The document discusses the needs and considerations of manufacturers and consumers regarding knife sharpeners. For manufacturers, key priorities are minimizing labor costs, understanding target markets, keeping production costs low, and designing for easy assembly. Environmental impact and recyclability are also important. For consumers, key priorities are effectiveness, low cost, value for money, easy maintenance and use, safety, compact storage, and being environmentally friendly. The document then analyzes design criteria like storage, ergonomics, materials, function, safety, and maintenance from a designer's perspective.

1. F522
Product Focus and Analysis
Images with this symbol , are videos. Hover over the video
and click the play button that appears to watch the video.

3. Manufacturer Needs
•Labour
The manufacturers, in regard to my design would want to include as
little manual labour as possible to keep costs down. This is achieved by
manufacturing the product using machinery as far as possible, which also
eliminates/minimizes the factor of human error and faults. My product was made
almost completely from the injection moulding process which would be manned by
someone, most likely an unskilled labourer. This would mean that they wouldn’t
need to be paid a lot, or at least not the same wage as a skilled worker, hence the
costs are at a minimum.
•Target Market
The manufacturer would need to research their market so that they could
then refine and focus their design to suit the consumer. By carrying out surveys and
getting to know the specifications of their consumer, they are able to understand
and include the specific requirements that would make their product more appealing
to this definitive market. In my case, the manufacturers have found that not only is
knife sharpener used in the home, but it’s also needed on activities such as hunting
and camping - in which case being lightweight is essential, as well as being made
of materials that are weather resistant.
•Cost of Production
The manufacturer would need the cost of production to be as cost effective as
possible so that the product could be large scale batch produced. The direct costs
would involve the materials, so the thermoplastics that are melted in the injection
moulding process. Also the labour needed to man the machinery is included in this
cost. In addition the amount of money needed to run the injection moulding
machine is substantial and so the manufacturer’s would need to produce more units
to compensate
•Assembly
The manufacturer would need to understand that the product is primarily one
injection moulded piece, and the only other separate part of the product is attached
using 3 Philips head screws. This could be done at home by the consumer, which
would save the manufacturers a little money . However, the product had already
been assembled and packaged ready for purchase, which might’ve encouraged
people to buy it, as it is easy and primed for use.
•Environmental Issues
The plastics used in the injection moulding process are thermoplastics, and so
rather than the products being thrown away or burnt when no longer useable, they
are able to be melted again and remoulded when they reach the end of their use.
This decreases the potential output of greenhouse gases that are associated with
burning plastics. This would also benefit the company as this could be an asset
when marketing their product to consumers – they’re more likely to buy if they think
they’re making a conscious effort to help the environment.
Consumer Needs
•What it offers the consumer
The consumer would expect the product to successfully sharpen utensils, either a knife or
a pair of scissors. It should be comfortable and easy to hold, in such a way that it doesn’t
create risk of injury to the user. It should also be quite durable, and resist scratches or
wear, as not only does this decrease the aesthetics of the product, but it also weakens it
after repetitive attrition.
•Cost
The consumer expects the product to be inexpensive, as there are a lot of utensils
required in the kitchen – if they were all highly priced it would amount to too much for the
average consumer. It should be priced in a way that is not so cheap that the consumer
thinks they’re not receiving quality, but so that it is affordable.
•Value for Money
The consumer expects the product to have a reasonably long life-span, as it is not
expected to be used very often. This means that buying frequent replacements is not on
the consumers agenda or something that they factor in financially. The product also needs
to be effective and do what it says it will, without much difficulty on the users part.
•Maintenance
The consumer expects the product to be able to be cleaned easily, so being dishwasher safe would
be an advantage and make a consumer more likely to buy the product. As the product is made up
of more than one part, it should be easy for the consumer to re-attach or tighten the screws that
hold the product together.
•Ease of Use/Ergonomic Comfort
The consumer expects the product to be comfortable to hold so that it is easy to use and
therefore is more efficient.
•Instructions/Safety
The consumer expects the instructions to be as clear as possible and give sure direction
as to how to hold both the product and utensil, perhaps in the form of pictures as well as
words. This is especially important as holding the utensil incorrectly could result in a hand
slipping and the user injuring themselves.
•Storage
As the product is not needed often enough to be left out in sight the consumer expects it to be
compact enough to be stored away and take up little space in a drawer, or cupboard. It should
perhaps come with a protection so that the blades for sharpening are not dulled by being knocked
repeatedly against items it is stored with.
•Product Afterlife
The consumer expects the product to be able to be recycled, as this would be an incentive to buy
the product. Knowing that the product would not add to greenhouse gases by being burnt or stored
on landfills would encourage the consumer to purchase it.

4. Key Criteria
Storage
The designer would have decided to make this
product quite small and compact so that it is easy to
store away when not in use (which would most
likely be often).
Ergonomics
The designer would have designed the product to
be as ergonomic as possible, especially as it is a
handheld product that needs to be gripped firmly.
This would explain the contours on the handle that
increase the stability of the consumers hold on the
product and also the raised lip that provides a
comfortable rest for the thumb
Materials
The designers would have arranged the product so
that it was made out of the same material as far as
possible – in this case polypropylene, which can be
melted and remoulded into a new product making it
more eco-friendly than most plastic products.
The other materials chosen for example, the metal
for the blades would’ve been chosen for their ability
to keep a sharp edge, their durability and resistance
to wear.
Function
The designers would have wanted the product to
function effectively; so it would sharpen the utensils
successfully without any cause for complaint on the
consumers part
Competition/Price
The consumers would’ve designed the product so that it
could be cost effective and affordable for the majority of
the market – increasing sales and making sure they offer
value for money where competitors cannot.
Weight
The designers would have formed the product so that it
is lightweight, as this would enable it to be handheld and
increase its outreach. This can be seen by the fact that
the product is used not just in the kitchen, but also on
enterprises such as hunting and fishing
Maintenance
The designers would have had the idea that for the
product to be marketable to the majority of people, it
would need to have easy maintenance. This would
explain the reason why it is dishwasher safe and also
why the product is primarily one piece of plastic – there
is only one other detachable part and this is held in place
by three Philips head screws which can easily be
tightened or re-screwed if necessary by the consumer.
Safety
The designer would have designed the product so that
whatever you were sharpening would be facing away
from you to minimize the chance of accidents
In this section I will analyse my product with a designers intentions in mind to
determine why they might’ve made the choices they did when designing the product.
In conclusion, after considering the above categories it is clear that the designer primarily wanted the
product to sharpen knives and scissors in the most effective way and then secondly to be lightweight
to increase portability and the range of situations it could be used in. They have done this at the
expense of utmost safety and also aesthetics, both of which I aim to improve in my design.

