Product Design – Page 3 – A&AA Blog (Archive)

Herman D'Hooge and Smart Cities : Innovations for The Portland Plan

Posted on July 23, 2013 by Sabina Poole

Smarter Everyday: From Bits and Bytes to Realtime Knowledge

Herman D'Hooge, Image Courtesy Herman D'Hooge

We have learned to exist in a world that is far from perfect. From diseases to global warming, from feast to famine, from carbon footprints to shameless use of fossil fuels to man’s inhumanity to man, we cope, we innovate, we create, we make and we find new ways to move forward. Not to put too fine a point on it, but this progress inherently entails getting smarter. Whether increasing the knowledge of those around us to better understand a need for global environmental cooperation to creating systems that will opportunistically reach and improve the lives of citizens in our most populated cities, the drive to get smarter and be able to dynamically adjust and do more with less is the new call to action. At the forefront of the modern sustainable revolution and with the admirable goal to improve and begin the long march forward to sustain a living, healthy planet, there are individuals who dedicate their work and creativity to making our world a “smarter” place. Herman D’Hooge is one such person.

Today, Herman D’Hooge hails as a Senior Principal Engineer and Innovation Strategist at Intel. Yet, far from the fast-paced industry, innovation, and technology of Intel, D’Hooge grew up in the small village of Lennik, Belgium-–a place, he notes is known for a charmingly non-technological connection to draft horses. The bucolic landscape of Lennik might have launched an early appreciation for the nature of a village or the possibility of a city within the peacefulness of an environment, but whatever the impetus, Herman D’Hooge’s path led him to an academic background steeped in technology innovation, the accelerated world of information systems, and the concept of smart cities. With graduate degrees in electrical engineering and computer science (University of Ghent, Belgium), D’Hooge arrived stateside at Intel in 1979 as part of an exchange program between Intel and ITT Bell Telephone from Antwerp. In his exchange assignment he worked on the development of the operating system of Intel’s newest microprocessor. The knowledge gained from this project would be invaluable in designing ITT’s first generation of computer-controlled telephone switching systems after his return. As D’Hooge became increasingly immersed in the Intel project he also became increasingly fascinated with leading-edge microcomputer development. He never returned to his job at ITT Bell Telephone. In 1981 he joined Intel as a full-time employee and by doing so started a long journey in technology innovation.

Herman D'Hooge instructs his students in the Smarter Cities UO AAA interdisciplinary workshop in Portland.

For the first few decades, much of this innovation is what we, the public, experienced as a continuous stream of improvements to the PC, or the personal computer. By the mid 1990s, PCs morphed into indispensable office productivity tools as well common household objects. It was also at that time that D’Hooge’s interests shifted from technology invention and development to thinking about what it is people want from future computers. During those years, finding New Uses and New Users for computing was the mantra. Rather than building ever more powerful computers and hoping they (users) would come because they would find a good use for it, Intel wanted change in how to inform future technology roadmaps: determine first what new uses the PC should be providing by trying to peer into the minds of current and future users and have that reveal how PCs should evolve in capabilities. It was the period when Intel started experimenting with ethnographic methods to gain insights into these new users new uses. It became clear that computing would also provide value to people when delivered in forms other than computers. With most every thing in the real world on the path to eventually becoming digital or being touched by the digital revolution, opportunities for innovation were plenty.

One such opportunity occurred in 1998 when D’Hooge co-founded a joint project with toy giant Mattel®. Mattel was perhaps best known for Barbies and Hot Wheels. The venture opened in Portland’s Pearl district and set out to develop a line of PC-connected toys that enabled ways of playing enabling kids to discover, explore and create in ways connecting them to technology. The venture ran for about three years and created and marketed toys such as Intel Play QX3 computer microscope among several others. When the internet bubble was about to burst in 2001, the toy venture was closed and the business assets sold to a small toy company in Atlanta (which to this date still sells computer microscopes). D’Hooge and most of his teammates flowed back into mainstream Intel.

Returning into the fold, the experience gained by this venture in consumer products proved tremendous. D’Hooge comments that the insights gained via the processes for researching, creating, developing and marketing consumer products taught much about how to do it and how to connect all the dots from ethnographic research all the way to computer chip technology definition. He established a user centered design team focused on reimagining the PC by applying these newly learned practices. He grew a mixed discipline team of ethnographers, industrial designers, interaction designers, human factors experts, mechanical/ electrical/ software engineers, and individuals focused on business and marketing. In the years that followed, this team designed and engineered a series of purpose-built personal computer experiences ranging from pioneering all-in-one desktop PCs, PCs for consumers in China, PCs for internet cafes in China, to kiosk PCs for rural India, as well several first-of-kind computer user experience prototypes. Many of these PC designs were picked up and productized by PC manufacturers. Several of the practices by which these computers were conceived and developed slowly started to find their way into Intel’s standard set of product planning and development business processes.

In 2010, D’Hooge joined Intel’s Eco-Technology Program Office where he and the team explored the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) for improving environmental sustainability. The approach was based on the simple idea that the adoption and use of ICTs in industries such as buildings, construction, transportation, agriculture, energy, and water would enable those industries to gain better insights into what goes in their systems which would, in turn, lead to better decisions and ultimately a smarter use of resources such as energy and materials, a reduction in cost, and a smaller environmental footprint. One environment where many of these systems all come together and interact which each other creating additional opportunities for innovation is within a city. This initially sparked D’Hooge’s interest in looking at the city as the unit of analysis.

Herman D'Hooge and his Smarter Portland Plan students meet with City of Portland Office of the Mayor Policy Advisor, Josh Alpert.

Curiously enough, this all ties into the University of Oregon and the School of Architecture and Allied Arts —a place that is very fortunate to have Herman D’Hooge on the school’s board of visitors and as an active and encouraging supporter of the UO AAA academic environment. Every seven years Intel offers its employees an eight-week sabbatical. It’s an ideal opportunity to renew oneself and return fully reenergized. Getting ready to start his fourth sabbatical in 2012 D’Hooge asked to spend his sabbatical teaching at UO thereby exploring his interest in integrating technologies, sustainability, product design. He hoped to also delve deeper into the smart cities concept. It turns out that a teaching sabbatical can be extended up to six months which is what ended up happening and timing was perfect for an UO AAA Fall Term course. He saw an opportunity to seamlessly blend these interests with the vibrant interdisciplinary environment of the UO Portland location, where students study in the fields of architecture, product design and digital arts.

D’Hooge, himself forever the open-source diplomat, realized the possibility of teaming up with University of Oregon students who could bring fresh pairs of eyes with insights and connectivity to a city they lived in and cared about. Fall term 2012 saw the first offering of D’Hooge’s Smart Cities workshop at the UO White Stag location in Portland’s Old Town Chinatown, 408|508 Smarter Cities Allied Arts Interdisciplinary course.

Portland Mayor Charlie Hales greets Herman D'Hooge and the students of The Smarter Portland Plan.

The goal of the course “was to explore the space of possibility created by the adoption of information and communications technology (ICT) in the urban environment.” D’Hooge further explains, “The focus was not on how the technology works, but on how its adoption can contribute to making cities more efficient, more environmentally sustainable, more equitable, more livable, more prosperous.” The workshop had 29 University of Oregon in Portland students. Guest lecturers for the workshop included Joe Zehnder, chief of planning with the Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability who introduced the students to “The Portland Plan.” Students set about to imagine recommendations they would make for where, how, and why ICT’s could make a positive impact. A report was prepared that details the strongest student suggestions (view the PDF here).

[About The Portland Plan: The Portland Plan presents a strategic roadmap to help Portland thrive into the future. The result of more than two years of research, dozens of workshops and fairs, hundreds of meetings with community groups, and 20,000 comments from residents, businesses and nonprofits, the plan’s three integrated strategies and framework for advancing equity were designed to help realize the vision of a prosperous, educated, healthy and equitable Portland.]

Not only would the students be able to work on their own environment and consider the potential of change and improvement to Portland but they would be able to connect in meaningful ways to Intel future employment opportunities. Intel and D’Hooge envision the university environment as one of forward-thinking, research oriented, open and receptive to new ideas and the intersection of those new ideas with creative people. D’Hooge was excited to explore smarter city technologies and to experience how spaces and objects could be infused with technology. The Smarter Cities workshop with the students from architecture, digital arts and product design advocated an interaction between people and spaces where thinking about technology became more of a “What can I do, as an individual, to enhance my environment? What can I do to make life better and make the planet more sustainable?” attitude. D’Hooge and his students set out to tackle this question from a uniquely Portland vantage.

Portland Mayor Charlie Hales talks to students about The Smarter Portland Plan

The original Portland Plan is to be implemented by 2035. D’Hooge and his students saw an opportunity to enhance The Portland Plan by investigating how information technologies can help it be, as D’Hooge simply states, “smarter.” So, what does that mean?

