Fab Labs and 3D printing

A Fab Lab is a learning environment based on making, experimentation, and working with physical prototypes. It often involves 3D printing, which allows students to quickly check whether a designed object actually works, meets technical constraints, and addresses the selected problem. The process begins with defining the problem and designing a solution, usually in a CAD environment. Students then prepare the model for printing, taking into account technical limitations such as material strength, tolerances, and production time. The printed prototype is tested, and the results lead to further iterations and improvements. The value of this method lies in confronting an idea with reality, revealing flawed assumptions, design imperfections, and technological limitations.

Course: Innovation Management
Topic: Prototype Design
Students work in teams to design a simple object that solves a specific problem for users of a co-working space, such as cable organisation, workstation ergonomics, storage of small items, workspace labelling, or keeping desks tidy. The aim is to create and test a physical prototype.

Introduction (5–10 min)
The teacher presents the challenge, safety rules and technical constraints: available materials, maximum object size, estimated printing time, minimum wall thickness and the number of possible iterations. They explain that the project should be simple, feasible and possible to test.
Stage 1 – Problem Definition (15–20 min)
Teams select one specific problem that can be solved with a simple physical object. They analyse the user situation, identify when the difficulty occurs, and define the intended effect of the solution. The problem should be narrow enough to be translated into an object design.
Stage 2 – Sketching (30–45 min)
Students prepare an initial sketch of the solution. They define its function, approximate dimensions, method of use, place of application and basic technical requirements. At this stage, the key question is: can this object be produced, tested and improved within the available time?
Stage 3 – Modelling (60–90 min)
Teams create a model in CAD software or adapt an existing model according to the project
assumptions. They must consider basic technical constraints such as stability, wall thickness, joining methods, ergonomics, scale and printing time. The teacher supports them with guiding questions: will the object be durable enough, will it fit the intended context of use, and can it be printed easily?
Stage 4 – Preparing for Printing (20–30 min)
Students export the model, prepare it in a slicer and check the printing parameters. They analyse printing time, material consumption, the need for supports, model orientation and surface quality. If the design is too complex, they must simplify it.
Stage 5 – Printing the Prototype (60–180 min)
Teams print the first version of the prototype. While waiting, they may prepare a testing sheet, a list of assessment criteria or process documentation. If printing time is limited, the teacher may allow teams to print a miniature, a fragment of the object or its simplified version.
Stage 6 – Testing (30–45 min)
Students test the prototype in practice. They check whether it fits the intended context of use, whether it is stable, comfortable, sufficiently durable and whether it actually solves the selected problem. They record what works, what does not work and what needs improvement.

Stage 7 – Iteration (30–45 min)
Based on the test results, teams make changes to the design. They may improve dimensions, shape, wall thickness, attachment methods, ergonomics or simplify the construction. If there is no time for another print, they prepare an improved model and describe what changes they would introduce in the next version.

Presentation and Reflection (20–30 min)
Teams present the prototype and the process documentation. They explain which problem they selected, what solution they designed, what the testing revealed, what problems occurred and what they changed in the next version. The teacher concludes by emphasising that the value of the method lies in learning through materialising ideas, testing them and improving the solution.

• When the aim is learning through action, experimentation, and the creation of a physical outcome.
• When the topic allows students to move from an idea to a tangible prototype.
• When students are expected to develop spatial, technical, and iterative thinking.
• When it is important to understand the limitations of materials, equipment, scale, production time, and ergonomics.

• When there is no access to the necessary technical infrastructure, materials, or technical support.
• When the group is too large and the number of devices does not allow teams to work effectively.
• When the task is purely theoretical.
• When printing time makes it impossible to produce either the prototype or even a simplified version of it.

• Students focus on the technology rather than the problem → regularly return to the question of what problem the designed object solves and how it will be used.
• The design is too complicated to produce → introduce constraints on size, printing time, number of parts, and level of detail.
• Printing time is too long → allow students to print a miniature, a fragment of the solution, or a simplified version.
• The prototype looks good but does not work → treat this as an important learning moment and ask students to diagnose the causes.
• Students become frustrated by technical errors → emphasise that errors are part of the design process, not evidence of failure.

Easier → Provide ready-made models for students to modify, or limit the project scope to a single element.
More Challenging → Introduce material or cost constraints, or require students to analyse the scalability of the solution.

• Conduct a short safety briefing before the work begins.
• Set a printing time limit for each team.
• Require at least one user test.
• Encourage students to document iterations, for example through photos and notes.
• Treat errors as a source of learning, not as failure.

Formative Assessment
The teacher reviews the project brief, successive versions of the prototype, and the results of testing. Developmental feedback is provided by indicating whether the solution addresses the defined problem, which design decisions are well justified, and what should be improved in the next iteration, such as the construction, functionality, ergonomics, durability, or suitability for users’ needs. Students use this feedback to modify their designs before producing the final prototype.

Summative Assessment
Assessment focuses on the final prototype and a short record of the design process. The documentation should include successive versions of the solution, photographs or sketches of the prototype, a description of the modifications introduced, the results of testing, and a justification of the design decisions made. Assessment criteria include the suitability of the solution for the problem identified, the functionality of the prototype, the quality of the iterative development process, the use of testing results, safety considerations, and the ability to explain how the project evolved over time.