Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T04:40:30.562Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

FROM HAPTIC INTERACTION TO DESIGN INSIGHT: AN EMPIRICAL COMPARISON OF COMMERCIAL HAND-TRACKING TECHNOLOGY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Christopher Michael Jason Cox*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
Ben Hicks
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
James Gopsill
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
Chris Snider
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
*
Cox, Christopher Michael Jason, University of Bristol, United Kingdom, christopher.cox@bristol.ac.uk

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.

Advancements in prototyping technologies – haptics and extended reality – are creating exciting new environments to enhance stakeholder and user interaction with design concepts. These interactions can now occur earlier in the design process, transforming feedback mechanisms resulting in greater and faster iterations. This is essential for bringing right-first-time products to market as quickly as possible.

While existing feedback tools, such as speak-aloud, surveys and/or questionnaires, are a useful means for capturing user feedback and reflections on interactions, there is a desire to explicitly map user feedback to their physical prototype interaction. Over the past decade, several hand-tracking tools have been developed that can, in principle, capture product user interaction.

In this paper, we explore the capability of the LeapMotion Controller, MediaPipe and Manus Prime X Haptic gloves to capture user interaction with prototypes. A broad perspective of capability is adopted, including accuracy as well as the practical aspects of knowledge, skills, and ease of use. In this study, challenges in accuracy, occlusion and data processing were elicited in the capture and translation of user interaction into design insights.

Type
Article
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), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Bordegoni, M. and Ferrise, F. (2013) “Designing interaction with consumer products in a multisensory virtual reality environment”, Virtual and Physical Prototyping, 8(1), pp. 5164. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452759.2012.762612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckingham, G. (2021) “Hand Tracking for Immersive Virtual Reality: Opportunities and Challenges”, Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2, p. 728461. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2021.728461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caeiro-Rodríguez, M. et al. (2021) “A Systematic Review of Commercial Smart Gloves: Current Status and Applications”, Sensors, 21(8), p. 2667. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21082667.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carter, T. et al. (2013) “UltraHaptics: Multi-point mid-air haptic feedback for touch surfaces”, UIST 2013 - Proceedings of the 26th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 505514. https://doi.org/10.1145/2501988.2502018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, C., Hicks, B. and Gopsill, J. (2022) “Improving Mixed-Reality Prototyping through a Classification and Characterisation of Fidelity”, Proceedings of the Design Society, 2, pp. 353362. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2022.37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guna, J. et al. (2014) “An Analysis of the Precision and Reliability of the Leap Motion Sensor and Its Suitability for Static and Dynamic Tracking”, Sensors, 14(2), pp. 37023720. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140203702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Insko, B.E. (2001) “Passive haptics significantly enhances virtual environments”, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Lederman, S.J. and Klatzky, R.L. (2009) “Haptic perception: a tutorial”, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(7), pp. 14391459. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lugaresi, C. et al. (2019) “MediaPipe: A Framework for Building Perception Pipelines”, arXiv. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.08172 (Accessed: 15 August 2022). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1906.08172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Openshaw, S. and Taylor, E. (2006) “Ergonomics and Design, A Reference Guide”, DIANE Publishing Company.Google Scholar
MANUS (2022a). “Prime X Haptic VR”, MANUS, Available at: https://www.manus-meta.com/products/prime-x-haptic (Accessed: 7 December 2022).Google Scholar
Group, PRYSM (2022) “Technological Adoption: A Cost-Benefit Framework White Paper”, PRYSM Group. Available at: https://www.prysmgroup.io/articles/technological-adoption-a-cost-benefit-framework (Accessed: 7 December 2022).Google Scholar
MANUS (2022b). “Quantum Metagloves”, MANUS. Available at: https://www.manus-meta.com/products/quantum-metagloves (Accessed: 7 December 2022).Google Scholar
Senso (2022) “Senso Glove”, Senso. Available at: https://senso.me (Accessed: 7 December 2022).Google Scholar
Tekscan (2020) “Steering Wheel Ergonomics”, Tekscan. Available at: https://www.tekscan.com/applications/steering-wheel-ergonomics (Accessed: 10 November 2022).Google Scholar
Vicon (2021) “Vicon Study of Dynamic Object Tracking Accuracy”, Vicon. Available at: https://www.vicon.com/resources/blog/vicon-study-of-dynamic-object-tracking-accuracy/ (Accessed: 14 September 2021).Google Scholar
Zhang, F. et al. (2020) “MediaPipe Hands: On-device Real-time Hand Tracking”, arXiv. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.10214 (Accessed: 7 December 2022). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2006.10214CrossRefGoogle Scholar