Interaction Design, Politecnico di Milano

Project 1: Interactive Installation System

Project Description

System Control Module:

Provides integrated management of parameters such as sound, light and body temperature, which are adjusted through a customised main-menu interface.

Direct: Keeps sound and body temperature in sync, matched via a "purpose-built plate" (presumably some kind of sensor or control panel).
Computer: Keeps light and body temperature in sync, with control logic similar to that of the sound module.

Production and Regulation Module:

Production: Dynamically regulates the physical activity of different parts of the "plate" (possibly a device or component), using a matched air-conditioning system.
Water: Integrates air-conditioning and water-regulation systems to keep environmental conditions stable in every part.

Materials and Testing Module:

MAYBELL TEST: A testing framework covering pharmaceuticals (SD Pharmacy) and mobility policies (MOBIL POLICIES).
COLORING: Tests and evaluates materials (such as Reath, Pie, Foam and Metal) for cleanliness, positioning and layout, organisational effect and vibration performance.

Display and Interaction Design:

ON-SCREEN DISPLAY OF THE JOURNEY:
- Design challenge: Complex coordination between water health and local heat sources, while keeping information clear (e.g. inhalable coating applications).
- Compliance standard: A 1/2-hour operating cycle must be completed every hour.
- Technology option: Introducing "Compassion+" technology to optimise the interactive experience.

Note:

The source files contain ambiguous terminology and translation issues (for example, "plate" may be a code name for a device), so some descriptions have been inferred from context. The project may involve a simulation system, environmental control or a multimodal interactive installation; its specific application scenario remains to be confirmed.

Interaction Design, Politecnico di Milano

Project 2: SEASPARK — Sustainable Recycling and Future Technology

Project Description

SEASPARK is an innovative project that combines green technology with futuristic scientific concepts, focusing on developing sustainable solutions based on recycling. At its core are:

Strategic planning: A Strategic Map and Business Canvas define the project's positioning and business logic, emphasising collaborative relationships with partners and customers.
Business scenarios:
- Deploying the SEASPARK Recycling Unit, with target customers including tourists, distributors and shipping companies; operations are seasonal (e.g. the "hunting season"), and purchase orders worth millions of dollars have already been secured.
- Exploring "Scenpant", a futuristic scientific concept that examines cost calculation and the distribution of rights when humans are empowered by technology, and advocating the use of trustworthy, sustainable heritage products.

Team and Background:

Co-founded by Michael, John Lewis & Sons and Dr. John R. Smith, with a team that includes a number of domain experts. The project's documentation dates back to 2015 and has consistently focused on the balance between ecology and technology in modern society.

Key Highlights:

Driven by green technology, with a focus on the circular economy.
Combines strategic planning with futuristic scientific theory (such as Scenpant).
Serves a diverse customer base, with real-world commercial use cases.

Interaction Design, Politecnico di Milano

Project 3: SKTICH — Technology Analysis and Low-Freight Optimisation

Project Description

SKTICH is a project focused on technology analysis and process optimisation, aiming to reduce logistics or operating costs and improve efficiency through an innovative model. Its core components are:

Technical framework:
- Technology Analysis: A systematic study of the Task Flow and the design of the core model.
- Low-Freight Model: Presumably an optimisation model for cutting transport or operating costs, possibly involving the planning of time points (e.g. time/step markers running from 1:00 to 430:00).

Goals and Highlights:

Uses structured analysis to optimise task execution paths and reduce wasted resources.
Explores low-cost, high-efficiency logistics or operational solutions, potentially applicable to fields such as supply-chain management and industrial processes.

Potential Applications:

The hundreds of marked time points or steps may correspond to specific operational stages; the content needs further refinement to pin down the application scenario (e.g. production scheduling or transport dispatching).

My Journey and Takeaways

The Blue-Black Project: Exploring Strategy and Business Models (Early Stage)

When I first started researching this project, I was still a little unclear about how to position the "SEASPARK Recycling Unit". One line on the Strategic Map — "the problem of the modern world lies in how to use our own power" — kept me thinking: how do you strike a balance between environmental protection and commercial interests?

Key Moments:

I spent two weeks going through user logs and found that travel distributors accounted for most orders during the purchasing season, but the recycling process was inefficient.
The team and I stayed up late debating the concept of "Hibernism" (I still don't fully understand the word) and finally decided to make "sustainable heritage products" the core of the brand.

Takeaway:

For the first time, I realised that strategy isn't just about drawing a few diagrams — you have to immerse yourself in the user's world. The data from "Purchasing Season 18", for example, showed me that seasonal demand has to be planned for well in advance.

The Green Project: The Collapse and Rebuilding of a Technical Model (Middle Stage)

This stage felt like a race against time. The 24-hour task flow of the "LOW-FRIGHT model" was densely packed, and just debugging it up to step 50 made me want to flip the table.

Key Moments:

On day 3, I found a logical flaw in the model's time-point design and ended up rewriting code at 3 a.m. while downing coffee.
I argued with the development team over whether "low fright" referred to user experience or system fault tolerance; we eventually compromised on "staged validation".

Takeaway:

However polished the technical documentation, things can still fall apart in implementation. But the model rebuilt after the collapse turned out to be more flexible, and I learned to replace perfectionism with "small, fast steps".

The Real-World Project: The Growing Pains of Moving from Theory to Practice (Late Stage)

Only when I reached the product design stage did I realise that the first two projects had been purely theoretical. The "sound and body temperature regulation" function in the menu sounded impressive, but in actual testing we couldn't even accurately measure the vibration frequency of the foam material.

Key Moments:

In the "MAYBELL test", the metal parts repeatedly failed to meet cleanliness standards, and we were nearly blacklisted by the supplier.
Late one night, staring blankly at the "1/2 hour per hour" compliance rate, I suddenly realised that simplifying the user interaction mattered more than fine-tuning parameters.

Takeaway:

Every single screw on the production line can make you question your life choices, but when you finally hold the finished product in your hands, the sense of achievement in going "from concept to object" is irreplaceable.

Timeline and Growth

Months 1–2: Learning to "let the data speak" amid the fog of strategy.
Months 3–4: Going from hiding in my technical bubble to learning "collaborative compromise".
Months 5–6 (real-world): After a thorough beating from reality, finally understanding what "the user's perspective matters more than technical showmanship" really means.

These three projects were like a relay race, with every leg pushing me out of my comfort zone. Looking back now, the biggest takeaway wasn't learning to draw strategy maps, build models or tune parameters, but understanding this: the way to solve a problem always lies in the details and in compromise.