5. Strengths and Weaknesses Comparison – Primary Research
Introduction: This section discusses my comparisons between my knife sharpener and those developed by other
companies. By doing this I aim to find points from other products that I can apply to my design, and also to find
weaknesses and mistakes that I can avoid including.
Ergonomics
•The product has a definite handle for the
consumer to grip it firmly. It also has contours
that theoretically make the grip of the users
hand on the product more natural and much
more comfortable to hold
•The contours have not been created with the
use of anthropometrics, so the spacing is
unrealistic and therefore useless
•The shape of the handle means that it cuts
into the hand of the user, and isn’t comfortable
at all.
Functions
•The product allows the consumer to sharpen
the blades of both knives and scissors to
improve their efficiency in both the kitchen
and other outdoor uses
•The product doesn’t have any way of
collecting the filings from the sharpened
utensils.
Aesthetics
•The product doesn’t look particularly striking,
and the materials used give it a very cut-
price appearance and feel
Key
•Positives
•Negatives
•Comparison
•Elements to carry forward
Cost
•The product is very competitively priced so it
is affordable for the majority of people
•The product is priced this low because of the
materials used. For more high-end materials
to be used to increase the aesthetics, the
price of the product would have to be
increased to make it cost effective
Materials
•The polypropylene is suitable for this product,
as it is weather resistant, meaning it can be
used outdoors, and also very hard, so it is
durable enough to be used in the home and
elsewhere.
•The material can be melted and remoulded
so it helps the environment instead of being
burnt
•The material can be found in many different
colours which would be an advantage when
selling and improving aesthetics
Similar Products - Steel Rod
Function
The product sharpens the
blade of a knife using a sliding
motion instead of being
sharpened between two
blades.
Materials
The product is made almost
completely from steel, save the
handle which is just a plastic
covering. The steel is a good
choice of material as it is
resistant to wear. The plastic is
easily moulded and so this
allows for more freedom when
coming up with an ergonomic
design.
Ergonomics
•The product’s handle
has a curved shape
which is comfortable to
hold.
•It also incorporates
indentations which
increase the grip on the
handle.
Cost
•The product is more
expensive than the maxam
sharpener, and this may be
because there is a higher
quantity of coveted metal e.g.
steel. The price ranges from
around under £10.00 to near
£100.00, and this is because of
the range of finishes on the
steel and different processes
undergone to achieve the
hardest metal.
Aesthetics
•The product is familiarly used
by professional chefs and so it
has that appeal and implication
that by using it, you achieve a
better edge with your knife and
therefore better quality food.
The simplicity of the design
would mean that it would not
look out of place in a modern
day kitchen.
A video in which the advantages and disadvantages of the
products in fig 5. and fig 6. are discussed
Fig5.
Fig6.

6. Chantry Knife Sharpener
tew-550w
Function
The product sharpens knives
only without a handheld facility.
It needs to placed on a table for
stability, whereby the knife is
then sharpened on the criss-
crossed steel rods using a
sliding motion.
Cost
The product is also significantly
more expensive than the Maxam
knife sharpener, as the one I found
from Legend Cookshops was
£24.99 and this was the general
price range. This again was based
on the fact that the product was
made primarily from steel, and the
design involved in the sharpening
mechanism is a lot more intricate.
Ergonomics
The handheld section of the product is
made of a mouldable plastic and this has
been implemented so that indentations can
be included, improving the grip and stability
of the handle. The jutting lip that surround s
the handle stops the hand from slipping
onto the sharpening rod, which has an
abrasive texture and could injure the user.
Ergonomics
The product provides a lip with a severe
indentation for the hand to grip as a handle. The
fact that it is made from steel means that it can
withstand any high amount of pressure that the
user may apply. The way the indentation has
been formed means that it is irrelevant whether
you are right or left-handed – both can use the
product with ease. The angle of the blades is
pre-set so it can be used straight away.
Maintenance
The product is easily wiped down, so it
can be kept clean relatively often. In the
video I remove the inner mechanism
(fig.2) and point out how it functions, and
although this was useful it could be seen
as a design flaw, as the screws were
easily loosened as opposed to the
Maxam which is very secure and also
uses screws, meaning the heavy
mechanism could drop out at any time.
However, if this were to happen and the
apparatus were to break on impact,
there are replacement s available, so it
could be fixed quickly.
Materials
The product is made entirely from steel
and the housing is coated with a gloss
finish. This means that the product is
quite heavy which would be dangerous
for small children and adults alike if it
were to fall. Steel is a very popular
material due to its hardness and
resistance to wear. It’s also quite
expensive due to the method of
sourcing. As a result the overall cost of
the product is increased. The blades for
sharpening inside the product are made
from butchers steel. This means that the
blades are coated in either ceramic or
diamond which sharpen the blades and
have longitudinal ridges.
Aesthetics
The product is not striking
visually, although the simplicity
and effectiveness has meant that
it is on permanent display at the
New York Museum of Modern
Arts. The mechanism is hidden by
the steel housing and the coating
on this steel can come in a variety
of colours. (fig 3.)
Fig. 7 Fig.8
Fig 9.
Transport
The product is made originally in Sheffield so the
cost of transporting the product is included in the
final pricing, and this can vary depending on
where the product needs to be shipped to. The
company ships worldwide, like just like Maxam
but because of the materials used and also
perhaps the size of the product, the Chantry is
more expensive with shipping costing as much
as £25.00
Electric Buffalo Knife Sharpener
Function
The product sharpens knives
using different textures
(coarse, fine) using an electric
sharpening mechanism,
meaning you need only slide
the knife through the
designated slots to achieve a
sharpened edge. It also
doesn’t have handheld facility
and has to be placed on a
stable worktop for use.
Aesthetics
The product looks quite boxy and
unattractive in shape, although the finish
on the plastic housing is quite neutral
meaning it would go well in most modern
households.
Fig.10
Storage
Because of the shape and size of the
product, it would be quite hard to store
away as it’s not very compact
Fig. 11
Comparison
I think that the steel rods are better than the
Maxam, as the ergonomics make it much
more comfortable to use. The fact that there
aren’t designated finger holds actually
works to it’s advantage as it means that the
consumer can hold the product however
they feel more comfortable. However, this
does limit the amount of grip available. The
lack of structure in the product on the other
hand means that the method of sharpening
is unclear and requires a certain amount of
skill on the consumers part, as without it the
product would be used incorrectly
decreasing it’s efficiency.
Comparison
I believe that the Chantry is better than the
Maxam, because the method of
sharpening is a lot easier and more
comfortable. Although the Maxam is
predominately handheld, there is the
option of using it on a flat surface but this
presents safety issues which aren’t
present with the Chantry. With this
sharpener, the knife faces away from you
completely contrary to the Maxam where
the knife is placed in such a way where an
injury is likely.