“Smart” explains D’Hooge starts by obtaining better insights into what really happens in a city at the moment it happens enabling humans to make better informed decision about their city. Sensors embedded in a city’s systems (traffic lights, parking spaces, sidewalks, buildings, water pipes, etc.) in real-time communicate their information to a central location. There the information is analyzed, possibly combined with other information, and interpreted. This information forms the basis for decisions. For example: sensors in the water mains under a busy intersection can detect if a water main breaks soon after it happens. The information about the break can be used to dynamically chance traffic lights and update GPS information accessed by vehicles to route traffic away from the intersection while dispatching emergency vehicles to the area. This also illustrates how water and traffic systems can meaningfully interact in a city environment, a system of systems.

Knowing the infusion of student’s ideas into The Portland Plan could propel an evolutionary-like energy, the students enthusiastically welcomed this opportunity. Their recommendations reflect an impulse of vitality and change; their innovation projects a sense of buoyant optimism—youthful, full of promise, hope and vigorous with possibility. The list of “smart” recommendations arrived at by the UO students include such improvements as good student incentives supported by ICT devices, student tutor chats online via Skype chats, matching of students with mentors in the community via databases, new car sharing schemes, safe routes shown on maps controlled by citizens and their smartphones, smart city lighting that incorporates emergency signals and neighborhood celebratory lighting, bike-based sensors to plan cycling corridors and people aware intersections, parking improvements enhanced by the use of pre-assigned parking places, river water quality found on a phone app, and public viewing of cultural performances. “The ‘Smarter’ Portland Plan” is divided into three sections, Thriving, Educated Youth; Healthy, Connected City; Economic Prosperity and Affordability.

Students and Herman D'Hooge present "The 'Smarter' Portland Plan" to City Council of Portland, Oregon.

On June 26, the Portland City Council invited Herman D’Hooge and his students to present “The ‘Smarter’ Portland Plan” to the City Council. In attendance to represent the UO was Nancy Cheng, Department of Architecture director of Portland architecture program; Candace Horter, VP UO Advancement, Portland; Kiersten Muenchinger, director of the Product Design program; prominent advocates from the neighborhood included Anne Naito-Campbell, Randy Gragg and Paddy Tillett, among others. The council voted to adopt the plan and Mayor Charlie Hales commented that the report constituted a “rich menu of interesting ideas.” In the weeks following the June presentation, the UO in Portland School of Architecture and Allied Arts was contacted by the City Club of Portland’s executive director, Sam Adams and asked to present the Plan to the City Club at a future date.

D’Hooge’s “”Smarter’ Portland Plan” might hold the key to integrating more and “smarter” information technologies as 2035 approaches. The citizens of Portland might experience a community of well-integrated sensors, antennas, smartphones, and command and control centers—all with the intention of making this place better. The enticing possibility of such day-to-day frustrations such as parking downtown becoming easier by a simple sensor that would send data to a command center and then update an application on one’s smartphone directing and saving a specific parking place might be a more realistic possibility than not in the coming years. The idea that real-time information can be used to improve an experience of an urban environment with everything from road closures, to viewing concerts, to bus delays, to whether or not today is a good day to swim in the river, is nothing short of captivating.

Herman D'Hooge and students present "The 'Smarter' Portland Plan" to the Portland City Council.

The work on The ‘Smarter’ Portland Plan also laid a foundation for a continued collaboration between the city and Portland-based UO students. The idea of embedding UO students as “community creatives” in city project teams can be a win-win. The city taps the creativity and passion of the students and brings in their knowledge and point of view. Students get to work of projects that are likely to become real and get exposure to the real world.

To envision a city where, we, the people, are relevant, listened to, informed and would have the possibility of a democratic exchange of ideas and information seems a utopia we all should advocate for. And living in an urban fabric where the city can find ways to share information with no commercial purpose, dare we dream so big? One might say, the time has come. . . .

University of Oregon students in Herman D’Hooge’s Smarter Cities workshop who prepared “The ‘Smarter’ Portland Plan are,

Teressa Chizeck

Natalie Cregar

Elizabeth Hampton

Natasha Michalowsky

Eli Rosenwasser

“The ‘Smarter’ Portland Plan” is available here. [link to pdf]

Thank you to Herman D’Hooge for his comments and work on this project.

Resources:

Office of the Mayor | Acceptance of the Report “The ‘Smarter’ Portland Plan”

Moore’s Law | Intel

The Portland Plan

TEDx Portland collaborates with the White Box for "What If ?" Art and Design Show

Posted on April 18, 2013 by Sabina Poole

What If ? . . . . On Intersectionality and Your Visual Backlog

TEDx Portland What If ? at the UO White Box in Portland

The WHAT IF? TEDxPortland Art & Design Exhibition is a curated collaboration by the University of Oregon and TEDxPortland. 26 artists donated their time, treasure and talent to make this possible. Every penny from the online auction will benefit the Children’s Healing Art Project (CHAP). The Nike Foundation will match the amount raised. The auction starts at 5:30pm on April 17th, ending at 5:30pm on April 27th The exhibit will be housed at the White Box in the White Stag Block from April 4-24th and then will be transported and re-installed for TEDxPortland at the Portland Art Museum on April 27th Celebrating Ideas & Art worth spreading.

In keeping with the mission of TED, the exhibition showcases work that mines the territory between art, design, technology and science in popular culture. The work illuminates natural and imagined worlds through form and function. Selected artists were invited to submit work that is an exploration of visual media that connects to these multiple histories. Responding to concept, object, new knowledge and technologies through creative process, exhibited works span discrete disciplines and burgeoning practices.

Co-curated by White Box manager, Tomas Valladares and Molly Georgetta (Compound Gallery), What If ? presents a diverse yet curiously cohesive body of works that delve into both the digital and the handmade: a sort of vibrant intersectionality. Upon further observation, streams of unity begin to flow through the show but rather than providing simply visual entertainment and explanation, these works united and merged together in this space play with the realness of things and ideas in ways that encourage a captivating uncertainty.

I stared for an unreasonably lengthly amount of time at Zach Yarrington’s signage-cum-art Say it Out Loud. It spoke at me, not to me: playing with the blunt, authentic, familiar, but something was different. A myriad of thoughts flowed, too: 1800s memorabilia, font obsessiveness, decoration with flourish, signage you read at a glance, yet it felt new and unexpected, shifty. Had I seen this before? Heard this before? [Look at Zach Yarrington’s Say it Out Loud]

We’ve all heard that words can be deceiving. And, things are not always as they seem. Objects, images and language can evoke memories, appear commonplace, create difficult or lovely feelings, even prompt new ideas. The work displayed in TEDx’s “What If?” bring together pieces at once provocative, questioning, comfortable and challenging.

Craig Hickman’s “LOVER’S LANE” lassoo’ed me in next. It looked real, it sounded real, it sounded appealing, but then there was that roadsign, grubby billboard delivery, itself lovable in its truthfulness. However, what might have seemed comfortable was challenged by context, materiality, my own memory. Then I saw that wayward apostrophe, and the added comment, “HIGH WATER.” Had I seen those two paired together before? The logic of it was almost taunting, shamefully so–like, well of course, why didn’t I see that coming? Is it difficult to cope with ambiguity and a subconscious awareness? Hickman has no qualms in suggesting that we look, and expose ourselves to his nothing-barred candor. [Look at Craig Hickman’s LOVER’S LANE or for even more, explore his book OXIDE].

The “What If ?” TEDx Portland art exhibit opened on April 4 and here it is minutes before the online auction opens, and I am wondering about familiarity, the proverbial, and “a fictional world only slightly different from our own” (Craig Hickman describing his piece in What If ?, April 3, 2013). The exhibit prompts a questioning and a curiosity about ideas and traversing the distance between comfort of the everyday and the uncertain novelty of the unknown. Every piece here transcends the conventional, and asks the viewer to consider a different reality. It is a challenge to face familiar concepts that are rife with the expected and the known but here ignited with deviation and innovation the works become an intersection of both.

I talked to a few of the artists and designers exhibiting in the TEDx “What If ?” show to find out more….and asked them to explain a few threads woven into the body of work on exhibit that contributed to a shared ground line: that of manipulation of the human experience and layering methodology to explore the unknown. The integrative thinking and the intersectionality of this exhibit offered the opportunity to embrace the show’s portal to fascinating new representations of reality, the future, and here, and now.

The Opulent Project’s Meg Drinkwater explained “the found files that are used to create [the] ring act as symbols for what we know to be rings….By appropriating and combining these symbols…we have further emphasized the caricature that is in our collective mind….we attempt to ‘manipulate the human experience’ by examining it and questioning it.” [Look at the Opulent Project’s Digital Ring]

Sara Huston of The Last Attempt at Greatness (Sara Huston and John Paananen] and the works, Expectation 03, smtwtfs 01, and smtwtfs 02, exemplify the studio’s “exploration of subjects of progress, expectation, liminal space, categorization, perception, value and the intersection and language of art and design.” Huston and Paananen’s work boldly aims at “provoking discourse and contemplation in the viewer or user in an attempt to disrupt conventional ways of thinking, induce reflection and challenge the boundaries of what is known.” Precisely, the work of The Last Attempt at Greatness is about, as Huston elaborates, “the ‘What if?’…[it is] about getting people out of their comfort zone to look at the world in a new way.” [View their work in the auction.]

Trygve Faste, an artist/designer is showing a work called Protoform Orange Red Blue in What if? Faste’s work is “about examining the creation of objects..currently and in the future, but especially in the future.” The piece in What If? endeavors to illuminate his concept that “somehow the future will be more promising than the present.” Acrylic on canvas, Protoform is a product of “studio art and industrial design.” Faste explains that he has given himself “the challenge of trying to convey the complex relationships we have with the dynamic landscape of objects that surround us through the use of abstract painting and form….” He also believes that designers strive to “create new objects and experiences that bring together appropriate materials and technologies to create innovative solutions to everyday problems,” thus making objects of our environment; for the most part, he postulates this “comes from a place of wanting to do good.” His work “tries to tap into a collective subconscious regarding the human aspirations imbedded” in our already existing creations. A self-professed optimist, Faste relates that his work “explore[s] the unknown, particularly from the vague human desire to embark on achievements….that lead to a bright and futuristic tomorrow.” [See Protoform Orange Red Blue]

Jennifer Wall’s Parametric Ring was “birthed from a process combining 6^th century BC technology (cuttlefish bone casting) with neoteric technology (3-D printing from a parametric CAD file).” Wall speaks of her “pulling from discordant technologies to produce objects,” and explains her manipulation of the human experience as one where her research analyzes “the impulse to self-identify through the objects we make.” She continues, “time and history are necessary to understand the production of new ideas, which are often a reconstruction of that which already exists.” [See Parametric Ring]

What If ? may ask more questions that it answers, and prompt you to vacillate between emotions of familiarity and strangeness, between understanding and a sense of impulsive curiosity laced with insecurity. It may encourage you to recognize innovation and image as a way to explore new ideas and venture away from the expected. Yet, while the ability to leave a level of familiarity and comfort can precipitate a sense of entering a brave new world, it is this facing of dissidence that can bring the most rewarding drive forward. As Wall explains, we need contexts like this where objects “function as tangible indicator[s] of the space between past and present.”

Owning (and wearing) objects such as those available to you in this exhibit, is to “combine the past with the present so [you] can be doubly validated in ….an aesthetic taste and decision,” says Wall and achieve a greater understanding and perhaps connection. “It is plausible that all visual aesthetics are derivatives of one another, and that new ideas lie in seeing potential patterns in the visual backlog that already exists.”

It all starts today (Wednesday), my friends, tonight at 5:30 PST to be exact, here [The Auction]. This is your opportunity to be a part of this and actually have one, or more (!) of these pieces in your possession.

“What if…?” you wait until numbers start trickling in (and up) as aficionados of art and design find their way to this place and make their bid on . . . . Wait! A work that you might want? Bidding is a strategic thing, and somehow we might be made just a bit nervous that we cannot see our competition, no paddles to raise, no leaning gaze to see where that bid came from (how dare she!?), and no jocular teasing or outright disappointment when you are outdone. And, worst yet, no bidding wars?! Yes, this is a new and different way to hold an auction, just like “What If? contains novel approaches to art and design; and we hope you enjoy it.

I have to admit, there is something to be said for bidding from the comfort of your own online location. For wherever you are, I advise you to seize the moment: being online and secretly upping the bid is so deliciously satisfying……now you can add your click, in the name of healing children and buying something more than simply relevant but also something that appreciates the chance to accept both your own “visual backlog” and a voyage away from the status quo. Doesn’t that feel good?

Artists and designers with UO affiliation in TEDx Portland What If ? are

Zach Yarrington (BFA ’11 Digital Arts)

Trygve Faste (UO Assistant Professor, Product Design Program)

The Opulent Project with Meg Drinkwater and Erin Rose Gardner (BFA ’07 and ’08, respectively, in Metals/Jewelry)

Laura Vandenburgh (UO Assoc Professor)

Craig Hickman (UO Professor Digital Arts)

Sara Huston with The Last Attempt at Greatness (UO Instructor), I, II, III

Jennifer Wall (UO Instructor)

Jenene Nagy (UO Management Certificate)

"What If?" co-curated by Tomas Alfredo Valladares and Molly Georgetta

Product Design Program Turns to US Veterans with Adaptive Design Innovation

Posted on April 1, 2013January 23, 2015 by Sabina Poole

A product design student (right) discusses his innovations for snowboarder | veteran Kevin Pannell’s equipment.

In a recent Huffington Post article, writer, film director, and activist Michael Moore posted his contentious yet well-received, “Those Who Say ‘I Support the Troops” Really Don’t.” It was a controversial and somewhat scathing look at the hypocrisy contained in rhetoric heard nationwide during these years the US has been involved with conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“’I support the troops!’ spoken by Americans with such false sincerity—false because our actions don’t match our words….” wrote Moore. Strong and accusatory words, to be sure. Moore detailed about six ways Americans are, dismally failing in their rallying cry of support. One way, he claims, we fall short is in bringing “aid and comfort to the sick and wounded” veterans.

It does have a ring of truth. After all, upon their return, what do we, as citizens do to assist a veteran’s assimilation back into everyday life? These are young men and women our nation sent away to defend, protect, and serve. Many of them return not as they left. Perhaps injured, with major physical set-backs, having experienced trauma we civilians will only pretend to understand gleaned from quick snipets of war-ravaged video games where the blood and fear is only as real as the pixels on our computer screen.

Most of us, while at the prime of our life, will never have to bear the reality of losing a limb (or limbs), sustaining severe nerve damage, or living through the explosion of a roadside bomb. Saying “thanks” to these soldiers who are fortunate and brave enough to return to life in our community just does not seem enough, does it? Have we stepped up to the plate of humanitarianism and empathy and offered something really meaningful, helpful, and productive? For that matter, who, among us, offers truly helpful innovation that recognizes these wounded warriors, ignites their passions and brings them into a place where they can use everything they have in life with the greatest potential?

“Innovation happens when you don’t just confine yourself to the same standards as everyone else…..” –Tobie Hatfield, Nike, Inc.

Under the auspices of UO’s Product Design Program with program director, Kiersten Muenchinger, two University of Oregon in Portland School of Architecture and Allied Arts adjunct instructors, Wilson Smith and Bob Lucas, and with assistance from Nike’s Matt Rhoades, rose to the occasion this winter term 2013 and created that space for innovation to happen. With a combination of compassion and understanding and a determined willingness to offer mindful help, Smith and Lucas created the studio course, Adaptive Products | Enabling Athletes with Disabilities. This is the second time the studio course has been offered (the story was widely covered last year on this blog, in the Oregonian and CBS’ Smart Planet and others), this time around, the instructors decided their focus would be US veterans with athletic interests.

Smith and Lucas realized they each had a keen interest in innovating “real life” user-based studio courses. Already well-aware of the need to develop sports innovation around athletes with physical challenges, Smith and Lucas saw an opportunity to help contribute to the dreams and aspirations of the wounded veterans and, by doing so, create a program that would benefit the athletes and add to the educational experience of the UO students.

Smith and Lucas’ innovative and groundbreaking studio, Adaptive Products: Enabling Athletes with Disabilities enabled UO students to work with veterans who undaunted by their injuries and life situations, were enthusiastically pursuing rigorous athletic dreams on a professional level. It was a way to bring real-life challenges to UO in Portland students and create key opportunities to develop problem solving skills and foster empathy in design. The fundamental goal of the studio was to involve students in design team relationships with the studio work benefitting both the athletes and adding to the educational experience of the students.

The studio allowed students to work closely with the athletes, here with Sargent Leo Curtis, wheelchair, fencer.

Combining strong backgrounds grounded in sports and design expertise, Smith and Lucas have been just the duo to accomplish this. Smith comes to the project with a longstanding history as a Nike Design Director. A UO alumus, (B. Arch. 1980), Smith is currently a Creative Catalyst within Nike’s ZOO (Special Other Operations) and has professional expertise in working to develop humanitarian aid efforts that promote and create access to sports. Bob Lucas’ career began at Nike in the footwear design and innovation field. Following 15 years at Nike, he continued in this genre becoming the Head of ait Design (adidas innovation team). His educational background includes a degree in Industrial Design. Professionally well-acquainted and united by a shared interest in health, sports and accessibility, Smith and Lucas found a strength and cooperative mission in each other’s significant accomplishments. Working together made sense and brought together years of design, leadership, and creative expertise.

