Embedded Files
Define the Problem
Background
You are trying to become a "Small Set Lego Designer" and are going to be interviewed soon by the Senior Lego Design Team. As part of the interview you will have to create a new set using the same pieces from an already existing set. You must show that you can think outside the box, think analytically and write instructions. Then you must create a 30-60 second long elevator pitch to present your set and show how you were able to make a completely original set from an already existing one.
Criteria
Criteria
Must create the lego pieces on onshape as part studio, drawings and then an assembly with all the pieces
All groups must have a unique design
Each group must use 75% or more of the lego pieces on their new model
Must pick one lego set and make a new one from the same pieces as the first set.
Must create 2 seperate lego sets
Must complete check-ins on expected due dates
Must present your lego set to Lego Design Team
Constraints
Constraints
Must try and sell the design in a 30-60 second pitch.
Must document instructions of how to build.
Must finish in a month.
Provided with a limited amount of pieces.
Pieces must come from one previously existing set.
Can't use pieces from outside the lego set
Must create 3D models of used pieces
Must create inventory showing all of our pieces with color and dimension
New lego set can't resemble used lego set
Original Set
Original Set
The only difficulty I had while building the set was the extra pieces that distracted me from the pieces that I needed. Outside of that building the set was fairly easy. One thing I noticed was how simple the instructions were as they 1 by 1 show you the process of building the set. Overall there were no major flaws with the set and it was pretty easy to build.
Generate Concepts
Isometric Drawing of Lego Pieces
Isometric Drawing of Lego Pieces
Set 1 (Concept Drawing)
Set 1 (Concept Drawing)
Set 1
Set 1
My Process
I came up with this idea as it seemed that everything we built came back to the lever and fulcrum function of the original set. In the end I decided to look for a completely new function instead, which was difficult as there were not many dynamic pieces in the set. I was finally able to replace the lever with a wheel and axle, but they still ended up having the same result, which was an "explosion."
Pros
Unique design
Uses the wheel for a different function
Only uses pieces provided to us by the original lego set
Has a complete different mechanic than original lego set
Serves as more of a mechanic than a landscape
Uses over 75% of the lego pieces
Makes canonical sense as fire causes tnt to explode
Cons
Weak structure
Not visually appealing
Pieces appear to look random
Set 2 (Concept Drawing)
Set 2 (Concept Drawing)
Set 2
Set 2
My Process
While building this I was mainly trying to keep a simple, visually appealing design. The problem was it ended up looking similar to the original build. The key difference between the two are the 6x6 pieces where instead of being perpendicular they're placed together in a straight line. I was also trying to keep it symmetrical for it to stay appealing to the eye. This was the final result, but ultimately it was too similair to the original for us to use it.
Pros
Visually Appealing
Structurally symmetrical
Keeps the landscape aesthetic of the original
Uses over 75% of the land pieces
Cons
Too similar to original set
Doesn't canonicaly make sense as the tnt is too far from the explosion point
Uses the same function as the original set
Too much empty space (Focused around the center)
Our Choice
We had a very difficult time deciding which set to use. Originally set 2 seemed to be the better option as it was visually appealing, structurally strong and fit all the criteria. Then set 1 had a messy design, structurally weak, but still fit the criteria. The only thing set 1 had going was that it showed how we could use our skills to reuse the same pieces and end up with a different result. This was demonstrated by the wheel function, which we created with the same pieces from the lever. Ultimately we decided to pick set 1 as set 2 was simply too alike to the original set.