7. Similar products – Secondary Research
Materials
The product’s different components comprise of diamond
abrasive wheels, polypropylene and rubber. The product
is marketed as being 100% diamond abrasive meaning
that instead of being attached to an average steel
grinding wheel with a mixture of other abrasive grains, it
uses real diamonds exclusively. This is an advantage as
it means that the wheels will be effective for a very long
time as diamonds are very resistant to wear. Steel is a
popular material but also quite expensive. Polypropylene
is an appropriate material as it has a high melting point,
so when the product is worked quite hard, the resulting
heat will not damage the housing. It is very lightweight so
it doesn’t add any extra weight to the already heavy
interior, and it is unlikely to shatter if dropped. The rubber
is used for the suction pads on the base of the product
and these are effective as they don’t damage the work
surface and provide a lot of grip and stability.
Maintenance/Hygiene
Due to the fact the product is electric it is not possible for it to
be dishwasher safe, however the materials used make it easy
to be wiped down. The filings that accumulate during
sharpening are caught by the magnetic function on the product.
This magnet can be removed and washed making it a very
hygienic product.
In case of the instance that the sharpening wheels become
dulled or faulty, it is possible to buy replacement wheel
Ergonomics
The product does not have any designated places to
hold it, as you are not expected to need to. It has non-
slip rubber grips on the base so that it is secure enough
to simply run the knife through. The base of the machine
is very wide so there is no chance of it wobbling or
tipping over while in use. The angle of the slots for the
knife are pre-set to the optimum angle so it’s ready for
use immediately.
A video where the advantages and disadvantages of the products
in Fig. 5, Fig.7 & Fig.11 are discussed
Cost
The product is much more expensive than the other sharpeners
I have researched, and some of the main reasons for this are
because it’s electric, the materials used and the processes
needed to attain these materials. From Eurowire Containers,
the sharpener was £42.50, £55.00 form Amazon and £41.86
from ebay.
Ergonomics
The product is a small cylindrical shape and doesn’t include any
facility to allow handheld grip e.g. contours, indentations etc. The
user is expected to perhaps support themselves, if necessary, on
a surrounding work surface. This improves the safety of the
product as it means hands are out of range when sharpening the
knives. The product includes a mechanism which secures the
entire base of the product to any surface, like a suction pad.
Function
The Anysharp knife
sharpener is a manual
knife sharpener that is
meant for table top use.
Aesthetics
The product looks very smart and the use of metal give it a
good quality appearance - neutral colours (e.g. black) mean
it would appeal to the majority of the market and not look out
of place in a modern day kitchen. The cylindrical shape
makes it look neat and compact.
Cost
The product isn’t quite inexpensive, however it isn’t a high-
end product price. In comparison to an electric sharpener it
is very affordable, but put next to other manual sharpeners,
it’s not as cost-effective. On Amazon it was £15.10, on ebay
it was £12.50 and from TheHut.com it was £15.99.
Storage
The product is very small (Fig. 14) and so would be easy to
store away when not in use.
Fig.13
Fig. 14
Materials
This product uses materials such as tungsten carbide,
polymer plastic and a type of metal that comes in
different colours. The tungsten carbide is suitable as it
keeps a sharp edge for a very long time. The polymer
cover used is a good decision as it protects the knife
from the metal edge. The use of metal means that if
excess pressure is applied, the entire structure won’t
warp or collapse like other plastics might do.
Maintenance/Hygiene
The product does not have any way of collecting the
filings when a knife is sharpened, or making sure that
they do not fly into food or onto a food prep surface.
Comparison
After research I think that the buffalo is better than the Maxam,
largely due to the fact that it has a feature that improves the hygiene
aspect of it. The magnet included in the design means that the filings
are collected and able to be cleaned, in comparison to the Maxam,
which lacks any way of making sure the metal excess is contained.
Another point which I think is better is the lack of indentations or
contours for the hand. This encourages the consumer not to hold
onto the sharpener which improves safety.
Finally I think the 3 stage sharpening feature is beneficial as it
makes the end result better quality than that of the Maxam.
Comparison
I think this sharpener is better than the Maxam, in
regards to aesthetics, safety and materials. The
materials used are stronger and more durable, plus
they give the product a look and feel of quality
rather than the uncostly plastic of the Maxam. The
suction feature that fastens the product to ‘any’
surface means that the consumer doesn’t need to
support the product and so their free hand is kept
out of the way – a safety feature which the Maxam
lacks. The method of sharpening increases this
safety, as rather than the blade of the knife being
pointed towards the user, the Anysharp works by
pointing the blade away.

8. Lakelands Compact Knife Sharpener
Ergonomics
The handle is covered in a soft rubber grip which is
comfortable to hold, plus it is shaped with indentations
which improve the design. It also includes a non slip
base so it is stable when sharpening on a flat surface
which improves the safety, as it would be un safe if it
wobbled a lot.
Function
The product sharpens knives using different textures
to achieve a sharp edge which will improve it’s
performance in the kitchen when slicing food.
Aesthetics
The product looks very sleek and compact down to
the curved shape; rather than being boxy and clunky.
The different textures for sharpening are clearly
labelled in eye-catching colours so as to avoid misuse
Maintenance/Hygiene
The product has no facility in which it can collect the
filings from the knife being sharpened and so they are
free to contaminate a food prep surface. Due to the
materials used, it is easy to wipe down to maintain
cleanliness.
Cost
The Lakelands compact knife sharpener is relatively
inexpensive at £9.99 in comparison to my knife
sharpener which is in the ‘compact’ category which
was priced at £4.99
Storage
Because of its smart, solid design, the product can be
tidied away easily in small spaces such as a drawer or
inside a container.
Materials
The product uses most likely tungsten carbide to
sharpen blades in a polymer housing – probably
polyethene. This material means that the product is
lightweight and not at all cumbersome. It also means
there’s not much chance of the product damaging a
surface or breaking if it’s dropped, as the plastic is
known for it’s high strength and rigidity.
Related products-Primary
Research
These products have features in them that
I may be able to incorporate in the design
of my product
Handles
The contours that are
used on the handle of
this product could be
useful for my design
as they increase grip
and make the product
more comfortable to
hold. On the other
hand, in that section a
different material could
be used as the plastic
is quite slippery.
This product has
indentations which
theoretically should
increase the grip –
however, as they are
made of the same
material as the rest of the
product they don’t really
benefit the design and the
entire handheld section is
quite slippery. If they were
made of rubber or any
other material with grip,
then this idea would be
effective
This product
doesn’t involve any
materials that
include grip or
comfort, however
the shape of the
handle is quite
effective in that it
fits the natural
contours of the
hand so that it is
comfortable to
hold.
This product
incorporates a
material and surface
texture that
increases grip. The
shape of the handle
feels very natural to
hold although the
size of the handle is
a little awkward –
although this may be
due to the nature of
the product and not
really a design flaw
Comparison
I think that the Lakelands is better than the Maxam,
because it has more stability when sharpening on a flat
surface. The indentations are effective at making the
product more comfortable to hold, and the rubber grip is
important in improving the products safety. The size of
the product is smaller than the Maxam however, which
means the users hands are in close proximity of the
knife which is not as good as the Maxam. As regards
hygiene, neither product has a collection feature for the
metal shavings.

9. This product is also
very good in the
fact that the curves
of the handle fit the
natural hold of the
hand (e.g. where
the thumb rests)
so it improves
comfort when it is
held. In addition it
also incorporates a
rubber like material
that improves grip
Conclusion
I have found many different elements to include in my final design, as well as some negatives that I will
definitely be avoiding.
The handle has
jutting lips either
end of it which
means that the
hand fits snugly in
between. However
it has no contours
or indentations so
the user is
essentially holding
a stick. However
they have made
use of different
materials that add
grip.
Base Grips
This spoon rest has
instead of isolated
spots of rubber, a
completely covered
base which uses
up more material,
but also increases
the protection the
surface has against
it. In addition it
improves the
stability.
The scales in the
image use separate
circles of rubber
aligned in a uniform
arrangement so that
they provide the
minimum protection
against the product
and the work
surface. In
comparison, it uses
less rubber material
than the spoon rest,
however these
rubber circles are
more likely to fall off.
Unlike the spoon rest or
scales, the electric
sharpener doesn’t use
circles of rubber, rather
it uses rubber suction
pads – these are more
effective at keeping the
product stable and free
from slipping than the
scales. It doesn’t matter
whether the surface is
wet or not as they work
well regardless. They
elevate the product
significantly from the
work surface, although
these are also prone to
falling off.
Positives to carry forward
•I will be using a rubber like material for the handle of my design as I have seen how it improves the grip
when holding it, which minimizes the risk of injury.
•When designing the shape of my handle, I will incorporate indentations, contours or any anthropometric
shape which will make the product more ergonomic as opposed to the current design
•I will be designing my product to be used on a work surface or handheld, as I have seen how the product is
make less efficient by trying to allow both to be possible. I will probably go with the work surface option as
this allows for more stability and so increases the safety of it.
•I will definitely incorporate a magnetic feature to collect the metal shavings so that they are easily cleaned,
as this would greatly improve the hygiene of the product and I know that this is vital in an environment
where food is prepared.
•I will include a grip system for the base of my design as this increases stability and also helps to protect the
work surface from scratching.
Negatives to dismiss
•I will not be designing the product to be handheld as this presents too many problems that compromise
safety, and comfort.
•I will not be using one material to manufacture the entire product as different materials suit different needs
and solve different issues which cannot be done by one material.