To introduce students to both the innovation of design and the importance of understanding human physiology, Smith and Lucas filled the term with experiences and connections that united the students with a sense of “biodesign and bioarchitecture” [Lynette Deschler. BASECAMP3] as well as design in the athletic fields. The instructors thoughtfully included workshops and conversations with Nike, Inc. Innovation Kitchen director, Tobie Hatfield and Lynette Deschler, an expert in human architecture and biodesign and owner of BASECAMP3.

Lynette Deschler of BASECAMP3 shows students how interconnected the body is during a classroom demonstration while Nike's Tobie Hatfield looks on, at podium.

Commenting on the student work, Deschler said,

The students did an amazing job with the knowledge I shared with them and integrating it into thoughtful, creative and functional product designs that related to their athletes needs. The scope of their projects were challenging, they not only had to be introduced to the mechanics and architecture of the human body, but the specialized needs of their athletes due to combat injuries. Further, combining these performance needs with the specifications of materials, performance demands, innovative design strategy, and overall functionality. They did an exceptional job at bringing these stories to life with real performance product solutions.

I really liked working with my athlete. The dedication and power he has was really inspirational. It’s rare that you get to work with someone in school, but to work with someone who is focused and passionate was amazing. The passion elevated the whole class, and the instructors just fanned the flames. It was one of the best studios I’ve had.–Comment from Adaptive Design studio student, Mike Bartell

For the winter 2013 studio, five students were paired with each athlete. Three athletes participated in the program: wheelchair fencer Sargent Leo Curtis (working with students, Natasha Michalowsky, Rebecca Swofford, Teressa Hamje, Michael Roy, and Thane Lochtie); rower Tony Davis (working with students Michael Bartell, Elizabeth (Lizz) Hampton, Daniel Nicholson, Timothy Ploeger, Isamu Jarman); and snowboarder, Kevin Pannell (working with students Nathan G. Schultze, Nithikarn Sidthilaw, Joel Swenson, Allison Rastetter, and Tony Kan).

Athlete Profiles

Kevin Pannell, snowboarder | Story: Army specialist in Iraq. In 2004 caught in a grenade ambush in central Baghdad. Legs amputated.

Sargent Leo Curtis, wheelchair fencer | Story: On his last mission in Iraq, 2004. Upon being Heli-dropped into Fallujah, encountered an IED or “roadside bomb.” Suffered extreme nerve and tissue damage resulting in fused vertebrae, hearing and vision loss, and extensive, permanent damage to nervous system.

Anthony (Tony) Davis, rower | Story: Retired Naval Officer. Tony received an air medal for over 150 hours of combat flight time during Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Upon returning home in 2005, involved in a traffic accident on Interstate-5. Broken back, ribs, collar bone, and paralyzed from waist down. Never rowed before 2009.

On March 14, 2013 at the UO in Portland’s main Event Room in the White Stag Block, the Product Design students unveiled their designs for the term-end critiques. Their audience included athletic-design greats such as Nike Air Force 1 designer Bruce Kilgore, PENSOLE’s D’Wayne Edwards, Senior Designer 2 & Design Ambassador – Adidas Innovation Team at Adidas John Acevedo, Intel’s Senior Principal Engineer and Innovation Strategist Herman D’Hooge, Nike ZOO Innovation Lead Tom Rushbrook, Nike Innovation Kitchen’s James Molyneux , and University of Oregon’s Dean of AAA Frances Bronet, UO in Portland Vice Provost and AAA Administrative Director Kate Wagle, UO Product Design Program Director Kiersten Muenchinger, and UO in Portland Department of Architecture Director Nancy Cheng.

Product Design student Lizz Hampton in the stages of design innovation at the White Stag Block as she prepares, experiments, and wears her ideas for rower, Tony Davis.

Wilson Smith kicked off the review session with a heartfelt comment, remembering the words of nationally respected UO Track and Field coach, Bill Bowerman when he said, “If you have a body, you are an athlete.” The stage was set for unveiling the innovation that could assist this new group of aspiring athletes achieve their dreams.

Each athlete had spent the previous 10 weeks working in close collaboration with the student teams. Students had attended practices, training sessions, and workouts alongside the athletes. This close contact enabled the students to observe and experience, the physical needs and equipment situations the athletes’ were dealing with. From watching the rowing technique of 2016 Para-Olympic hopeful, Tony Davis, students were able to design equipment such as a special seat that would adapt to his lower body strength and leverage issues (take, for example, an ingenious system arrived at by Daniel Nicholson that enables Davis to secure himself to his boat via a pair of shorts; or student Tim Ploeger’s “GROW” system, a precise analytical system of coaching solo training sessions).

Student Lizz Hampton and rower Tony Davis explore technique for rowing at Davis’ training gym. Photo courtesy of Adaptive Design studio Tony Davis Team

Working with international wheelchair fencing competitor, Sargent Leo Curtis, students recognized “an area….rich for potential development…and design(s) only limited by understanding.” [student Thane Lochte] Setting out to comprehend the Sargent’s performance driven sword play as much as possible, students in this group attended weekend practice sessions and observed this athlete’s “cerebral game and unique lunging forward” as key aspects of this athlete’s technique. And while the students were quick to point out the many rules and regulations in fencing, they realized that with innovation and thought the rules and integrity could be adapted to achieve the Sargent’s ideal fencing position. With equipment that would permit the fencer to lunge forward with lightening fast speed while maintaining precision, Sargent Curtis promised to take the student designs with him on his upcoming trip to Budapest to compete in the international wheelchair fencing competition. One such design Sargent Curtis was enthusiastic to take to the international wheelchair fencing competition was the “Valhalla,” Michael Roy’s device for the wheelchair seat that exemplified the foremost body-led, performance driven pieces of the exhibited designs.

Commenting on “the inspiring bravery” of the veterans [student Teressa Hamje], the students consistently saw a need for designing equipment for Curtis, Davis, and Pannell that would be simultaneously functional and aesthetically appropriate. The athlete-veterans expressed a need for faster, better, more performance oriented systems that could be incorporated into their training and improve the existing equipment.

As the critique came to a close, and comments swirled around the room in true brainstorm fashion addressing materiality, concepts, improvements and design theory, there was one common thread heard over and over that rose above the practicality of production. Perhaps best put into words by snowboarder Kevin Pannell: Pannell who had explained his youthful voyage into the military to the students at the beginning of the term with a bluntly self-aware realism, “I [was] a country-ass white boy from Arkansas and the Army was offering to pay me to play with guns…” had a new focus. This time it was not guns that were being put into his hands. Tonight, ski poles, backpacks, snowboard bindings and improved prosthetic devices were the vital tools of his future. As Pannell tried on, admired, held, and offered enthusiastic encouragement to the students to get their ideas made into real, working pieces, he boldly stated: “Let’s make some good stuff, the right stuff!” It was a looking forward to a life with a new sense of optimism and enthusiasm.

“My self-confidence is my lucky penny—don’t touch that.”–Sargent Leo Curtis to student, Teressa Hamje

As a noteworthy side-effect of the students’ design efforts, the students became aware of the importance of the athletes’ psychological conditions and the contribution athletic success brings to self-esteem. When Sargent Leo Curtis made his “lucky penny” comment, it was clear that these designs contained much more potential than simply improving athletic performance. With better, adapted equipment, the athletes would continue to gain self-confidence with the knowledge that they had specialized, thoughtful designs specifically crafted to help them achieve their goals. The adaptive design students were paying attention and listening to each athlete’s request. As one student noted, they were challenged to design equipment improvements that would “ignite flight.”

Following the final review and the unveiling of the student designs, Deschler, commented,

In my opinion these students now have a greater advantage in the design world. Today is essential to in integrate what I call bioarchetecture and biodesign to create new innovative solutions. This cross pollination will bring immeasurable gain to how we look at and create products of the future. These students not only understood this concept but did an exceptional job at beginning to express it to the world.

No matter the eventual outcome of the war nor the political minefield that surrounds this conflict, we have a notable victory being championed here. With individuals like Smith and Lucas and the students of Adaptive Design who looked beyond what they could not change in the past, and had the foresight to work with that which they could help create. Their astute sensitivity to the condition of our returning soldiers will hopefully contribute to these veterans having a brighter future, encouraging them to pursue independence, an enjoyment of life, and the happy pursuit of health and athletic opportunity. Undoubtedly, this group has illustrated a commendable support of our veterans.

And, that is something to be proud of.