Hey Eman, I really like the direction this is going! Especially with the mechanism for the claw. My biggest critique of the form you have now would be that there seems to be a disconnect between the truss-like structure you have surrounding the prosthetic limb, and the socket. (Obviously looking at those perspective renders the surfaces are intersecting in weird ways, so it doesn’t look like you’ve explored that part of the design as much yet) But I would say it seems like a very polygonal and architectural truss is coming together around a super organic socket. If you could find a way to better negotiate that transition it might give you a more unified solution.
Yeah, the final details haven’t really been figured out. The Truss Stucture and how it interacts with the socket will be interesting. Haven’t started to flush out those details yet, because I’m still trying to figure out if the wire frame is the correct direction to go. Getting in there and doing all the detail work is the next step. Just gotta make sure I like the overall concept before I try and model those touch points. Because modeling the truss to flow perfectly with the other components is no small task.
I’m not entirely sold on the wireframe, I just thought it wold convey a good story. But the idea is that the wireframe appears and is extremely light. And the climbing arm needs to be as light weight as possible to reduce fatigue. Also the “inside” of the prosthetic was ment to mimic the form of Ice Axs. So being able to see “into” the prosthetic tied into visual aesthetics of climbing gear a bit more.
I was originally attached to the more solid faceted approach, I just backed off because it seems so simple and didn’t really give me a big opportunity to showcase the gear side . Also everyone seems to be doing facets. And I though the wireframe would be a bit similar but different enough. But maybe I’m over thinking the facet things and should go back to my gut instinct.
Also with a more solid plates. You could potentially have the rock-wall aesthetic fearing for the outdoors look or take off the panels and embrace the more Ice Ax style aesthetic for when you want to show off your “gear”. Almost like a sleeper car. Heavier outside, with a very tech inside that none really knows about.
I think you should trust your gut. Trends are going to come and go, people won’t always remember “hey in 2012 facets were in, he just did facets” I think they’ll just know if it looks good or not.
I like the solid plates idea for the outdoors, because it eliminates the factor of stuff getting stuck in the holes of the trusses. the only issue then would be weight… which could be negotiated with materials. Looking forward to seeing how you work through all of this!
that’s wicked cool looking man! you could also play with those top facets and make them smooth to contrast the facets on bottom that are more complicated. either way, that looks awesome to me.
Coming along nicely. Facets are nice as is wireframe, but I wonder if the “trendiness” thing is also an issue and if could be more rationalized.
With the wireframe, I also wonder if there is an issue/opportunity with it getting stuck on things and/or being able to use the frame to hang things off of or hook onto things? I could see people tying things onto it or using a hole in the frame as a temporary hook which might be good or bad depending if it could support the stress.
R
Great project so far, really inspiring!
I just wanted to remark on the outer shell. Though I really like the lattice structure, especially with the added benefit of temporary storage, I do think you might want to spend some time on what this outer shell will be made of. Glass/carbon fiber, metal sheet or welded extrusions (for the lattice) might all work but which one will be best? Not only in terms of production but also wear-and-tear, maintenance, modifying, possibly breaking?
Thanks for all the feedback. I really appreciate it. Spent a today modeling my concept a bit more cleanly. In hopes of trying to show the concept a bit better.
I still like both the facets and wireframe. So I tried an approach that has both in the final language. The faceted front, is ment to have more subtle facets and be a bit more human in form. While the rear wireframe is much more agressive. The wireframe also allows you the opportunity to look inside to the technical side of the prosthetic. I really want a way to show of the custom socket and machined hardware.
Similar to how the bent carbon Cheetah leg really embrace the materiality and showcases the tech side of the product. I want to play of the same effect. To show the insides in order to help convey the sense of performance.
Originally I had modeled the socket to mimic the traditional construction method, a smooth surface that is essentially an offset of the residual limb. However, I realized with the advancements in 3D scanning and 3D printing you can now scan and automate the process a bit quicker. This should allow for the outside of the socket to be custom shaped, while having the inside surface be a perfect match to the user. So instead of trying to mesh the classic socket aesthetic with my form. Now the socket now will be able to mimic the form language a bit better.