10. Moral Implications
This section aims to highlight the various implications involved with my product and the different responsibilities surrounding
it.
My product uses various materials in its components
which are effective together, although their methods of
sourcing are not ideal. The sharpener is mainly
polypropylene, the blades are made of tungsten carbide,
and the screws are most likely out of steel.
•Polypropylene
The process of manufacturing polypropylene begins
initially with the sourcing of oil, as all plastics are
fundamentally oil based. Oil is drilled from different parts
of the world and this process is not only incredibly
expensive, but also damaging to the environment.
Oil is a non-renewable natural resource and the rate of
extraction far out paces the rate of production – for every
barrel found, the world consumes three. It is most
abundant in the Middle East although some of the biggest
oil drilling companies such as Saudi Aramco , Gazprom,
ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell are based in the US,
the Netherlands and Russia. The process of drilling oil is
long, expensive and there are many aspects which
damage the environment. The land must be leveled,
cleared and then access roads must be built. Water wells
must be drilled if there is no natural source near by and
also depending on the locality of the drill site, trucks.
Helicopters or barges are necessary to bring in
equipment. All these culminate to make oil drilling an
environmentally damaging process which risks the
welfare of wildlife in the area and. I have included a
picture below of what such a land drilling site looks like
after being exploited for oil. In regards to my product, the
main body (or handle) is manufactured from
prolypropylene.
Environmental Implications Polypropylene is not bio-degradable, however, it is
possible that it can be recycled and melted down to form
new products. This is contrary to other commercial
plastics that are left to be burnt on landfills and release
greenhouse gases. My product is assembled quite
simply, so it is possible to separate the necessary parts
to reuse them.
• Tungsten
The material tungsten is sourced from the mineral ores
scheelite and wolframite. The ore must be extracted from
these materials, then processed and separated into its
chemical form, ammonium paratungstate (ATP). Once
this has been done, it needs to be reacted with carbon at
temperatures above 1050°C to produce the tungsten
carbide metal.
Scheelie and Wolframite are both non-renewable ores,
and so their constant mining is rapidly depleting supplies.
In addition the materials are reached using open cut
mining technologies because these are the most cost
effective methods. These pits can be tens of miles wide
and thousands of feet deep, generally until the desired
material is completely exhausted. The pits are made big
so that the large machinery can access it – machinery
which is capable of killing wildlife and destroying habitats
even further. Also, the chemicals used to treat the
extracted ores can leak into the surrounding water and
soil, stopping any possible rehabilitation for the
environment. The picture below shows land before and
after it has been leveled in preparation for the pit to be
dug. Tungsten carbide is what the sharpeners on my
product are made from.
As regards to disposal, there are companies who offer to
buy unwanted tungsten carbide and recycle them and
these methods often include using chemical reactions to
isolate the tungsten; there are still some methods which
involve high temperatures and which are very expensive.
•Steel
Steel is an alloy of iron and carbon both of which are non
renewable and also need to be mined. To remove the iron
form the ore, it must be reacted using smelting, which
needs extremely high temperatures to occur. This requires
the further burning of fossil fuels which releases
greenhouse gases and damages the ozone layer. In
relation to my product, steel is what the three Philips head
screws are made from. Steel is widely recycled and
reused which saves energy that would’ve otherwise been
used in burning the material on landfill sites.
•Environmental Ethical Debate
The materials used to manufacture the knife sharpener are
all relatively damaging to the environment in regards to
their sourcing and the processing necessary for them to be
useful in manufacturing. Many parts of the entire process
require the burning of fossil fuels which are not only limited
resources, but harmful to the ozone layer. Although I
couldn’t find a lot of necessary information, I know that the
product is manufactured in China, and that the materials
used are all found/manufactured in other parts of the
world, so the effect of transport could be factored in as it
would be substantial in regards to the company’s carbon
footprint. The effect that the sourcing of these materials
has on the landscape is horrendous especially as in most
cases, it will never recover.
There are alternatives to mining metals, but alternatives to
metal-ores and polypropylene altogether should be found,
as they use limited resources and damage the
environment. Ideas like bio-plastics,

11. Social Implications
•Safety
In the case of my product, there is no warning anywhere
on the product , packaging or instructions that warns
against children playing with it, or an age range of who
should be handling it. This presents a real safety issue
as a symbol or written warning could act as a reminder
to adults buying the product, so that they remember to
keep the product out of children’s reach. As it stands, the
threat of injury is not highlighted and so consumers may
be lax about leaving it lying around.
In addition, the instructions for using the product do not
represent a particularly safe way of using the product. In
practice, the method of sharpening knives and scissors
especially carries the risk of stabbing yourself or slicing
your hand. To avoid doing this, users are forced to find
their own way of using the product which defeats the
point of the instructions and means that they definitely
need revising.
•Low Wage and Working Conditions
In the case of must products that are manufactured on a
large scale and sold for low prices, it is down to the
mistreatment of the labourers. This mistreatment can
count as being paid below minimum wage (living wage),
being worked long hours in poor conditions. Because in
most less economically developed countries (LEDC), the
laws on working conditions are not as thorough as those
in more economically developed countries (MEDC),
companies take advantage of this and choose to
manufacture their products there, as then they can keep
their costs as low as possible, and therefore keep their
final pricing down to entice consumers,
This comes at the expense of those working in the
factories, as due to the meagre wages, labourers lead a
life of poor quality, often living in slums and finding it hard
to buy food and basic necessities. However, they often
feel forced into working for these big companies, as they
dominate the area; crushing local indigenous livelihoods;
and monopolise business by offering thousands of jobs
where there are none.
In the pursuit of keeping expenses at a minimum,
businesses sometimes cut corners in vital areas, resulting
in the compromised safety of their workers. My product
was manufactured in China which is incidentally the
leader in corrupt labour.
Those who work in Chinese sweatshops are often
migrants from the countryside, and because of laws
passed in the 1970s, these people are treated as sub-
citizens without access to pensions, healthcare rights and
housing; so when they move to the city to find work they
are forced into working for these companies for appalling
wages and for very long hours – in some cases 7 days a
week with an hour long lunch break.
In the case of my product, labourers are required to
operate very large machinery, and providing they do
actually have to work long hours, there is a high chance
that they could become drowsy and get seriously injured.
•Effects of Mining
Some of the materials in my product need to be mined to
be reached, and this seriously damages the surrounding
areas.
Apart from the fact that the environment looks ugly after
the resources have been obtained, it is often irreversibly
damaged. The mining strips the land of greenery, wildlife
and it’s natural resources – features that indigenous
people likely rely on. The chemicals used to treat the
materials gained from mining can leak into the soil and
water, which would have a severe impact on their lives.
Without drinking water or fertile land, they wouldn’t be
able to continue sustaining themselves and living in that
area – leading to them being forced to move on, from their
own homeland.
•Social Ethical Debate
There are many issues after researching the
different processes that go into manufacturing this
product. The safety issue can be resolved fairly
easily, by simply printing clearly, anywhere on the
packaging a warning regarding children tampering
with it. Printing comprehensive instructions that are
actually effective would also be beneficial and solve
that problem.
Regarding low wages and working conditions, it is
common knowledge that this exploitation occurs,
however it would appear that many value cheap
products over the lives of those making them.
Companies still do next to nothing about the
working conditions, often actively seeking out these
organisations so that they can get their products
manufactured at the lowest price possible. Some
people are not aware the extent of the damage is,
and have misconceptions such as the workers are
willing or they are paid minimum wage. This is
untrue, as these people are effectively forced into
these jobs out of lack of options, and the average
monthly salary for a woman including overtime is
CNY 1,690 (£150).
In China, there is work being done to improve the
working conditions of these people, but
manufacturers could show responsibility by
shunning these factories and opting for legitimate
organisations that abide by the laws that protect
people from injustice – maybe even supporting
local trade in their own country.
Young women migrant workers in a rubber
factory

