Redesigned Linocut

Team: Trini Rogando, Elsa Bosemark, Talha Rao

Timeline: 4 weeks

Skills: Rapid prototyping (foam core, paper, dowels), RULA analysis, user feedback analysis, Likert data, Autodesk Fusion

Approach: Linoleum is a popular material for artists creating stamps. Cutting into linoleum requires a flexible tool, demanding both precision and force. To reduce hand strain and discomfort for these artists, my team focused on redesigning the blade handle.

Our process included multiple rounds of user testing, RULA analysis, and foam modeling of tool handles to measure ergonomic comfort.

Repetitive Motion Analysis

We began through talking through current users of the linocut to identify their grip patterns and usages, creating a task analysis and identifying points of highest strain.

Ideating, Defining, Prototyping

Group Design Parameters

  • Cuts the linoleum

  • Stable to maneuver

  • Good control over the blade so that cuts are exact

    • Flexibility for different grips

  • Uses same blade end

  • Comfortable to hold

    • Reduces pressure on fingers

  • Does not cramp hand after using it for a while

  • Not dangerous to use

  • Encourages correct hand and body posture

  • Works for different hand sizes

Ultimately, our 6 models had a variety of different shapes, suggested hand positions, and sizes.

Once we defined what our design parameters were due to physical constraint and tool function, the 3 of us each sketched 10 broad ideation brainstorms for ideation, then selected the strongest to physically model.

My drawings and foam models are below:

User Testing & Insight Gathering

With our 6 total foam models, we engaged in 3 rounds of user testing in a makerspace on campus, using the RULA national ergonomics worksheet and a visual hand/wrist pain indicator as a interview guide. gathering crucial insights:

  • Natural fit: Handles that matched natural hand curves felt most comfortable.

  • Grooves/curves: Well-placed indentations improved support and control.

  • Ergonomics: Even pressure and a healthy wrist angle were essential, with clear orientation.

  • Visibility: Users valued being able to see their work surface without hand/tool obstruction.

  • Leverage/precision: Awkward wrist motions or forced grips reduced control, and users valued feeling “close to the work”.

From these insights, my teammate Elsa created a matrix of two parameters of indicated interest to users:

  • Finger vs. Palm vs. Purlicue support

  • Grip angle (affecting control and finger positioning)

We then modeled 6 of these new iterated concepts - below are my foam models:

drawn by Elsa Bosemark

Data-Driven User Testing

For our second round of user testing, we developed a Likert survey to quantitatively determine which of our designs were the strongest, and administered it for each of our 6 new models.

Specific Evaluation Points

  1. Tool size fit in hand

  2. Angle comfort

  3. Control of blade

  4. Discomfort/pain points

Final Model

We developed measurements from the anthropometric table after devising our final design.

My CAD rendition of the design is below: