Connected everyday products may improve convenience while simultaneously introducing weight, privacy risk, repair barriers and premature technological obsolescence. This conceptual practice-based investigation examines how a smart backpack can reduce physical and cognitive friction in mobile work without making its primary carrying function dependent on electronics, software or cloud services. A purposive literature synthesis and an adapted Double Diamond process were employed to construct provisional use contexts, derive design requirements, compare three product architectures and define a staged verification framework. The resulting LumenPack proposition separates the textile shell, service cassette and removable power module and evaluates connected features through five “graceful intelligence” criteria: passive usability, legible failure, local control, repair access and data minimization. The study contributes a traceable conceptual framework linking literature-informed concerns to design requirements, architecture decisions, verification methods and claim limits. No research involving participants, manufactured prototype or certified performance is reported; these remain future validation activities.
References
[1]
Amend, C., Revellio, F., Tenner, I., & Schaltegger, S. (2022). The Potential of Modular Product Design on Repair Behavior and User Experience—Evidence from the Smartphone Industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 367, Article 132770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132770
[2]
Bocken, N. M. P., de Pauw, I., Bakker, C., & van der Grinten, B. (2016). Product Design and Business Model Strategies for a Circular Economy. Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 33, 308-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124
[3]
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8, 5-21. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511637
[4]
Coiduras-Sanagustín, A., Manchado-Pérez, E., & García-Hernández, C. (2024). Understanding Perspectives for Product Design on Personal Data Privacy in Internet of Things (IoT): A Systematic Literature Review (SLR). Heliyon, 10, e30357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30357
[5]
Cross, N. (1982). Designerly Ways of Knowing. Design Studies, 3, 221-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694x(82)90040-0
[6]
Design Council (2004). The Double Diamond: A Universally Accepted Depiction of the Design Process. Design Council.
[7]
Dorst, K. (2011). The Core of ‘Design Thinking’ and Its Application. Design Studies, 32, 521-532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006
[8]
Formentini, G., & Ramanujan, D. (2023). Design for Circular Disassembly: Evaluating the Impacts of Product End-of-Life Status on Circularity through the Parent-Action-Child Model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 405, Article 137009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137009
[9]
Friedman, K. (2003). Theory Construction in Design Research: Criteria: Approaches, and Methods. Design Studies, 24, 507-522. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0142-694x(03)00039-5
[10]
Knapik, J., Harman, E., & Reynolds, K. (1996). Load Carriage Using Packs: A Review of Physiological, Biomechanical and Medical Aspects. Applied Ergonomics, 27, 207-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(96)00013-0
[11]
Kühtreiber, P., Pak, V., & Reinhardt, D. (2022). A Survey on Solutions to Support Developers in Privacy-Preserving IoT Development. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 85, Article 101656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmcj.2022.101656
[12]
Lin, Y. C., & Chen, T. C. (2020). A Multibelief Analytic Hierarchy Process and Nonlinear Programming Approach for Diversifying Product Designs: Smart Backpack Design as an Example. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 234, 1044-1056. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954405419896117
[13]
Mao, C. P., Macias, B. R., & Hargens, A. R. (2015). Shoulder Skin and Muscle Hemodynamics during Backpack Carriage. Applied Ergonomics, 51, 80-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2015.04.006
[14]
Mesa, J. A. (2023). Design for Circularity and Durability: An Integrated Approach from DFX Guidelines. Research in Engineering Design, 34, 443-460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-023-00419-1
[15]
Parajuly, K., Green, J., Richter, J., Johnson, M., Rückschloss, J., Peeters, J. et al. (2024). Product Repair in a Circular Economy: Exploring Public Repair Behavior from a Systems Perspective. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 28, 74-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13451
[16]
Ramadan, M. Z., & Al-Shayea, A. M. (2013). A Modified Backpack Design for Male School Children. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 43, 462-471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2013.03.002
[17]
Richter, J. L., Svensson‐Hoglund, S., Dalhammar, C., Russell, J. D., & Thidell, ？. (2023). Taking Stock for Repair and Refurbishing: A Review of Harvesting of Spare Parts from Electrical and Electronic Products. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 27, 868-881. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13315
[18]
Roskladka, N., Bressanelli, G., Saccani, N., & Miragliotta, G. (2025). Repairable Electronic Products for the Circular Economy: A Review of Design for Repair Features, Practices and Measures to Contrast Obsolescence. Discover Sustainability, 6, Article No. 66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00753-x
[19]
Ruiz-Pastor, L., & Mesa, J. A. (2023). Proposing an Integrated Indicator to Measure Product Repairability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 395, Article 136434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136434
[20]
Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-Creation and the New Landscapes of Design. CoDesign, 4, 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068