12. Economic Implications
• Employment
Depending on the country, manufacturers
have an obligation to pay a certain
amount of money for their labour –
this is not always the case, and so
manufacturers can ire a large volume
of people and pay them relatively little
so they can mass-produce.
• Obtaining raw materials
In the case where manufacturers source
the raw materials themselves, they
would need to factor in the cost of
machinery and labour and transport
which would all add up, plus the cost
of using the materials to manufacture
the final product. However, in the
more likely case that the
manufacturers purchase the already
extracted materials from separate
businesses, they would need to find
the business that sold the right
amount for the best price to them
• Manufacturing the product
The cost of labour, materials, processes
(e.g. injection moulding) and transport
would be considered during
manufacture
• Value for money
The factors mentioned above would play a
part in this section, as manufacturers
want to make a profit; the costs
involved would need to be off-set by
the final price, but not so much that
the consumer believes they are being
ripped off.
• Transportation
The majority/ all of the materials necessary
for the production are found overseas,
and so this is detrimental to the
environment and also increases costs
(importation)
After research I think that
more of the product could be
recycled if people were made
more aware that these
materials could be recycled,
like steel and plastic
The improvement I make to
the design will definitely
make the product more
ergonomic
The overall cost would naturally
increase as labourers would have fair
wages and manufacturers would need
to spend more money to pay for the
more environmentally friendly
alternatives in the manufacturing
The sustainability would increase
as alternative materials could be
found that aren’t non-renewable,
and the manufacturing methods
could be improved so that the
burning of fossil fuels could be
decreased
My new design will have a different
structure which should improve the
strength but I will use similar if not
exactly the same materials so the
durability should stay the same
Ideally, manufacturers would situate their buildings as
close to their resources as possible so that the necessary
transportation distance would be as small as possible.
This is not including the transportation of the finished
goods overseas in exportation
Manufacturers could include
some clear-cut instructions in
terms of use, and a child age
warning that was appropriate to
make the product safer. My new
design of the product will address
the issue of safety in regards to
ergonomics as well.
The present methods of
manufacturing are effective but
damaging to the environment.
Seeking out alternatives that aren’t
as detrimental would improve this
part of the process
Eco-Web
This shows the improvements that
applying my research regarding all
the implications would have on the
life-cycle of this product
Economic Debate
There are many costs involved with manufacturing the product from right at the start when the raw materials are
sourced, to the very end when the final product is packaged and exported. The manufacturers need to find a balance
that is tipped slightly more in their favour so that they can make a profit – this is hard to do with raw materials
increasing in price as they decrease in amount. This would explain the attraction of cheap labour, as it is one cost that
can be kept exceptionally low. However it is morally wrong and it is horrible that these labourers feel they have no
other option than to resort to these businesses. If those with power paid fair wages and worked harder to find
alternative materials, the worlds resources would not be depleting so rapidly and the prices wouldn’t rise so high and
so fast. Of course this would inevitably increase the cost of the entire process and ultimately mean that the consumer
must pay more but I feel this is a necessary sacrifice if people want to be assured that their products haven’t been
made at the expense of someone’s life/quality of life.

13. Specifications
Key: Function; Food Hygiene; Safety; Ergonomics; Materials; Storage; Aesthetics; Comfort; Technical Details; Justifications
Design Brief
I chose a knife sharpener as my project, as the one I have access to has plenty of design flaws that I believe I can improve. The function of a knife sharpener is to sharpen the blades of
utensils be it scissors or knives, so that they are more efficient/effective while in use.
After choosing a product that I use quite often, I have analysed it, noting all the weaknesses and thinking of ways to improve it. To do this, I have done primary and secondary research of
similar products so that I can do direct comparisons and pick out positives and negatives in relation to my own product. In addition, I have looked at related products to find inspiration for
other parts of my new design, such as the handle, and the grips for the base of the product. These have helped me find ideas to carry forward and also points to avoid so that I don’t make
the same mistakes.
I plan on improving certain aspects of my product as mentioned above, such as the handle as it isn’t ergonomically shaped, stability and safety of the design These are only a few of the
weaknesses I hope to remove – I have included the rest below as a reminder.
Function
F1: The product must sharpen utensils effectively so that they are more efficient during use e.g. knives slicing food
Food Hygiene
FH1: The product must have a way of collecting the metal shavings from the sharpened product so that they don’t contaminate possible food
prep surfaces
FH2; The product must be able to be cleaned easily so that a build-up of dirt doesn’t make it less efficient or present a risk of illness if food
preparation items are used on it
Safety:
S1: The product must have instructions on how it should be used so that there isn’t a risk of someone using it incorrectly and becoming injured
S2: The product must be packaged in such a way that the blades are covered so that the exposed blades do not cause injury
S3: The product should have an age range clearly printed on it so that consumers are reminded to keep it out of reach
Ergonomics
E1: The product must be comfortable to hold so that the consumer has a reasonable amount of grip and so can avoid cutting themselves
Materials
M1 The materials must be durable and strong so that they can withstand wear and tear which is desirable in household items
Storage:
The product must be compact so that it can packed away in small spaces, as it isn’t an item that must be in full view all the time
Aesthetics:
A1: The product must use colours that contrast when marking instructions directly onto the product, so that they can be seen clearly and the
product won’t be used incorrectly
A2: The colours used shouldn’t be too bright, mainly neutral, so that they will fit in the majority of kitchens
Comfort:
C1: The product should use more than one material when being manufactured, for instance rubber could be used on the handle to provide
definite grip
C2: The product should make use of indentations and contours so that it fits the natural curve of the hand
Technical Details:
TD1: The product shouldn’t be too heavy otherwise it will cause injury if dropped
TD2: The product must fit the 95th percentile of people regarding size, otherwise it will be uncomfortable to hold for the majority of people and
make the product less effective and present more hazards
TD3: The product must be easily disassembled so that the respective parts can be recycled
Weaknesses (Reminder)

14. Development of Improvements
Key
•I will show the progression in my
sketches and models and each new
improvement will be labeled: 1, 1.1,
1.2 etc.
•I will also show which design ideas
are viable and that I would consider
carrying forward using the following
symbols
This section will look at my different concepts (preliminary ideas) and how they can be improved into viable design ideas. I will show
this via sketches, 2D and 3D models and interactive dialogue.
Initial Ideas
These are some of my initial sketches, that I may consider putting forward and
developing further.
Initial Ideas (continued)
Key: Function; Food
Hygiene; Safety;
Ergonomics;
Materials; Storage;
Aesthetics;
Comfort; Technical
Details;
Justifications
Contours for the finger to rest/grip
Indentation for thumb rest
Bumps/pitted surface to add texture
and grip
Rubber (other soft material?)
to guard against sharp edges
Wider base for
stability
Removable part for washing(?)
Clear label for different
utensils e.g. different
material, colour, extrusion

15. Further exploration of initial ideas
Removable section for
hygiene
Thumb indent for better
grip
Indentation for thumb
Finger holds for grip and
stability
Thumb indent
Hand would be too
close to knife when
sharpening
Product could tip if too
much force is applied
Wide, sturdy base increases stability
Shape doesn’t lend
itself to storing away
neatly