Also playing around with materiality. Soft fabric coated composite vs a hard metal lattice. A rubberized coating might be cool too and play into the “grip” side of climbing.
These are all still missing the climbing claw attachments. Those are being modeled next.
Hey Emmanuel,
Bit late to the party here but I read through the whole post.
I agree with everything said above. It has a very “Fuse Project” feel to it right now. It looks like a Jambox on your arm. That being said I love the idea of the naked-ness and showing off the function and mechanism. I do question however the function and practicality of this method, will this be a cleaning issue when you sweat or if you use it outside when your climbing? Will straps and ropes get caught in it?
I am split here because I like the idea of structure mimicking the form of the arm, and I like showing off the mechanism but maybe it can be done in another way. What about a trellised structure like the frame of a Ducati Monster? I think something like this could look tougher and rugged as opposed to a dainty consumer product. Think about the whole lifcycle of the product and what would happen if you banged it or dropped it, would these forms hold up? Would they have to be cast aluminum vs. injection molded plastic? Also how will the product age, how will it patina? I think these are very important questions to ask with an action sports product.
As always like where your going, just some thoughts to help you knock it out of the park.
Erik - you bring up some good points. Not sure if straps/ropes/etc would get caught in the frame. At least not while actually climbing indoors, since there is a lot less hardware as opposed to outdoor climbing, where things get a bit more technical. But it’s been brought up a ton of times so defiantly will be a question that will come up at my critique.
I really need to consider the materials a bit more and how they will react over the life of the product. Nothing better than well loved piece of sporting equipment. I still have busted cleats on my shelfs because I dont want to get rid of them. Should look at how different materials might react with the form.
The thing with prosthetics is they are all custom made to a specific users anatomy. So production of these are all one off pieces. Traditional prosthetics are hand shaped, hand layed up composite pieces that take a few weeks to make. So I feel like using more expensive techniques like 3D Printing, or aluminum casting might be ok.
Also currently all prosthetics parts have an L Code associated with them so that insurances can be billed appropriately. Need to do a a bit more research, because the how these will be made/paid for by other users will most likely get brought up at critique.
Hey Eman, just a quick thought about the socket shape: if you’re gunna laminate the sheets together, wouldn’t the inner and outer shapes have to be the same? Having a different outer and inner shape would result in varying thickness throughout the socket, could that be a potential issue? Even if you don’t laminate it and rapid manufacture it wouldn’t that varying wall thickness still be an issue as far as balance goes?
Good catch, but most likely it would be 3D Printed. My initial idea is that the area between the two surfaces would be hollow and filled with an expanding foam of some sort. So there wouldn’t be any wall thickness variation. Finished off by a milled aluminum cap to function as a grace plate and allow hardware to bolt to the socket.
If for some reason 3D printed parts aren’t strong enough. They could be hand layed up individually and joined together.
Maybe a gas assist could work as well? Just throwing out ideas…
There could be see some great design opportunities with being able to fit different arm sizes. The socket would be a custom piece that is fit to arm, and the trellis structure could come in a variety of sizes (S,M,L). I think either folded/welded aluminium or cast aluminium would be be badass. Also I love the idea of using anodized or coated parts that when they wear show the raw aluminum beneath. I love that effect/look.
Also do you think this should only be limited to indoor use? I am not very familiar with the climbing market but I don’t see why this product shouldn’t work in both settings.
Keep it up!
Thats actually a really good idea. Could be fairly easy to mock up also. Just make a few different sockets to test it. Could also make on that would allow the critiquers to try on the prosthetic and give the final product a test.
I dont think it needs to be limited to indoor. I just focused on indoor with my research and prototyping, so I cant really talk about the outdoor specific aspects quite yet. Though from what I’ve heard there is not much difference and the climbing claw would actually be more effective outdoors, because you dont need to fear ruining or chipping the wall.
I know outdoor often times you’ll be lead climbing so you’ll clip into anchors on your way up the wall. Or if its a new route, you’ll be setting your own anchors. So that adds another level of complexity. So the fact that I havent really considered these aspects, pushes me away from the outdoor aspect of it. But otherwise the climbing part should be the same.
Heres a version thats a little bit more on the tech side. No “spiderweb” rear frame. Just a simple trellis structure. Front doesn’t have a pattern. (although I’ll still play around with it) Probably a lightweight alloy of some sort. Which would allow you to take some hits on the fornt surface. Incase you slam into a wall, drop it, have something fall towards you. You can always use the prosthetic as a shield.
No internal pipe anymore. Figured the prosthetic shells could act as the structure. Also would allow you the opportunity to keep small items inside the prosthetic. Maybe a chalk stone, carabiners, anchors? Not sure how practical it would be when climbing, but might be more practical during transportation. As it could function as a place to hold your extra climbing claws.
Also a little nameplate on the socket. Suppose to slightly tie in the trellis structure and the faceted form together a bit.
Just another update. Getting close to finalizing the concept.
Looking good.
My only comment would be more nakedness! It feels a little half and half right now. Open windows to make it more dynamic. I love the idea of fearings taking hits but make them as minimal as possible. The Trellis should be the sexiness and the first thing to catch your eye, the fearing the second.
Also, not to throw a wrench in your gears but I really liked your old tool intersection. Like the shaft with the collet holding it at the top. Maybe not running all the way down, but I really liked the design language you had going there.
Yeah, I was originally drawn towards that style pipe and collet. However, the top piece needs to rotate now. Theres a “clutch” assembly inside that top piece, similar to the FDM print above. So I couldn’t use that approach as cleanly as I would want. But it would be cool to be able to change the length of the arm at will. So you could have the opportunity to entend your reach. So might be an option there to explore a bit.
But I figured I’d get rid of the pipe and take it one step away from visual fearing into something that can stand on its own. Although I did like the idea of stripping off the fearing and having an option to go extremely light weight. I was told to stop riding the fence with the modularity aspect and really define what the direction for the prosthetic is. But I was always drawn towards the pipe based structure. Hence the early explorations. But there seems to be a lot of people who liked that side and I might just go back towards that direction.
Unfortunately, final crit is coming up fairly quickly so i need to have most parts finalized and ready for prototyping really soon. So radical changes aren’t going to be possible. But I can still tweak a few things.
Hey Eman-
Totally psyched about your project! it’s been really great watching it evolve from your initial problem statement to a sweet concept. I figured I’d offer some feedback, mainly on the aesthetics, so you can do with it what you want. I’ve been thinking for a week or so now on how to explain what i’m thinking, so hopefully this will make sense. or something. Also, I haven’t really read anyone else’s responses, so if this has been said before… whoops hahaha.
I think as the form stands right now, it still looks too uncontrolled. Maybe you deliberately picked the tessellated surfaces and their areas, or maybe they are more resultant, but I feel they can be toned down quite a bit. The polygonal surfaces are great for rocking out volume studies of where peaks in the form might want to lie, but as a design that will stand on it’s own, I don’t think they’re the final direction to take. Looking at the different views of this thing, it’s really obvious to me where this concept shines- at the intersection of the cage and surface. The curve that continues on that side view from the main surface to the cage really, really defines your project and gives it character. However, outside the the direct side view (which would rarely be seen in real life), that defining line is totally lost, especially in your latest concept with the X’d out boxes. These X’s, especially when combined with the polygons/tessellations, really hide the beauty of the design. I’m not quite sure what the final result would be, but I think you should play around with ways of smoothing out the main surface, bringing out the contrast between that smooth surface and the rugged roll cage, and figuring out how to make your character line run the whole form while making a statement (whether it’s a more aggressive form or a calmer form). In other words, you should try (if you have time or whatever) to make the form more cohesive in itself and with the concept (2 radically different surfaces intersecting). You can also think about some really subtle surface patterns (like maybe something that looks laser etched fading in and out across the surface.) with the key word being subtle. I don’t think the surface pattern should overpower the main form, but only add to it in a meaningful way.
I hope that makes sense, and I’m totally digging how your project is turning out! good luck with hell week and finishing everything!!!