Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T19:17:24.203Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

IDENTIFYING THE FACTORS AFFECTING THE REPLICABILITY OF OPEN SOURCE HARDWARE DESIGNS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Rafaella Antoniou ,
Romain Pinquié ,
Jean-François Boujut ,
Amer Ezoji  and
Elies Dekoninck
Rafaella Antoniou*
Affiliation:
University of Bath
Romain Pinquié
Affiliation:
Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, G-SCOP, 38000 Grenoble, France
Jean-François Boujut
Affiliation:
Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, G-SCOP, 38000 Grenoble, France
Amer Ezoji
Affiliation:
Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, G-SCOP, 38000 Grenoble, France
Elies Dekoninck
Affiliation:
University of Bath
*
Antoniou, Rafaella, University of Bath, Mechanical Engineering, United Kingdom, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Open-source hardware (OSH) development is a new design paradigm from a commercial perspective. Openly sharing designs of technical products is a step towards democratising access to new technologies for the benefit of individuals and communities in society. At the core of the open-source hardware definition lies the freedom for anyone to replicate the hardware based on the design. Thus, enabling this freedom is a step towards developing a successful OSH. Previous research supposes that a bill of materials and assembly instructions are enough for this. In this study, we question this assumption and investigate what other factors may influence replicability of an OSH. Using data from a survey and interviews with OSH practitioners, we identify and describe these factors, which relate to the documentation, the design and the context of the person replicating the hardware. Using these insights, we present a diagram of the replication process along with questions the person replicating the hardware would ask to check whether an OSH is replicable. Finally, we synthesise this information into practical advice for OSH projects to increase the replicability of the designs they produce, and thus the likelihood of their project's success.

Keywords

Open source designOpen source hardwareOpen innovationDesign practiceDesign reuse
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 1817 - 1826
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

“Artifact Review and Badging - Current”. (n.d.)., available at: https://www.acm.org/publications/policies/artifact-review-and-badging-current (accessed 2 December 2020).Google Scholar
Balka, K. (2011), Open Source Product Development: The Meaning and Relevance of Openness, Hamburg University of Technology, available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-8349-6949-1.pdf (accessed 12 June 2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barba, L.A. (2018), “Terminologies for Reproducible Research”, ArXiv, arXiv, available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03311 (accessed 1 December 2020).Google Scholar
Bonvoisin, J., Buchert, T., Preidel, M. and Stark, R.G. (2018), “How participative is open source hardware? Insights from online repository mining”, Design Science, Vol. 4, p. e19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonvoisin, J., Mies, R., Boujut, J.-F. and Stark, R. (2017), “What is the ‘Source’ of Open Source Hardware?”, Journal of Open Hardware, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonvoisin, J., Molloy, J., Häuer, M. and Wenzel, T. (2020), “Standardisation of Practices in Open Source Hardware”, Journal of Open Hardware, Ubiquity Press, Vol. 4 No. 1, available at:https://doi.org/10.5334/joh.22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonvoisin, J., Thomas, L., Mies, R., Gros, C., Stark, R., Samuel, K., Jochem, Roland, et al. (2017), “Current State of Practices in Open Source Product Development”, 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED17), Vol. 2, pp. 111–120.Google Scholar
Boujut, J.-F., Pourroy, F., Marin, P., Dai, J. and Richardot, G. (2019), “Open Source Hardware Communities: Investigating Participation in Design Activities”, pp. 5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“DIN SPEC 3105-1:2020-09, Open Source Hardware - Part 1: Requirements for technical documentation”. (n.d.). .Google Scholar
Galbreth, M.R., Boyac, T. and Verter, V. (2013), “Product reuse in innovative industries”, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 1011–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausberg, J.P. and Spaeth, S. (2020), “Why makers make what they make: motivations to contribute to open source hardware development”, R&D Management, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 75–95.Google Scholar
Li, Z., Seering, W., Ramos, J.D., Yang, M. and Wallace, D.R. (2017), “Why open source? Exploring the motivations of using an open model for hardware development”, Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, Vol. 1, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), available at:https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2017-68195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z., Seering, W., Tao, T. and Cao, S. (2019), “Understanding Community Behaviors in For-Profit Open Source Hardware Projects”, Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 2397–2406.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, M., Yang, S., Martinsen, K. and Kainuma, Y. (2016), “Trends and research challenges in remanufacturing”, International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, Korean Society for Precision Engineering, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and M. (2019), Reproducibility and Replicability in Science, Reproducibility and Replicability in Science, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., available at:https://doi.org/10.17226/25303.Google Scholar
Open Source Hardware Association. (2018), “Definition (English) – Open Source Hardware Association”, available at: https://www.oshwa.org/definition/ (accessed 10 November 2018).Google Scholar
Pearce, J.M. (2017), “Emerging Business Models for Open Source Hardware”, Journal of Open Hardware, Ubiquity Press, Ltd., Vol. 1 No. 1, available at:https://doi.org/10.5334/joh.4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plesser, H.E. (2018), “Reproducibility vs. Replicability: A Brief History of a Confused Terminology”, Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, Frontiers Media S.A., Vol. 11, p. 76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rougier, N.P., Hinsen, K., Alexandre, F., Arildsen, omas, Barba, L.Y., Benureau, F.C., Titus Brown, C., et al. (2017), Sustainable Computational Science: The ReScience Initiative.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sivaloganathan, S. and Shahin, T.M.M. (1999), “Design reuse: An overview”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Vol. 213 No. 7, pp. 641–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanamandram, V.M.K. and Panchal, J.H. (2014), “Evaluating the Level of Openness in Open Source Hardware”, Product Development in the Socio-Sphere, Springer International Publishing, pp. 99–120.Google Scholar