16. Weakness 1 & 2 – Handle and sharpening Key: Function; Food Hygiene; Safety; Ergonomics; Materials; Storage; Aesthetics; Comfort;
Technical Details; Justifications
With this idea I moved straight onto the form
of contours, as through research I have
found this is one of the most comfortable
handle shapes.
In this card model, I found that the spacing
of the indents was not comfortable and the
number of them was unnecessary. In
addition, the amount of negative space
between the hand on the handle and the rest
of the model was too much, counting as a
waste. The handle I found to be too slim and
meant that my fingers were positioned
uncomfortably in my palm.
I made another model with a sturdier
handle and tried to give more
consideration to the spacing between
the contours and the number of them.
I also tried to make the negative
space smaller to reduce waste.
When I tried the model, the handle
was then too thick and felt unstable in
my hand. The contours were
improved a little, although they were
still too close together so my fingers
felt squashed.
Regarding this design idea, I wanted to use some of the different ideas I had found during my research to improve the
handle
1.0 1.1 1.2
This model gave me a better idea of
the real width of the idea, unlike the
card.
I found that the sharp edges were
uncomfortable and added extra width
which made my hand stretch over the
handle more although this size may
be more comfortable for someone
with bigger hands. The base was
stable which meant that it functioned
well as a table top sharpener, as the
user could grip the handle and place
weight onto the table securely.
In this model I sanded the edges to make
them curve round and more comfortable,
as it would mean that the hand could fit
more naturally around the handle. In the
previous model, I found that the way my
thumb rested was quite awk-
-ward and uncomfort-
-able, whereas with
the edges sanded it is
able to fall more
naturally round the
side.
1.3

17. 1.4
In this improvement I
incorporated the con-
-tours I had tried out in the card
model, but I tried to measure out the
width and spacing of the fingers so that
I didn’t get the same problem (see idea
1.0). The model fit well, especially with
the indent on the handle for the thumb,
which improved comfort and grip.
However, when the model was held by
someone else, they found the contours
were spaced too closely together, and
the handle was too small. This was
due to the width of the handle which
meant he folded his fingers over each
other; and also the radius of the
curvature, which forced his fingers into
an uncomfortable bended position.
This problem would come under technical details,
and I would solve it by calculating an average of
everyone’s hand size to make a more
comfortable fit for more people.
I found with this design that to get sufficient grip, the position of the
hand differed to when it was held aloft – this meant that when it was
actually in use on a flat surface, the indentations and contours were
not quite accurate. The hand naturally curved into a position I had
not allowed for when designing the contours, and so it was quite
uncomfortable when it was in realistic use.
In the picture it is demonstrated
how the wrist is forced into an
awkward position when the
contours are used, which when
held for a prolonged period of
time caused considerable
discomfort. The way the wrist
almost rests on the worktop is
clearly impractical, and I also
found that the strain on the
wrist was painful after a while.
With this model I also found
that although there were
improvements, the depth of
the product wasn’t as good as
previous models – it was less
stable as it was a slimmer
design.
In this model I wanted to show
the ideal hand position, where
the user is most comfortable.
Apparently this is very different
from my suggested contours, so
this is a point I will take further, to
test out the most natural feeling
handhold before accommodating
for it.
I noticed with this model however
that the thumb is a lot closer to
the sharpener than in the
previous model, and this
presents a safety issue as it is
now more likely that the
1.5
user will be cut if the knife(?) somehow manages to come out of the
sharpening feature.
In future models this will be something to consider and a solution could be to
design a sort of guard or protection for the users hand.

18. 2.0
This idea originated from
the concept of minimalism
and the point is that rather
than the handle and the
functioning part of the product being separate, maybe
they could be one and the same(?). The cylindrical
shape was easy enough to hold as my hand was able
to fit round it comfortably, however it offered no grip so
it was easy to accidentally drop it which would prove to
be a safety issue.
I then developed the model to improve the grip
on it – by including the indentations of my
fingers, there was more resistance and less
chance of the product slipping from my hand. It
also improved comfort as I didn’t have to grip
so hard; my fingers were able to rest in the
grooves.
However, this
obviously meant
that the product,
or at least the
indentations were
tailored to fit me,
and wouldn’t
necessarily
improve anything
for someone of a
different hand
size.
This was made
clear when it was
held by another classmate – because his
hands were bigger, he was not able to hold the
product comfortably while
trying to make use of the recess’ – he would
have to disregard them if he were to properly
grip the product.
2.1
2.2
This idea was created so that people could find the
grooves that suited their own hand size and so was
more comfortable. However the design was actually
less comfortable, as the contours that went all the way
round the product made it harder to hold firmly. In
theory, I would manufacture this product out of a stiffer
material, and this would surely create discomfort if the
contours were pressing into the users palm as they do
here (see fig.1).
In the same model, it is clear that the thumb is much
too close to where the sharpening feature would be
placed and potentially too close to the blade of the
knife. I would have to make the product taller/ bigger
so that there could be more space between the hand
and the sharpener. This would mean there would be
less chance of the blade slipping and cutting the hand
of the user.
Fig1.

19. With this idea, I wanted to use
the shape from this sketch, as
during my research with the
modelling I have found that the
most comfortable and effective
shape is one that allows the
hand/arm to be at a slight
angle to the sharpener, instead
of a severe straight on grip(?).
With this model this proved to
be true as the angle is more
natural to hold and
However, with this model, the edges were very sharp, and would
present a safety issue if a child were to get hold of it, let alone the fact
that there would be blades in it theoretically. In addition to being
somewhat dangerous, the edges are quite uncomfortable to grip as
they cut into the users palm. In addition, the sharp edges would
damage any work surface if it were dropped.
Disc-sanding the edges made the
product less of a danger and they
also didn’t affect the stability of the
product as I originally thought, as
the radius of the curvature wasn’t
as severe as I first intended.
However, due to the nature of the
material, the product was quite
slippy(?), and so even though it
was more comfortable to hold post-
sanding, it was still very hard to grip
it tightly enough so that it could be
safe.
unlike my other ideas, it fits the majority of
people. In addition, the way the hand is
positioned means that it is out of the way of the
utensil being sharpened, avoiding a potential
safety hazard.
Anti-Slip Mat/Rug Underlay
This material had an almost sticky
texture and was very effective at
providing grip. It was also quite soft and
so was pretty comfortable. However, due
to the fact that it had very wide holes it
appeared very hard to clean which would
be a key factor in a kitchen item.
Plasticine – Anti-Slip
Indentations
I created this texture using the underlay
(above) and pressed it into the plasticine.
The plasticine itself was quite easy to grip,
although it could still do with improvement
which this texture did. The groves were
deep enough to make a difference but not
so deep that they would become a hygiene
issue and trap dirt, bacteria etc. that would
be hard to clean
Plasticine – Sandpaper
Indentations
I created this texture by pressing the
grain of a sheet of sandpaper into
the plasticine. This did not improve
the grip of the plasticine at all, this
was perhaps because the indents
weren’t deep enough.
3.0
3.1
3.2 3.3
3.4
4.0
4.1
4.2

20. Video Development - In this video I discussed with my teacher the pros and cons of my recent models and what I could do to
develop them further and improve my final design
In the video the client comments on the last model being slightly
unstable and wobbly – however it is necessary to point out that the
product is not meant for use when the user is sat down, as this
contributes to the instability. Ordinarily and for safety, the product
would be used on a work surface with the consumer standing up
applying weight downwards, making it much more steady.
During the discussion there were many points made that I thought
were valid and would work to improve my final model. There were
also weaknesses that I myself noticed in the models that I hadn’t
taken note of before - although they weren’t mentioned in the video I
have included them in the pointers below.
• “Chunky”, and robust build makes it
feel sturdy
• Wide base area makes it much more
stable – user is able to gain more
purchase and use product safely
• Handle is too wide and so is
uncomfortable
• Finger indents add more grip
• Contours on one side limit use to
users of certain dexterity
• Smaller width means less stability –
would decrease safety
• The shape is much more conducive
to comfort – fits the natural shape
of the hand
• The base still needs to be wider
• The knife slots are too shallow –
this would restrict the types of
knives that could be used on it

