Hasta La Ideas

This is the heartwarming moment a scuba diver saved a tiny fish that was stuck beneath the waves inside a plastic bag. The female instructor was diving with friends when she noticed the little fella barely breathing inside the plastic pollution in Phuket, southern Thailand last Thursday (14/02). Without intervention, the fish would almost certainly have suffocated and drowned…(Read…)

IKEA claims its latest London store is its greenest ever. But how can this be true if another green building was demolished to make way for it? asks Tom Ravenscroft.

Knocking down one sustainable building to build another is nonsensical. Still, this is exactly what has happened in Greenwich, London, where IKEA has just opened its latest retail outlet.

“IKEA Greenwich is our most sustainable store,” reads the furniture company’s website and the building sure is packed with sustainable features. But there’s something seriously wrong. The white elephant in the room is that to build the store, IKEA demolished what was the UK’s most sustainable supermarket.

Designed by London-based architectural practice Chetwoods, Sainsbury’s Greenwich was lauded as a pioneering example of sustainable commercial architecture that pushed the boundaries of eco-friendly design at the end of the 20th century. It was the first supermarket to achieve an excellent BREEAM sustainability rating, with its green credentials earning it a place on the Stirling Prize shortlist – unsurprisingly the first and only supermarket ever to make the list.

However, only 17 years after celebrity chef Jamie Oliver opened the doors, it was demolished. In an instant not only was the building wiped away, but with it the idea that it was sustainable. As Laurie Chetwood told me: “Knocking it down knocks out the idea that it was a sustainable building. It makes a mockery of it all.”

IKEA has clearly put every effort into creating a environmentally friendly store

As a rule of thumb, the energy needed to construct and demolish a building is around 30 per cent of what’s needed to run it over a 50-year lifespan. By demolishing the building much earlier than this, any environmental savings banked while running the building were wiped out. No matter how little energy the Sainsbury’s building took to operate, in Greenwich a standard steel box that stood for 50 years would have been the more sustainable option.

IKEA has clearly put every effort into creating a environmentally-friendly store. Designed by SRA Architects, the building looks on the face of it like you’d expect an IKEA to look. But behind its familiar blue face, it incorporates numerous green technologies: rainwater harvesting will contribute half the water used in the building, its circulation areas are naturally lit and LED lighting has been installed throughout.

The store’s sustainability agenda is most visible from the air. The roof is covered with 12,000-square-metres of solar panels, broken only by rooflights, and a 4,000-square-metre green roof – one of the largest in London.

However, even if it achieves the highest BREEAM rating as is expected, what has come before means IKEA’s ‘most sustainable store’ can hardly be considered sustainable.

The store could have been repurposed by another retailer, or converted for another use

Sainsbury’s made the decision to leave the site as the building was no longer big enough for its needs and has instead built a new, larger store just down the road. According to the chain, the decision to close any store is “never taken lightly”. It claims relocating has allowed it “to operate in an even more environmentally-friendly way”.

The store could have been repurposed by another retailer, or converted for another use. But IKEA decided that, although the site was ideal for its first new London store in 14 years, the building was not.

“There must have been an alternative – it should have been retained and used by another retailer, or become a community centre or it could have made a good sports centre,” said Catherine Croft, director of the Twentieth Century Society, which campaigned for the building to be saved.

The fact that IKEA chose this site means that the company has to bare some of the responsibility for the building’s destruction. A brownfield site, or even one with a less sustainable building, would have been better – a point that was made by the building’s lead architect Paul Hinkin at the planning inquest.

“To destroy a pioneering environmentally sustainable building and concrete over its garden after less than 15 years does not, as claimed by the applicants, represent sustainable development,” he said. “To be sustainable IKEA should be encouraged to build on brownfield land.”

While the IKEA may have passed BREEAM’s sustainability test, does it push the boundaries of green design like the Sainsbury’s did? Not only did it have add-ons like rainwater harvesting and solar power, but the entire store was naturally lit with large rooflights. As Chetwood puts it: “Sustainability was in Sainsbury’s DNA”.

It’s hard to say the same about the IKEA, which for all intents and purposes is still a steel-framed box. “I get the impression that it’s lipstick on the face of an elephant,” added Chetwood.

Any system that lets this happen is broken

IKEA may argue that environmental building technologies have moved on, that the Sainsbury’s was no longer a cutting-edge sustainable building. But under this logic, buying and scraping a new electric car every year would be sustainable.

Like its predecessor, the immediate sustainable credentials of the IKEA can not be doubted. However, the succession of decisions that have lead to it being built are certainly not.

Both IKEA and Sainsbury’s may justify their actions as part of wider sustainability agenda. However calling either building sustainable now seems a stretch. Destroying one building to build another can never be for the good of the environment, and any system that lets this happen is broken.

The failure in Greenwich comes down to lack of flexibility, both with architecture and planning system. Architects should take note of what has happened in southeast London – even the most sustainable building can be demolished if it cannot adapt to new uses.

While both IKEA and Sainsbury’s should be applauded for commissioning sustainable buildings, to relocate after such a short stint shows a lack of perspective and stewardship on behalf of Sainsbury’s and IKEA. The decision to acquire a site with a young existing structure it did not want shows a narrow definition of sustainability. The fact that the planners allowed it highlights a system that still does not truly take sustainability seriously.

Green buildings can only be great if their lifespan is longer than flatpack furniture.

Photography courtesy of IKEA, unless stated.

The post “There’s something seriously wrong with IKEA’s most sustainable store” appeared first on Dezeen.

American delivery company FedEx has developed an autonomous robotic delivery device to help retailers distribute same-day orders to their customers.

Designed to satisfy the ever-growing expectations of consumers, the SameDay Bot allows retailers to accept orders from nearby customers and send them by robot directly to the buyer’s home or office that same day.

After discovering that, on average, more than 60 per cent of vendors’ customers live within three miles of a store location, FedEx saw the opportunity to create an on-demand, hyper-local delivery service.

The robot can travel on pavements and along roadsides to safely deliver small-scale shipments straight from a warehouse or store to the customers’ door, the so-called last-mile.

“The FedEx SameDay Bot is an innovation designed to change the face of local delivery and help retailers efficiently address their customers’ rising expectations,” explained Brie Carere, executive vice president of FedEx.

“The bot represents a milestone in our ongoing mission to solve the complexities and expense of same-day, last-mile delivery for the growing e-commerce market in a manner that is safe and environmentally friendly.”

Developed in collaboration with DEKA Research & Development Corporation, the SameDay Bot is equipped with “pedestrian-safe technology” that uses multiple cameras and LiDAR remote sensing technology to detect its surroundings.

Accompanied by machine-learning algorithms, these safety features work to keep the robot away from obstacles, avoiding any collisions by plotting a safe path and ensuring the bot follows the rules of the road.

While FedEx is keeping its cards close to its chest by not yet disclosing exactly how the battery-powered bot works, it has revealed that it is powered by patented technology that allows it to travel across unpaved surfaces, curbs, and even steps for a literal “door-to-door” delivery experience.

“The bot has unique capabilities that make it unlike other autonomous vehicles,” said DEKA founder Dean Kamen. “We built upon the power base of the iBot, an advanced, FDA-approved [the US food and drug administration], mobility device for the disabled population with more than 10 million hours of reliable, real-world operation.”

“By leveraging this base in an additional application, we hope that the iBot will become even more accessible to those who need it for their own mobility,” he added.

A prototype of the SameDay Bot made its debut during US television network NBC’s The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon earlier this week on 26 February.

FedEx plan to refine this model to meet safety standards and regulations, and the specific needs of customers, before testing the robot this Summer in selected cities, including Memphis, Tennessee, where it will undertake deliveries between different FedEx office locations.

“We couldn’t be more excited that FedEx chose its hometown as one of the pilot cities for this revolutionary innovation,” said City of Memphis mayor Jim Strickland.

“We look forward to working with FedEx to continue introducing technologies that will help improve the quality of life in our community,” he continued.

Both delivery companies and automotive manufacturers are venturing into the world of autonomous robotic delivery for the last-mile transportation from local warehouses to the customer’s door.

German manufacturer Continental’s offering has been designed to resemble a dog, and travels close to its final destination in a driverless van

The post FedEx’s autonomous robot SameDay Bot delivers packages to your doorstep appeared first on Dezeen.

Time is a precious commodity in the working life of a product designer or engineer. When you get to a certain point in your product development cycle and need to find the right vendor to produce your custom parts, it can be a long and arduous process. This process involves contacting suppliers, emailing the CAD drawings, waiting for quotes, benchmarking against other suppliers and then managing the process until you receive your parts.

All this time-consuming and energy-sapping hassle is eliminated by Xometry, a technology company established in 2014. As a manufacturing platform, Xometry plays the role of matchmaker, or, what is commonly known as production-as-a-service. The Xometry Partner Network has over 2,500 vetted manufacturers across the US – combined they have over 8,000 machines, 13 manufacturing capabilities and the ability to manufacture using 200 different types of material. Xometry leverages its knowledge and experience with its network to select a manufacturing partner that best matches the designer’s requirements and lead time.

This is all done instantly, too. Xometry’s Instant Quoting Engine^SM will analyze the uploaded CAD file and provide DFM (design for manufacturing) feedback, lead times and pricing in real-time. For further ease of use, SolidWorks and Autodesk Inventor users can do all of this directly inside their CAD environment using Xometry add-ins.

“But we are not just a computer input and output service. As part of our kick off process we have live engineering support,” says Gregory Paulsen, Xometry’s Director of Molding and New Manufacturing Technologies. “For instance, when I talk to a customer at the start of a project, I very often ask them the same question twice: when do you need these parts by? The first time they say ASAP and the second time you often get a different and more detailed answer. From there, we are able to much better understand where they are in the product development cycle and can recommend a solution that fits them at their current stage of progress.”

Molded parts can be both highly detailed and highly functional

Not affiliated with one particular brand or technology, Xometry approaches each project with an open mind, focused on understanding the designer’s needs and helping them identify the right manufacturing solution. For instance, while a customer may have come to Xometry to 3D print their project, a consultation may reveal that the best process for the job is actually plastic injection molding.

Mostly associated with the mass production of end-use parts, injection molding is a process that, simply put, involves injecting molten material into a mold cavity, where it cools and solidifies to the configuration of the cavity. This means that the process involves not only the design of the product but also the mold or tool, which is machined from metal. Although the tooling cost could look daunting at first, the benefits of this process include identical, high precision, repeatable parts with tight tolerances that can be made rapidly from a wide material selection.

A set of parts with a snap fit for assembly

Using its manufacturing network, Xometry can provide the cost-effective production of parts from 100 to over 10,000. This makes injection molding ideal for applications ranging from prototyping to production and as a bridge to production tooling.

“When we look at the requirements of a job, there are two things that usually scream at me that could make it suitable for injection molding,” says Paulsen. “The first is if a customer wants a higher quantity and the second is if they require some sort of cosmetic finish. With molding you can get a better cosmetic finish from the get-go whereas with almost all 3D printing processes, finished parts need some amount of post-processing work,”

“I’ve seen volumes of 50 units that can actually save money, look better and perform better with injection molding than with 3D printing because the part can benefit from the exact thermoplastic material and the mold provides a better surface finish. Additionally, the scaling is there too because the principal advantage of injection molding is the ability to scale production,” adds Paulsen.

However, to reap the benefits of injection molding, the product has to be designed to suit this manufacturing process. Xometry can provide assistance here too in ensuring the part is easily moldable while meeting the customer’s structural and cosmetic requirements.

“With injection molding, you’re also making the tool and that’s why there’s a much higher consideration for getting the design right. We will often spend another 24 to 48 hours working with a customer to add a rib here or a draft angle there to ensure that the part can be easily removed from the mold. There may be an iterative cycle of design changes before we move further into the process,” describes Paulsen.

For instance, Bruce Kyles, an engineer at Thermaco, a North Carolina-based technology company specializing in the field of oil and grease extraction from wastewater, contacted Xometry with an injection molding requirement. While having used its Xometry’s Instant Quoting Engine^SM for a number of 3D printed prototype parts in the past, this was its first endeavor in low volume tooling. The requirement was for four parts: one of which was a color-match blue ABS part with mold texturing and the remaining three were glass-filled polypropylene non-appearance parts for an assembly.

The cosmetic side of Thermaco’s part, showing mold texturing and text

Upon receiving their quote, Xometry went over Thermaco’s material choices, with Kyles clearly defining the color and texture needs of the project. “I was duly impressed with the array of injection molding materials that Xometry offered, which is important to me as an engineer,” comments Kyles.

The non-cosmetic side of Thermaco’s part, showing coring, ribs, and ejection locations

From there, Xometry provided a detailed DFM report for his parts and in this instance, Paulsen and his team highlighted its parting, ejection, and gating approach as well as some concerns on draft and texturing.

With these changes made and the design ready for production, Xometry managed the entire process, providing Kyles with regular emails about the part’s journey. “Because of a successful kickoff, we had a very smooth production and provided him with the parts he needed on time,” says Paulsen.

The result is not only high quality, cost-effective and timely custom parts but by partnering with Xometry, Kyles gets to reclaim the time and effort it would have taken to source and manage this process internally. As a new breed of sourcing partner offering production-as-a-service, Xometry is fast becoming a very appealing proposition for engineers and product designers.

New York firm Weiss Manfredi has revealed plans to update Edward Durell Stone’s modernist US embassy in New Delhi, India, as part of a major overhaul of the complex.

Commissioned by the US Department of State, Weiss Manfredi‘s masterplan is intended to transform the United States Embassy in the city’s Chanakyapuri neighbourhood into a “multi-functional campus”.

The project marks the first update to the 28-acre (11-hectare) compound since its completion in 1959. Designed by 20th-century American architect Stone – was also behind New York’s Museum of Modern Art – it features a number of structures created in the modernist architecture style.

Weiss Manfredi’s project will involve the renovation of these existing buildings, including a major overhaul of the Chancery Building – a structure detailed with white-latticed walls, a flat roof, slender golden pilotis, and a large courtyard at the centre.

New facilities, such as an office building and a support annex, will be added to bolster the embassy’s functions. Renderings depict these as low-lying and white, and also detailed with slatted facades that complement the existing structures.

“The redesign of the Embassy Campus defines a sustainable vision for the Embassy’s future that builds on the legacy of the historic campus to create a new foundation for American diplomacy in India,” said Weiss Manfredi in a project statement.

Weiss Manfredi is a multidisciplinary design practice, which typically blends architecture, landscape and urbanism. The transformation of a former industrial site in Long Island City into Hunter’s Point South Park is among the firm’s recent projects.

For New Delhi’s US Embassy, the team has designed major updates to the landscape that surrounds the buildings, with the intent to create active outdoor space on site that would make the most of the local climate.

Wide paths of white paving, trees that provide shade and benches for resting are all included, among a number of other features.

“Inspired by India’s enduring tradition of weaving together architecture and landscape, a series of cast stone screens, canopies, reflecting pools and garden walls introduce a resilient, integrated design language that brings the campus into the 21st century,” said the firm.

The project is among several embassies that the US Department of State’s Office of Overseas Building Operations has commissioned the country’s practices to design. Others include plans for a new outpost in Honduras by SHoP Architects and a compound in Brasília designed by Studio Gang.

Philadelphia-based firm Kieran Timberlake completed work on a “crystalline cube” that houses the US Embassy in London in 2017.

The post Weiss Manfredi unveils masterplan for New Delhi’s modernist US Embassy appeared first on Dezeen.