## 3 Methods
### Verification and Evaluation  
An exhaustive visual inspection was conducted (Figure 8) to identify anomalies such as folds, wrinkles, or surface irregularities that occurred during the thermoforming process. This preliminary evaluation played a pivotal role in detecting immediate defects that could compromise the functionality, safety, or aesthetic value of the final product. Specific regions were identified where the material's output deviated from expected behavior, providing key insights into its performance under the applied thermoforming conditions. To enhance the precision and depth of this evaluation, a high-resolution laser scanner (FARO Focus3D X330 HDR, Lake Mary, FL, USA) was employed, generating a comprehensive point cloud dataset (Figure 9) of the piece. This process created an accurate digital twin of the physical part, capturing intricate geometric details that might escape visual detection. The resulting data were subsequently processed using specialized software (FARO SCENE_2018.0.0.648), allowing for a detailed comparison between the scanned geometry and the original CAD model. This overlay analysis facilitated the identification of subtle discrepancies in curvature, dimensions, and surface continuity. Such insights enabled the team to correlate the material properties and process parameters with observed geometric deviations, guiding informed adjustments to both the design and manufacturing workflows. Figure 6: Actual fabricated MDF mold of module B: first iteration, before sanding. The piece was later modified and processed with filler to accomplish the changes required to obtain the final installed piece. Figure 7: Initial digital simulation of the thermoforming process performed in Grasshopper to check the viability of the design. This was later adjusted with corrected parameters for the material constraints. This cross-check provided a detailed understanding of the material and process-induced tolerances, revealing regions where the material exhibited excessive stretching or compression, resulting in undesirable variations such as thinning or thickening, which could compromise structural integrity. Additionally, stresses and distortions accumulated during the cooling phase were determined to be key challenges that must be carefully controlled to ensure the durability and safety of the final product. As highlighted in Figure 8, visible creases and deformations were present on the surface of the initial thermoforming trial, particularly in regions featuring complex double curvatures. The material's limitations in conforming to tight radii without structural compromise manifested as buckling or folding. This observation emphasized the need to balance design aesthetics and ergonomics with material and manufacturing constraints. Recognizing the relationship between excessive curvature and material failure enabled the team to adjust the design strategically, mitigating similar issues in subsequent iterations. To address these challenges and enhance the manufacturing process while maintaining a focus on sustainability and resource efficiency, the decision was made to rework the existing mold instead of creating a new one. This approach not only reduced material waste and costs but also aligned with the project's environmental objectives by minimizing the use of additional resources. Reworking the mold involved adding filler material to convex areas to reduce excessive curvature and performing roughing and sanding on concave areas to smooth abrupt transitions and increase radii where necessary. This precise modification process, guided by curvature analyses, enabled the mold to better accommodate the material's thermoforming capabilities. Figure 8: Wrinkles and folds appeared in the first full prototype and process testing, not achieving the expected output. Data collected before, during, and after the thermoforming influenced the next (successful) iterations.