Develop a Solution
Isometric View of Lego Pieces
1x1 tile
1x2 tilw
2x2 tile
2x2 smooth tile with hole
2x4 tile
2x4 smooth tile
2x4 smooth tile with holes
6x6 tile
1x1 peg
1x1 peg with hole
1x2 smooth L shape
Flower peg
2x2 circular tile
2x2 tile with hole
axle
Flower base
2x2 fire
3 block tall
2x1 tall
1x2 tall w hole
2x1 tall with slit
2x2 tall
4x2 tall
Isometric View of Lego Set
Drawings of Lego Pieces
2x1 tall drawing
3 block tall drawing
1x2 tall with hole drawing
4x2 tall drawing
2x2 tall drawing
2x1 tall with slit drawing
1x1 tile drawing
2x2 tile drawing
2x1 tile drawing
4x2 tile drawing
2x2 smooth tile with hole drawing
2x4 smooth tile with hole drawing
2x4 smooth tile drawing
6x6 tile drawing
1x1 peg drawing
1x1 peg with hole drawing
flower peg drawing
2x1 L shape drawing
2x2 tile with hole drawing
2x2 circular tile drawing
Axle drawing
2x2 fire drawing
flower base drawing
Construct & Test Prototype
Testing the instructions
While assembling the design the only real problem I had was placing the pegs onto the flower base. I also had a difficult time placing pieces without them collapsing, which is a major flaw in the set as it has very little structural support. Other than that building the set was fairly easy with a couple of small inconveniences in the way. The instructions made sense to me and I ended up successfully building the set, meaning that the instructions were successful.
Dominic's test
Dominics struggles: Overall it was a great set but it was a little struggle to put the fire underneath and in between legos. I would have the fire added step earlier.
Marcos Test
Marco struggles: Placing the fire was difficult and the TNT block was annoying as it was falling over. Also it was annoying that the pieces fell apart and were unsupported at some sections.
Delaney's Test
Delaney struggles: I think the instructions were very clear and easy to follow, though the fire was hard to get under the TNT block.
Evaluate Solution
Conclusion
From my data I have learned that this would be a solid lego set that plenty of kids will buy. It takes no more than 10 minutes to finish, which is just enough to fit their short attention spans according to britishcouncil.my. Then once they are done their remaining attention will go into the fun explosion mechanism on the lego set. This lego set was given an 9 overall in instruction clarity meaning that the instructions were good for the most part. It was given a 9 in instruction aesthetic showing that the instructions were clear and visually appealing. Then the lego set aesthetic was given an 8 overall meaning that it was visually appealing. I believe the reason it wasn't higher was because it had a messy aesthetic. I believe that this will be a great set that plenty of kids will come to love as it has a completely new idea than most lego sets. Most lego sets are just a simple building/landscape with a small function, but this one is different. This one is centered around one function, which I believe will end up creating a new kind of lego set. These "Educational Lego Sets" will be a simple machine with no extra pieces for a visual appeal. They will simply exist as a means for kids to learn the basics of simple machines and inspire them to pursue to be an engineer.
Reflection
I would say that our solution was successful as it manages to show how we could take one lego set and turn it into a completely original one, while still following all the constraints and criteria. Our set manages to be its own original set as we were able to take the lever function of the original set and turn it into a wheel and axle function. I also managed to change the landscape aspect of it and turn the lego set into a mechanic instead. Next time I do this I will take more time into building my design and make sure my structure gets the support it needs. While using the lego set, many pieces aren't very supported causing them to break off easily making the whole structure weak. I would have also made sure that it wasn't as crowded in the middle and still has pieces around the ends to make it seem more natural. I should have also spent more time considering the color way of the set as it ended up having a messy and crowded look. There were also plenty of minor inconveniences in the instruction book such as the fire piece being added near last, which was difficult for them to place as there were many pieces in the way while the tried to place it. We also should've had them place the pegs onto the flower base before placing the flower base on the 4x4 smooth flat. In conclusion, I believe that although there was plenty we could've done better, we were successful in making a brand new set from a previosly existing one.
Present Solution
Our Pitch to the Senior Lego Design Team Script
Kyle: We think our design is great because of its pronounced and unique design, it changes the lever style of the original build and transforms it into an entirely new axle system.
Aly: We feel that customers would be more interested in our set as unlike most other sets instead of serving as a landscape, design based build, it serves as more of a machine type design where the wheel and axle keeps spinning until the pieces come off, which simulates an explosion. And there's nothing kids love more than an explosion!
Kyle: We strongly believe that we should be considered for the small lego set designer team as we worked amazingly as a group, and our creativity combined was able to create such a unique and distinctive design.
Page updated
Report abuse