30-45min / depending on time available overall)
ā¢ each table appoints 1 (-2) ārepresentativesā
(2) Group rotate while ārepresentativesā stick with their table
ā¢ each will be presented with the material that has been discussed and mapped at each table (by ārepresentativeā)
ā¢ each group contributes , one after the other, to each question (15-20min) => material evolving, versioning, ā¦
/ for Question 1-4, especially 3. āHow can open design, open innovation and open source, contribute to a RDM / CE?ā Reference : Open Source @RSA Maker summit #5 & #6 this week #RSAmake
** 1:14:45** Tom Greenham @TonyGreenham asks Vinay Gupta @leashless (strong supporter of decentralised power , open source, ā¦)
āWhat forms of knowledge management do we need in this new economy?ā ā How can we balance this reward for the creator and support the very existence of these creators , that needs financial resourcesā - How can we balance that without creating barriers around knowledge (IP, trademarking, ā¦ 19/20th century business model āmantrapā ?ā
Hey @Lars2i@Grit Thanks for this input itās really good. What do you mean by āfield guidesā?
We received the programme from Johannes and I am surprised to see there are actually four parallel workshops happening so I assume we will have quite a few participantsā¦The other workshop is about business models run by IfM at Cambridgeā¦
Timeframes: 135-150 minutes available to us, which I think is very longā¦
How about this break-down:
Introduction: 30 mins
Intro from @Lars2i on OSCE???
Intro from Sharon on RdM and CMS project??? @Grit Is it okay to use some of the Making Futures slides as a starting point for my presentation? I will credit you of course.
Working group sessions (world cafe style with facilitators and rotating groups): 60 mins
Break: 10 Mins
Feedback, group discussion and next steps: 30 mins
One reason for the event is to build collaborations and partnerships for future projects. So, for the feedback bit I think we would need to ask for three specific things to feedback eg. research gaps identified as well as two others???
maybe the feedback could be framed around current barriers, opportunities for research gaps ???
Iām a bit worried the overall questions are too complicatedā¦
Also, what do the participants get from coming to the workshop?
write-up results on OSCE blog
potential collaborations
@TechnicalNature think it would be good to get your input here if you have ten mins.
Do you have questions for the world-cafe part? How many groups do you think should there be?
Some Ideas for questions:
If you would use Open Source to make RdM work? How would you do it? (How to share knowledge around OSHW?)
What risks entail the Open Source approach for RdM and how could they be overcome?
Design guides for open RdM? (Implications for standards etc.)
OSHW & OSCEdays Introduction
In the opening I would explain what is OSHW - show the definition and show Arduino as an example and Open PCR maybe. Then the OSCEdays - the question it has - the definitions and practices of open source and circular economy are pretty close - in theory.
Then I would like to emphasize two things/problems of OSHW that IMO should touch RdM as well.
One: You canāt copy it as easy as software and it is hard to develop collaboration tools for it, but @jbonvoisin (who will probably be in the room with us) starts to work on it. See: http://osiscoming.openitagency.eu/window14/
And two: The use of standard parts in design to make decentralized collaboration work. I would show Open Structures the page and then my lamp (Hiebo Two) and the problems it has: Which is mostly its āuglinessā.
These are both strong and really open questions. I think it will take me between 15 and 20 min. to present them. Too long?
Okay, I think this is what we need to work on tomorrowā¦I think we canāt make it too complicatedā¦which it probably is at the moment? Also, how are the questions we are asking relate back to the overall purpose of what we are doign and how does that interest participants.
I would say a key focus area/ perhaps that links all areas could be learning & knowledge exchange around these topics - how and where?
Instigating the move to look for it, question in the first place
Finding where to go
What type of form/s should it take?
Particularly around RdM / CE / OSHW - this all seems to be fairly distributed in itself - also learning from current manufacturing, in CE and efficiency etc.
This also could help to think about where outcomes from the workshop could go, development of OSCEdays platforms and linking to others.
