Presentation on theme: "The VR Scooter Leonidas Deligiannidis Robert J.K. Jacob Wind and Tactile Feedback Improve User Performance."— Presentation transcript:
The VR Scooter Leonidas Deligiannidis Robert J.K. Jacob Wind and Tactile Feedback Improve User Performance
VR Scooter Simulating a physical scooter. Natural and easy travel in a large scale virtual environments (user utilizes skills gained in the real world). Vibrotactile actuators simulate motion speed. A fan simulates wind when the scooter is in motion. Our study shows that wind and tactile feedback improved user performance.
Traveling in IVE Traveling is difficult in general. Traveling is as effective as the device utilized. Technique/device should be easy to master. How many degrees of freedom used at once?
Feedback Draw users attention at a particular point of interest. Collision information. In general to improve spatial awareness and improve level of immersion. VR Scooter: –Fan (Variable speed). –Vibrotactile devices (Variable intensity). –A real physical device with springs and steering mechanism.
The VR Scooter Environment spring Serial Connections Computer 3D tracker Proprietary cable connecting the switches on the VR scooter to the Input Status Interface. Vibrotactile device 3D sensor fan Relay controller and input status interface Relay Controller Status Interface
The VR Environment
A VR Scooter User
Vehicle Based Traveling Technique Two Modes –Fly –Drive (Default) Pointing vs Vehicle- based Traveling techniques User rotates self, still pointing forward Arrow indicates the direction of travel
Experiment 10 minute training session (devices) 10 minutes practice with the VR Scooter; VE different from the trials VE. Two trials per person: with fans/tactors and without (VR enhanced, VR plain) 5 to 10 minutes break between trials. 13 subjects total ( one couldnt complete ), so 12 subjects total. The order was counterbalanced to eliminate differences in fatigue and learning. 10 out of the 12 subjects performed better in VR enhanced (order didnt matter). Ground collision enabled.
Experiment (Cont.) At the end of the experiment: –Q: The training session familiarized me with using the VR scooter. –5-point Likert scale (1. strongly disagree strongly agree) –The responses show that they were sufficiently familiarized with the VR scooter (Mean=4.75; Standard deviation=0.45).
Experiment (Cont.) Travel from start to finish –Measure Speed and Accuracy Subjects told us when they were ready verbally. Finally, the subjects filled out a survey containing questions about satisfaction with the interfaces and the level of immersion they presented to the user.
Results Our hypothesis was that in virtual environments subjects would perform better if the level of immersion is increased, which was achieved by the use of a fan and vibrotactile devices. within-subject experimental design. Our independent variable: traveling type –(using fan/vibrators and not using fan/vibrators). Our dependent variable: performance –(time to complete the task; getting from the start to the finish point). Scoring Penalty for inaccuracy.
Results (Cont.) No scoring penalty, no significant improvement in performance –F(1,11)=0.49, p=0.498 With Scoring penalty –F(1,11)=6.88, p=0.024 Performance measurements based on traveling type. VR plainVR enhanced MSDM F (1,11)p No penalty With penalty M and SD represent the mean and standard deviation respectively. F and p are from ANOVA analyses that compare the means of the answers in VR plain and VR enhanced. All questions were based on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1), to strongly agree (5).
Results (Cont.) Survey questions and results. VR plainVR enhanced Survey Questions MSDM F (1,22)p It is realistic experience using the fan and vibrators <0.001 The system is user friendly The system is easy to use It is ease to get started The VR scooter's travelling technique is accurate Fatigue felt while riding the VR scooter I am satisfied with the performance of the application M and SD represent the mean and standard deviation respectively. F and p are from ANOVA analyses that compare the means of the answers in VR plain and VR enhanced. All questions were based on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1), to strongly agree (5).
Results (Cont.) Open-ended question: Which version do you prefer: VR plain or VR enhanced and why. –All twelve subjects specified that overall they prefer the VR enhanced. experience more convincing, and the environment … comes to life Difficult to figure out their speed of travel in VR plain (going through walls, late turning/tilting)
Results (Cont.) –Moreover, we asked all subjects if they find the utilization of fans and vibrotactile devices useful in Virtual Reality and particularly in scooter-based traveling techniques. –The results suggest that the utilization of fans and vibrotactile devices are useful in Virtual Environments (mean=4.83, standard deviation=0.39) based on a 5-point Likert scale where 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree.