skip to main content
10.1145/3173225.3173226acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Ani-Bot: A Modular Robotics System Supporting Creation, Tweaking, and Usage with Mixed-Reality Interactions

Published:18 March 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Ani-Bot is a modular robotics system that allows users to control their DIY robots using Mixed-Reality Interaction (MRI). This system takes advantage of MRI to enable users to visually program the robot through the augmented view of a Head-Mounted Display (HMD). In this paper, we first explain the design of the Mixed-Reality (MR) ready modular robotics system, which allows users to instantly perform MRI once they finish assembling the robot. Then, we elaborate the augmentations provided by the MR system in the three primary phases of a construction kit's lifecycle: Creation, Tweaking, and Usage. Finally, we demonstrate Ani-Bot with four application examples and evaluate the system with a two-session user study. The results of our evaluation indicate that Ani-Bot does successfully embed MRI into the lifecycle (Creation, Tweaking, Usage) of DIY robotics and that it does show strong potential for delivering an enhanced user experience.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

fp1015.mp4

mp4

61.4 MB

References

  1. 2017. CageBot. (2017). https://www.cagebot.com/shop/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2017. Code-a-pillar. (2017). http://fisher-price.mattel.com/shop/en-us/fp/think-learn-code-a-pillar-starter-gift-set-fgn83.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 2017. Cubelets. (2017). http://www.modrobotics.com/cubelets/cubelets-twenty/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 2017. HoloLens. (2017). https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/hololens.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 2017. Lego Mindstorm. (2017). https://www.lego.com/en-us/mindstorms.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 2017. MOSS. (2017). http://www.modrobotics.com/moss/programming/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. 2017. Tinkerbots. (2017). https://www.tinkerbots.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. 2017. VEX Robotics. (2017). https://www.vexrobotics.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 2017. Vuforia. (2017). https://www.vuforia.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. David Anderson, James L Frankel, Joe Marks, Aseem Agarwala, Paul Beardsley, Jessica Hodgins, Darren Leigh, Kathy Ryall, Eddie Sullivan, and Jonathan S Yedidia. 2000. Tangible interaction+ graphical interpretation: a new approach to 3D modeling. In Proceedings of the 27th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 393--402. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Ayah Bdeir. 2009. Electronics as material: littleBits. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction. ACM, 397--400. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Jonathan Wun Shiung Chong, SK Ong, Andrew YC Nee, and K Youcef-Youmi. 2009. Robot programming using augmented reality: An interactive method for planning collision-free paths. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 25, 3 (2009), 689--701. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. HC Fang, SK Ong, and AYC Nee. 2012. Interactive robot trajectory planning and simulation using augmented reality. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 28, 2 (2012), 227--237. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. HC Fang, SK Ong, and AYC Nee. 2014. A novel augmented reality-based interface for robot path planning. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) 8, 1 (2014), 33--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Jared A Frank, Matthew Moorhead, and Vikram Kapila. 2016. Realizing mixed-reality environments with tablets for intuitive human-robot collaboration for object manipulation tasks. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 302--307.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Richard Fung, Sunao Hashimoto, Masahiko Inami, and Takeo Igarashi. 2011. An augmented reality system for teaching sequential tasks to a household robot. In RO-MAN, 2011 IEEE. IEEE, 282--287.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Saikat Gupta, Sujin Jang, and Karthik Ramani. 2014. PuppetX: a framework for gestural interactions with user constructed playthings. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces. ACM, 73--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Sunao Hashimoto, Akihiko Ishida, Masahiko Inami, and Takeo Igarashi. 2011. Touchme: An augmented reality based remote robot manipulation. In 21st Int. Conf. on Artificial Reality and Telexistence, Proc. of ICAT2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Steven J Henderson and Steven K Feiner. 2011. Augmented reality in the psychomotor phase of a procedural task. In Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), 2011 10th IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 191--200. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Valentin Heun, James Hobin, and Pattie Maes. 2013a. Reality editor: Programming smarter objects. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing adjunct publication. ACM, 307--310. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Valentin Heun, Shunichi Kasahara, and Pattie Maes. 2013b. Smarter objects: using AR technology to program physical objects and their interactions. In CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 961--966. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Hiroshi Ishii. 2008. The tangible user interface and its evolution. Commun. ACM 51, 6 (2008), 32--36. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Kentaro Ishii, Yoshiki Takeoka, Masahiko Inami, and Takeo Igarashi. 2010. Drag-and-drop interface for registration-free object delivery. In RO-MAN, 2010 IEEE. IEEE, 228--233.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Shunichi Kasahara, Ryuma Niiyama, Valentin Heun, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2013. exTouch: spatially-aware embodied manipulation of actuated objects mediated by augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction. ACM, 223--228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Majeed Kazemitabaar, Jason McPeak, Alexander Jiao, Liang He, Thomas Outing, and Jon E Froehlich. 2017. MakerWear: A Tangible Approach to Interactive Wearable Creation for Children. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 133--145. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Yoshifumi Kitamura, Yuichi Itoh, Toshihiro Masaki, and Fumio Kishino. 