21. I will include a grip system for the base of my design as this
increases stability and also helps to protect the work
surface from scratching.
The first material I tested as a potential base grip was felt.
Although it’s soft, non-scratchy texture was good at protecting the
work surface, it provided next to no grip and still slid around a lot.
In addition to this I found that the material picked up dirt while in
use, which would be not only unsightly but a hygiene problem if
the product is to be used in the kitchen
The next material I tried was the same anti-slip rug underlay I
used previously. Although for a different function, I found the
same issues – the large holes would trap dirt which would be
unhygienic and difficult to clean thoroughly. Despite this, the
material made a very good base as it gripped the table surface
well and prevented the model from slipping.
With the next attempt I tested the stability of rubber feet. These were quite large, almost
the same width as the base of the model, and so I only needed two. In addition to being
wide, they were also high, meaning that after I attached them to the base they gave the
product more height. However, because of the tapered design of the feet, this made the
model much more unstable and prone to wobbling. However this did keep the model of
the work surface which would hypothetically protect a kitchen worktop.
These were similar to the previous rubber feet, only smaller. However, there was still only room
for a couple of them on the base of the model – this coupled with the same tapered design and
smaller width made the model even more unstable as the feet reduced the points of contact on
the work surface
Lastly, I experimented with the grip of an elastic band. I used one with a larger thickness than
that in the picture, and applied the strips to the base using double sided tape. The end result
was the best overall. The natural friction of rubber made it perfect for providing grip, and as the
elastic band did not have much depth at all, it didn’t raise the model off the surface to the point
of instability. The parallel strips made sure there was enough grip throughout the base of the
model.

22. Weakness 2 & 3 Sharpening and
Hygiene
Key: Function; Food Hygiene; Safety; Ergonomics; Materials; Storage; Aesthetics; Comfort;
Technical Details; Justifications
The sharpening feature on my original product is unable to be removed and so any metal filings that haven’t fallen onto
surrounding surfaces are still stuck on the sharpener - left to build up over time and present a hygiene issue. Also this
could hinder the effectiveness of the sharpener if they are left to accumulate. By designing the feature to be removable, it
can easily be washed separately.
To do this, I researched mechanisms that would securely hold the feature in place while in use, but that could also easily
be removed when necessary:
The first mechanism I found was a simple sliding
drawer.
This was because I wanted to focus on ease of
movement this design was ideal as the drawer is
designed to slide in and out smoothly.
However, if I were to choose this idea, I would need to
adjust the resistance of the slide, as it would be
ineffective if the sharpening feature was too easy to
remove. This could be done by lining the slide with a
material that provides friction to hold the sharpening
feature in.
Regarding the safety of this
design, if too much force is
applied while using the
sharpener, it could cause the
feature to ‘flip’ out of it’s hold
making it dangerous as well
as ineffective.
By lining the slide with a
material that provides friction,
this could make it more
stable and safer.
As an improvement on the first idea,
I found a “T-bar” slide, like those
found on more sophisticated drawer
slides.
This should help to increase the
stability of the sharpening feature
while in use and stop it from
suddenly jumping out of the slot.
5.0
5.1
I found an idea that was loosely based
on a ratchet and pawl mechanism. the
Safety 1st Cabinet Slide Lock. The
sides of the product are lined with
teeth that then provide resistance if
the slide is tugged back upwards. In
this case a button is pressed which
releases the mechanism in the slide,
where it can be easily pulled off.
After seeing this example, I thought it
would improve my design as the
jagged slide would provide more
security for the removable sharpener
instead of relying on the size of the
slots to provide resistance,
5.2

23. Weakness 2 Sharpening
(continued)
To get a better idea of how the mechanism would work, I constructed a model from translucent 3mm acrylic. I designed the
piece on Solidworks and glued them together using acrylic cement. This method of manufacture is not particularly viable as it
would cost too much money and energy to cut out all the different pieces and then put them all together, when it could
potentially be produced all in one which would be more cost-effective.
From this model I found that the sharpener slid in and out of the setting well and it was secure in its holder.
There were no outstanding issues with the model although to improve it I would find a way to make
sure the sharpener was as steady/solid as possible. One way would be to manufacture the product
with magnets so that while the sharpener is in use, it is more secure.
After some research I found that it is possible to find magnets that are dishwasher safe and don’t lose
their magnetism after washing.
Another way to improve the stability would be to line the slide with a material that provides friction
such as silicon rubber. Used for products such as phone cases, it has sufficient grip and flexibility. It
is also used for things such as cake moulds and so is dishwasher safe.
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Figure 1 demonstrates
the idea of a magnet on
the underside of the
sharpener.
Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the
different ways in which silicon could
be attached to the sharpener to
improve the design

24. Weakness 4 - Safety (symbols and instructions)
For this part I researched different symbols that are used in
everyday life – that are widely recognised and understood.
With these examples, the drawings are incredibly simple and
only represent the essentials so there is no confusion.
The symbols only include the bare minimum when it comes to shapes
and also use a couple of contrasting colours/shades.
Black and white are the most obvious combinations as there is then
no chance of confusion with colour-blind consumers and it creates the
most clear-cut image. On the other hand, red is a popular colour to
use when indicating danger or safety.
Contrasting colours are striking
and easy to understand quickly
In my original product, there was no sign of instructions
on how to use the product, let alone safely. It only had a
small image on the packaging of suggested use which
wasn’t particularly clear or informative – it only gave a
basic idea.
As well as informing people on how to use the product,
there should be all the necessary safety precautions and
warnings that are normally seen on products that have a
degree of safety risk.
Points that should be mentioned somewhere on the
product:
• The blades are sharp
• The knives that are used are sharp
• There is a risk of injury
• It shouldn’t be accessible to children
When I write the instruction booklet and create the
signage, it will have to be:
• Clear/easy to understand
• Contrasting colours or black and white
• Limited use of words so it can be universal
• Simple shapes – as little detail as possible without
losing the meaning
SketchesinFig.5,6createdin2DDesign
Fig.1
Fig.2
Fig.3
Fig.4Fig.5
Fig.6

25. Final Design
This is my final design after developing my
weaknesses and thinking of suitable
materials. Here I have checked my design
against my initial list of specifications and a
reminder of what I was hoping to achieve/
improve with this new product design.
F1 - The product is still able to fulfil its
function as a knife sharpener, as I have
included the necessary sharpening slots for
the knife at an appropriate depth so that
different sizes may use the product. The
purpose of having two slots is that one may
be used for the typical straight edged knife,
and the other for serrated knives
S1 & S3 - I have improved the safety of the
design with the shape of the product as well as
the “safety card” that I have designed. It would
include various warning symbols depicting the
hazard of sharp knives and the need to keep the
product away from young children.
FH1 - I have fulfilled the food hygiene
spec as the removable sharpening
feature allows for more thorough and
frequent cleaning as if the consumer
doesn’t believe the whole unit needs
washing, they can still maintain the
sharpener.
E1 -I have improved the ergonomics by
designing the rubber sleeve for the
handle, as well as adding contours and
texture to this so that maximum grip can
be achieved.
FH2 -All the materials used are easily
cleaned, either wiped down or in the
dishwasher which contributes to the
hygiene spec
TD2 - The shape of the product lends
itself to the technical details spec, as
the majority of people who tested my
design found it comfortable and non-
restrictive
St1 - The final model I made stands at
129mm, which is a suitable size to be
able to be put away neatly
M1 - The materials I would use theoretically would
be ABS and rubber, both of which are durable and
tough so that they would withstand the pressure that
would surely be applied to them during use
A2 - Although I initially stated that the product should have
an unassuming colour scheme, the bold colours I used in
the model only serve to make the product a feature along
with it’s unusual shape, making it a talking point
C1 & C2 -The use of a relatively
soft material such as rubber and
the indentations also achieve
comfort instead of holding the bare
handle which may cause pain after
a while
TD1 - The product weighs 0.224kg,
which is definitely light enough to allow
ease of use
TD3 - The product would be easy to disassemble
and since there aren’t many different materials
used, it would be easy to recycle the different
components, e.g. main body, rubber sleeve

26. Testing – Plan of Action
In the average kitchen, there are numerous surfaces such as tiled floors, etc. that can be easily chipped or damaged by falling utensils that are heavy or particularly
hard. In the same way, the product itself could be damaged if it were to fall on aforementioned surfaces. To test this, I will execute a simple drop test and observe any
changes to the material at the end, hence testing the materials for their hardness. I will drop the material from a specified height and see whether the materials split,
shatter or if there is no change. I will also record the densities of the material samples and see whether this has any bearing on the results.
Below I have included a sketch of how the experiment will be carried out. By carrying out this experiment I will be able to select the best material for my product. The
experiment will be carried out in my own kitchen as this is a realistic environment complete with tiles so I can hopefully record some definitive results.
I dropped the respective materials from a height of
90cm as this is the average height of a kitchen
worktop and this is the environment that I would
expect the tool to be used in
Material Density
(g/mm³)
Drop 1
Result
Drop 2
Result
Drop 3 Result Mean Result
2mm
Aluminium
14476 Slight
blunt on
one
corner
No
change
No change No change
5mm
Utile
33950 No
change
No
change
No change No change
3mm
HIPs
17100 No
change
No
change
No change No change
1mm
Mild Steel
9150 No
change
No
change
No change No change
1mm
Polystyrene
7546 No
change
No
change
No change No change
3mm
Acrylic
14341 No
change
No
change
No change No change

27. Client Testing
I interviewed my original client and asked them questions based on
the improved product
*Is the improved handle more
comfortable?
*Is the improved design safer?
*Does the improved design look better?
*Would you be willing to pay more for
the improved design?
*What do you like most about the new
design?
*How could the design be improved
further?
*The new product is safer
*The new design is much more
comfortable
*The new design is nicer and
smoother to hold
*The new product could be
improved by widening the base
as it is slightly unstable being as
narrow as it is currently
In conclusion, what I will take forward from this interview are the key points. Mainly that the design of the product is good aesthetically and I
shouldn’t change the basic shape. My client also stated that she liked the bold, singular colour scheme. However, her only concern was that
the product was unstable due to the narrow base which was also mentioned in a previous video. To improve this I would definitely widen it to
give the user more security when using it.
Conclusion

28. Summary of Results
In this section I will analyse the results from my
developments and also my testing and explain how
certain experiences influenced my decisions during the
modelling process and improvement making.
I firstly tried to improve the handle of my design,
choosing Styrofoam as it is easy to manipulate and
shape quickly. The initial model aimed to incorporate as
much grip as possible to improve the ergonomics, and I
thought that by incorporating more material, there would
be more of the product to grip. However I found that this
was actually uncomfortable and incidentally hindered
the amount of grip a person could have on the product,
as their hand was stretched around the material. In my
aim to make the design as sturdy as possible I had
neglected comfort as well, as the un-sanded sides cut
into the users already strained palm.
For my second idea, I tried to incorporate more of my
specifications including comfort and so I shaped the
original model but with sanded edges and also with a
slimmer finish. This allowed a greater range of people
to hold the product comfortably and firmly, with more
control over the product. To improve the ergonomics I
also played around with ergonomics more,
experimenting with different styles of indentation and
contours to improve grip and make the users hand
feel natural around the handle. Although the concept
was well received by those who tried it, the execution
of the idea was not as successful and again restricted
the people who could use the product as the contours
were not well spaced or accommodating to those with
bigger hands. In addition, I found that the slimmer
design meant that stability was suffering and many of
my clients said the same
The next idea that I had needed precision and so I
moved away from Styrofoam and used acrylic
instead. By building up the model from different
layers, I was able to create a really sturdy model. In
addition, the new triangular shape solved the
problem of technical details – the shape acted in
such a way that the user could position their hands
in a way that was comfortable to them and so this
ended up being my best improvement for the
weakness.
The next improvement I made was to the sharpening
feature. I wanted it to be removable so that it could be
easily and frequently washed to maintain hygiene.
My first idea was to incorporate the sliding
mechanism of a typical bedside drawer, as this is
easy to slide in and out. However I found this was too
easy and would make the feature too lose for use. I
then experimented with different sliding mechanisms
that would still be easy to manipulate, but also have
friction or a stopping mechanism. I found that the best
idea was a mixture of silicon sliders that provide
friction so that the feature isn’t too easy to remove,
and a magnet on the base of the feature, to ensure
security for the user.
Analysis of Testing
My testing appeared to prove largely inconclusive,
and this was because the conditions were not
strict enough to gain valid results. The pieces I
chose for my experiment were of varying sizes,
and I also didn’t find a way to drop the materials
from the same height each time. However, the
repeats helped to average a mean which meant
the results were clear and concise. From my
results it would appear that I could manufacture
my product out of all the tested materials.
However I wouldn’t chose the utile or any sort of
wood as it could be exposed to water in a kitchen
environment, and this could cause untreated wood
to warp or become damaged. The treatment for
the wood that could prevent this may not be safe
for consumption and so you wouldn’t want
anything used for food prep to come into contact
with it. Materials such as the aluminium and steel
are easy to clean, but aesthetically they are harder
to maintain as they scratch easier and more
visibly. This is in contrast to the different plastics
that I tested, HIPs, Polystyrene and Acrylic.
Polystyrene is much too flimsy for a product that
would be under considerable stress, albeit not
often. Although HIPs and acrylic are much better
candidates for the product I would select a
material that could be injection moulded, as this
manufacturing process would allow my product to
be batch-produced and would simplify the different
stages in manufacture.

29. Further Improvements
If I were to make any further modifications to my product, I would
definitely take on board the suggestions of my clients and also learn
from my own modelling, experiments etc.
Firstly, I would increase the base width of my product, as
throughout my project it was often commented on as being instable,
a little wobbly and not very secure. This would increase the safety
of the design, and also make it look even more engaging
aesthetically wise as the shape would be unusual and interesting. It
also wouldn’t cause any implications regarding manufacturing
methods – I could still have the product injection moulded as it is
still a relatively simple shape and not too complex.
A previous idea that portrays a
product with a wider base
However this improvement could potentially affect my
transportation costs and carbon footprint, as the new shape
would need more packaging to encompass it in a standard
shape for ease of stacking. This would take up more room
while transporting the product and so not as many could be
packed and transported at once. In addition, my waste could
potentially increase, although using recyclable materials in
packaging would counteract this.
However this is all in the worst case scenario as I am confident
my modifications will not increase the dimensions dramatically
and so my costs and environmental effects will not be a cause for
concern.
Sketch illustrates how the product
would be packaged and stacked
In this picture you can see by the knuckles straining
how there is force being exerted away from the
product, almost pushing it. If this were to become
too much, the product could be cause to fall over
while in use, creating the risk of injury. This is made
more prominent by the narrow base which increases
this risk
I would as another improvement make it more clear which
slot is for which knife type. At the moment there are two
slots, one for a normal knife edge, and one for a serrated
edge. By creating extruded, colour coded signs directly on
the product, I could have clear signs for the user so that
they could use the product effectively and efficiently.
The symbols could be
made more striking
by having them in
contrasting colours to
the product so that
they really stand out
to the user and they
are made aware.