Title: VE Input Devices
1VE Input Devices
- Doug Bowman
- (Modified by Sabarish V. Babu)
- Virginia Tech
- Bowman, et al., Chapter 4
2Goals and Motivation
- Provide practical introduction to the input
devices used in VEs - Examine common and state of the art input devices
- look for general trends
- spark creativity
- Advantages and disadvantages
- Discuss how different input devices affect
interface design
3Input devices
- Hardware that allows the user to communicate with
the system - Input device vs. interaction technique
- Single device can implement many ITs
4Human-computer interface
User interface software
Input devices
System Software
Output devices
User
5Human-VE interface
Env. model
Display(s)
Simulation loop -render -check for
events -respond to events -iterate
simulation -get new tracker data
Tracking system
Input device(s)
6Input device characteristics
- Degrees of Freedom (DOFs) DOF composition
(integral vs. separable) - Range of reported values discrete/continuous/hybr
id - User action required active/passive/hybrid
- Intended use locator, valuator, choice,
- Frame of reference relative vs. absolute
- Properties sensed position, motion, force,
7Practical classification system
- Desktop devices
- Tracking devices
- 3D mice
- Special-purpose devices
- Direct human input
8Desktop devices keyboards
- Chord keyboards1
- Arm-mounted keyboards2
- Soft keyboards (logical devices)
9Desktop devices 6-DOF devices
- 6 DOFs without tracking
- Often isometric
- Exs SpaceBall, SpaceMouse, SpaceOrb
10Tracking physical objects (props)
11Tracking devices eye tracking
12Tracking devices pinch gloves
- Conductive cloth at fingertips
- Any gesture of 2 to 10 fingers, plus combinations
of gestures - gt 115,000 gestures
13Pinch Gloves for menus
- TULIP system14
- ND hand selects menu, D hand selects item within
menu - Limited to comfortable gestures
- Visual feedback on virtual hands
143D mice
- Ring Mouse
- Fly Mouse
- Wand
- Cubic Mouse
- Dragonfly
15Special-purpose devices using conductive cloth
- Virtual toolbelt
- Used to select virtual tools
- Good use of proprioceptive cues
- Interaction slippers3
- Step on displayed options
- Click heels to go home
16Special-purpose devices Painting Table4
17Special-purpose devices ShapeTape11
18Human input speech
- Frees hands
- Allows multimodal input
- No special hardware
- Specialized software
- Issues recognition, ambient noise, training,
false positives,
19Human input Bioelectric Control
20Human input Body Sensing Devices
21More human input
- Breathing device - OSMOSE
- Brain-body actuated control
- muscle movements
- thoughts!
22Locomotion devices
- Treadmills
- Stationary cycles
- VMC / magic carpet
- Walking/flying simulations (use trackers)
23UNIPORT
- First Locomotion Device For U.S. Army (1994)
- Proof-of-concept demonstration
- Developed in six weeks
- Difficult to change direction of travel
- Small motions such as side-stepping are impossible
24Treadport
- Developed in 1995
- Based on a standard treadmill with the user being
monitored and constrained by mechanical
attachment to the users waist - User actually walks or jogs instead of pedaling
- Physical movement is constrained to one direction
25Individual Soldier Mobility Simulator (Biport)
- Most sophisticated locomotion device
- Designed for the conduct of locomotion studies
- Hydraulic-based locomotion driven w/ force
sensors at the feet - Safeguards limited responsiveness
- Too awkward to operate
26Omni-Directional Treadmill15,16
- Most recently developed locomotion device for
U.S. Army - Revolutionary device that enables bipedal
locomotion in any direction of travel - Consists of two perpendicular treadmills
- Two fundamental types of movement
- User initiated movement
- System initiated movement
27Torus treadmill
28Virtual Motion Controller17
- Weight sensors in platform sense users position
over platform - Step in direction to move that direction
- Step further to go faster
29Walking in place18,19
- Analyze tracker information from head, body, feet
- Neural network (Slater)
- GAITER project (Templeman)
- Shown to be better than purely virtual movement,
but worse than real walking20
30Classification of locomotion devices/techniques
31Input and output with a single device
- Classic example - touch screen
- LCD tablets or PDAs with pen-based input
- Phantom haptic device
- FEELEX haptic device21
32PDA as ideal VE device?22
- Offers both input and output
- Has on-board memory
- Wireless communication
- Portable, light, robust
- Allows text / number input
- Can be tracked to allow spatial input
33Conclusions
- When choosing a device, consider
- Cost
- Generality
- DOFs
- Ergonomics / human factors
- Typical scenarios of use
- Output devices
- Interaction techniques
34Acknowledgments
- Doug Bowman, Virginia Tech, Center for
Human-Computer Interaction - Joe LaViola, Brown University, for slides and
discussions - Ron Spencer, presentation on locomotion devices
used by the Army
35References
- 1 Matias, E., MacKenzie, I., Buxton, W.
(1993). Half-QWERTY A One-handed Keyboard
Facilitating Skill Transfer from QWERTY.
Proceedings of ACM INTERCHI, 88-94. - 2 Thomas, B., Tyerman, S., Grimmer, K.
(1998). Evaluation of Text Input Mechanisms for
Wearable Computers. Virtual Reality Research,
Development, and Applications, 3, 187-199. - 3 LaViola, J., Acevedo, D., Keefe, D.,
Zeleznik, R. (2001). Hands-Free Multi-Scale
Navigation in Virtual Environments. Proceedings
of ACM Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 9-15. - 4 Keefe, D., Feliz, D., Moscovich, T., Laidlaw,
D., LaViola, J. (2001). CavePainting A Fully
Immersive 3D Artistic Medium and Interactive
Experience. Proceedings of ACM Symposium on
Interactive 3D Graphics, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, 85-93. - 5 Bowman, D., Wineman, J., Hodges, L.,
Allison, D. (1998). Designing Animal Habitats
Within an Immersive VE. IEEE Computer Graphics
Applications, 18(5), 9-13. - 6 Hinckley, K., Pausch, R., Goble, J.,
Kassell, N. (1994). Passive Real-World Interface
Props for Neurosurgical Visualization.
Proceedings of CHI Human Factors in Computing
Systems, 452-458. - 7 Kessler, G., Hodges, L., Walker, N. (1995).
Evaluation of the CyberGlove(TM) as a Whole Hand
Input Device. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human
Interaction, 2(4), 263-283. - 8 LaViola, J., Zeleznik, R. (1999). Flex and
Pinch A Case Study of Whole-Hand Input Design
for Virtual Environment Interaction. Proceedings
of the International Conference on Computer
Graphics and Imaging, 221-225. - 9 Ware, C., Jessome, D. (1988). Using the
Bat a Six-Dimensional Mouse for Object
Placement. IEEE Computer Graphics and
Applications, 8(6), 65-70. - 10 Zeleznik, R. C., Herndon, K. P., Robbins, D.
C., Huang, N., Meyer, T., Parker, N., Hughes,
J. F. (1993). An Interactive 3D Toolkit for
Constructing 3D Widgets. Proceedings of ACM
SIGGRAPH, Anaheim, CA, USA, 81-84.
36References (2)
- 11 Balakrishnan, R., Fitzmaurice, G.,
Kurtenbach, G., Singh, K. (1999). Exploring
Interactive Curve and Surface Manipulation Using
a Bend and Twist Sensitive Input Strip.
Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Interactive
3D Graphics, 111-118. - 12 Froehlich, B., Plate, J. (2000). The Cubic
Mouse A New Device for Three-Dimensional Input.
Proceedings of ACM CHI. - 13 Mapes, D., Moshell, J. (1995). A
Two-Handed Interface for Object Manipulation in
Virtual Environments. Presence Teleoperators and
Virtual Environments, 4(4), 403-416. - 14 Bowman, D., Wingrave, C., Campbell, J.,
Ly, V. (2001). Using Pinch Gloves for both
Natural and Abstract Interaction Techniques in
Virtual Environments. Proceedings of HCI
International, New Orleans, Louisiana. - 15 Darken, R., Cockayne, W., Carmein, D.
(1997). The Omni-directional Treadmill A
Locomotion Device for Virtual Worlds. Proceedings
of ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and
Technology, 213-221. - 16 Iwata, H. (1999). Walking About Virtual
Environments on an Infinite Floor. Proceedings of
IEEE Virtual Reality, Houston, Texas, 286-293. - 17 Wells, M., Peterson, B., Aten, J. (1996).
The Virtual Motion Controller A
Sufficient-Motion Walking Simulator. Proceedings
of IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International
Symposium, 1-8. - 18 Slater, M., Usoh, M., Steed, A. (1995).
Taking Steps The Influence of a Walking
Technique on Presence in Virtual Reality. ACM
Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 2(3),
201-219. - 19 Slater, M., Steed, A., Usoh, M. (1995).
The Virtual Treadmill A Naturalistic Metaphor
for Navigation in Immersive Virtual Environments,
Virtual Environments '95 Selected Papers of the
Eurographics Workshops (pp. 135-148). New York
SpringerWien. - 20 Usoh, M., Arthur, K., Whitton, M., Bastos,
R., Steed, A., Slater, M., Brooks, F. (1999).
Walking gt Walking-in-Place gt Flying, in Virtual
Environments. Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH,
359-364.
37References (3)
- 21 Iwata, H., Yano, H., Nakaizumi, F.,
Kawamura, R. (2001). Project FEELEX adding
haptic surface to graphics. Proceedings of ACM
SIGGRAPH, Los Angeles, 469-476. - 22 Watsen, K., Darken, R., Capps, M. (1999).
A Handheld Computer as an Interaction Device to a
Virtual Environment. Proceedings of the Third
Immersive Projection Technology Workshop. - 23 Zhai, S. (1998). User Performance in
Relation to 3D Input Device Design. Computer
Graphics, 32(4), 50-54.