2000. ActiveCube: a bi-directional user interface using cubes. In Knowledge-Based Intelligent Engineering Systems and Allied Technologies, 2000. Proceedings. Fourth International Conference on, Vol. 1. IEEE, 99--102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Jens Lambrecht, Martin Kleinsorge, Martin Rosenstrauch, and Jörg Krüger. 2013. Spatial programming for industrial robots through task demonstration. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems 10, 5 (2013), 254.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Daniel Leithinger, Sean Follmer, Alex Olwal, Samuel Luescher, Akimitsu Hogge, Jinha Lee, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2013. Sublimate: state-changing virtual and physical rendering to augment interaction with shape displays. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 1441--1450. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Joanne Leong, Florian Perteneder, Hans-Christian Jetter, and Michael Haller. 2017. What a Life!: Building a Framework for Constructive Assemblies.. In Tangible and Embedded Interaction. 57--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Natan Linder and Pattie Maes. 2010. LuminAR: portable robotic augmented reality interface design and prototype. In Adjunct proceedings of the 23nd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. ACM, 395--396. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Sotiris Makris, George Pintzos, Loukas Rentzos, and George Chryssolouris. 2013. Assembly support using AR technology based on automatic sequence generation. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology 62, 1 (2013), 9--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Andrew Miller, Brandyn White, Emiko Charbonneau, Zach Kanzler, and Joseph J LaViola Jr. 2012. Interactive 3D model acquisition and tracking of building block structures. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 18, 4 (2012), 651--659. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Lai Xing Ng, SK Ong, and AYC Nee. 2010. ARCADE: a simple and fast augmented reality computer-aided design environment using everyday objects. (2010).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Lai Xing Ng, SW Oon, Soh Khim Ong, and A YC Nee. 2011. GARDE: a gesture-based augmented reality design evaluation system. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing 5, 2 (2011), 85--94.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Hyunjoo Oh and Mark D Gross. 2015. Cube-in: A Learning Kit for Physical Computing Basics. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. ACM, 383--386. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. SK Ong, Yu Pang, and AYC Nee. 2007. Augmented reality aided assembly design and planning. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology 56, 1 (2007), 49--52.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Hayes Solos Raffle, Amanda J Parkes, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2004. Topobo: a constructive assembly system with kinetic memory. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 647 654. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Philipp Schoessler, Daniel Windham, Daniel Leithinger, Sean Follmer, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2015. Kinetic Blocks: Actuated Constructive Assembly for Interaction and Display. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology. ACM, 341--349. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Jasjeet Singh Seehra, Ansh Verma, Kylie Peppler, and Karthik Ramani. 2015. Handimate: Create and animate using everyday objects as material. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. ACM, 117--124. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Orit Shaer and Eva Hornecker. 2010. Tangible user interfaces: past, present, and future directions. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction 3, 1--2 (2010), 1--137. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Ronit Slyper, Guy Hoffman, and Ariel Shamir. 2015. Mirror Puppeteering: Animating Toy Robots in Front of a Webcam. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. ACM, 241--248. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Masanori Sugimoto, Tomoki Fujita, Haipeng Mi, and Aleksander Krzywinski. 2011. RoboTable2: a novel programming environment using physical robots on a tabletop platform. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology. ACM, 10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Amanda Sullivan, Mollie Elkin, and Marina Umaschi Bers. 2015. KIBO robot demo: Engaging young children in programming and engineering. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on interaction design and children. ACM, 418--421. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. X Wang, SK Ong, and Andrew Yeh-Ching Nee. 2016. Multi-modal augmented-reality assembly guidance based on bare-hand interface. Advanced Engineering Informatics 30, 3 (2016), 406--421. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. ZB Wang, SK Ong, and AYC Nee. 2013. Augmented reality aided interactive manual assembly design. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 69, 5--8 (2013), 1311--1321.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Michael Philetus Weller, Ellen Yi-Luen Do, and Mark D Gross. 2008. Posey: instrumenting a poseable hub and strut construction toy. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction. ACM, 39--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. ML Yuan, SK Ong, and AYC Nee. 2008. Augmented reality for assembly guidance using a virtual interactive tool. International Journal of Production Research 46, 7 (2008), 1745--1767.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. J Zhang, SK Ong, and AYC Nee. 2011. RFID-assisted assembly guidance system in an augmented reality environment. International Journal of Production Research 49, 13 (2011), 3919--3938.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Ani-Bot: A Modular Robotics System Supporting Creation, Tweaking, and Usage with Mixed-Reality Interactions

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      TEI '18: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction
      March 2018
      763 pages
      ISBN:9781450355681
      DOI:10.1145/3173225

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 18 March 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      TEI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate37of130submissions,28%Overall Acceptance Rate393of1,367submissions,29%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader