In this paper we consider the FabLab as an experimental facility for research, intervention and learning. By providing a space that affords close proximity between users, producers, technologies and materials, the FabLab affords a 'hybrid hub' for weaving relations between these. Borrowing the metaphor of 'the bazaar' from Raymond (2001), we argue that FabLabs, due to their open and nonregulated character, can be seen as offering what we call a 'bizarre bazaar' for exchange, fabrication and knowledge creation. Based on the background of our own experiences with establishing and running FabLab RUC as an experimental learning, innovation and research environment, we discuss how 'working through materials' enables new forms of learning and research. We do this firstly by considering lab-based learning in design in general, and design and anthropological theory around "Making" in particular. We then, secondly, move on to consider three cases for knowledge creation in a Fablab context, drawn from current work at FabLab RUC and demonstrating what we see as key potentials. Finally, and thirdly, we conclude emphasizing in particular the role of proximity between researchers, students and professionals in art, technology and entrepreneurship. Introduction: FabLab RUC, its origin and principles FabLab RUC (https://ruc.dk/fablab) originally developed as an idea for bringing art, technology and hands-on 'Maker' approaches into academia not as an optional element in the academic program, but as a vital part of the skills and competences of future academics, whether training for a degree in technical science, natural science, the arts or social science. The Lab was formally established in autumn 2013 but draws on earlier experiences with integrating digital fabrication in research and learning. Since 2008

In this paper different scenarios for back protection of a canvas painting and their effect on the stability of the relative humidity behind the painting are tested. A painting on canvas, stretched on a wooden frame, was fitted with various styles of back protection and then exposed to a cycle of temperature variation at the back, with the front exposed to a constant room temperature. The painting was also exposed to a constant wall temperature and varying room temperature. The space between the canvas and the back board was fitted with temperature and relative humidity (RH) sensors. The sensors were used to provide the essential single-point data of temperature and RH at the given locations. For more comprehensive understanding of the rather confined space, further numerical simulation (computational fluid dynamics) was adopted as part of the investigation. The computational fluid dynamics was used to understand the natural convection within the microclimate through the depictions of temperature distribution, as well as the corresponding airflow. The unprotected painting suffered a large RH variation at its back, because of the varying canvas temperature interacting with the constant room air moisture content. Effective stabilisation of the RH behind the canvas against temperature variation was provided by a shiny aluminium alloy sheet sealed against the frame. The non-absorbent back board experienced a strong variation in RH, because of humidity buffering of the space by the painting canvas at a different temperature. Either a space or insulation between this back plate and the wall reduced the risk of condensation on the inner surface of the back plate. Insulation will however increase the risk of condensation on the wall surface behind the painting. An absorbent back board de-stabilised the RH at the painting canvas surface by providing a competing humidity buffer at a different temperature. To provide protection against moisture exchange with an unsuitable room RH, extra humidity buffer was placed 3 mm behind the painting canvas, kept close to the painting temperature by insulation between this buffer and the back board. This stabilised RH at the canvas surface but increased both the temperature and the RH variation at the back board and thus increased the risk of condensation on the inner surface of the back board. The RH and the temperature in the narrow spaces between the painting canvas and the wooden stretcher frame were always more nearly constant than in the open canvas area, which suggests an explanation for the widely observed better condition of the areas of canvas paintings which lie close over the support structure. Our conclusion is that a non-absorbent, impermeable back plate gives good RH stability against a changing temperature gradient between wall and canvas painting surface.

No abstract

We present potentials of creating excuses as a central metaphor for a design strategy-excuses to interact (a "ticket to talk") as a way to facilitate social interactions among participants. Interaction design has, in its third wave, moved towards the more abstract experiential potentials of designing for embodied playful interactions, but much is needed to understand the dynamics of social interaction and how one can design for social curiosity. With this perspective we move beyond tangible curiosity, attempting to break restraint, timidity and shyness-using touch to design for bending social norms. We build the concept of creating excuses to interact based on three large experiments with interactive art installations presented in a festival context. We attempt to convert the particular design cases into general understandings of a set of potential design strategies, with the intention to create generative design knowledge. Extremely simple technical rules can be designed with the sole purpose of breaking down normal social restraints and provoking interesting social interaction. CCS CONCEPTS • Human-centered computing → Interaction design → Interaction design theory, concepts and paradigms .

A painting on canvas, stretched on a wooden frame, was fitted with various styles of back protection and then exposed to a cycle of temperature variation at the back, with the front exposed to a constant room temperature. The painting was also exposed to a constant wall temperature and varying room temperature. The space between the canvas and the back board was fitted with temperature and relative humidity (RH) sensors. The unprotected painting suffered a large RH variation at its back, because of the varying canvas temperature interacting with the constant room air moisture content. Effective stabilisation of the RH behind the canvas against temperature variation was provided by a shiny aluminium alloy sheet sealed against the frame. The non-absorbent back board experienced a strong variation in RH, because of humidity buffering of the space by the painting canvas at a different temperature. Either a space or insulation between this back plate and the wall reduced the risk of condensation on the inner surface of the back plate. Insulation will however increase the risk of condensation on the wall surface behind the painting. An absorbent back board de-stabilised the RH at the painting canvas surface by providing a competing humidity buffer at a different temperature. To provide protection against moisture exchange with an unsuitable room RH, extra humidity buffer was placed 3 mm behind the painting canvas, kept close to the painting temperature by insulation between this buffer and the back board. This stabilised RH at the canvas surface but increased both the temperature and the RH variation at the back board and thus increased the risk of condensation on the inner surface of the back board. The RH and the temperature in the narrow spaces between the painting canvas and the wooden stretcher frame were always more nearly constant than in the open canvas area, which suggests an explanation for the widely observed better condition of the areas of canvas paintings which lie close over the support structure. Our conclusion is that a non-absorbent, impermeable back plate gives good RH stability against a changing temperature gradient between wall and painting surface.