There are multiple approaches to achieving modularity in toys, each with its unique set of advantages and tradeoffs. In light of such variety, designers might find it increasingly strenuous to be constantly mindful of each set in teams that need to agilely develop new products to fulfill the swiftly changing market. Another challenge is that during the ideation phase in design exploration, the designer might find themselves limited in their understanding of modular toy design and miss certain possibilities that could be a result of random combinations of the different aspects of modularity. This paper aims to aid designers in both selecting concept direction before ideation and exploring random possibilities during ideation. By introducing a systematic analysis framework for toy modularity visualized in a graph with two axes, the graph can focus designers on the appropriate route while providing a vast map that they can readily explore. In addition, two examples are provided to ground the graph in real design projects and demonstrate how it can be utilized.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hengjie Li (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: