skip to main content
10.1145/3332167.3357118acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesuistConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Towards Consistent Haptic Coupling with HaptiStrap: Doing Better than "Tight yet Comfortable"

Published:14 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

How firmly a haptic device, such as a smartwatch, is coupled to the body can change how its haptic effects are perceived. However, hapticians often rely on vague subjective coupling characteristics such as "strapped snugly" or "tight yet comfortable". Achieving consistent strap tightness across body sites and between participants can be challenging, since even if strap tension is consistent, differences in limb circumference alter the resulting normal force under the haptic actuator in potentially unintuitive ways. Furthermore, when participants must attach the devices on their own, e.g., during a longitudinal in-the-wild study, they may not use the same tightness each day without guidance. We present HaptiStrap, a low-cost, easily fabricated tool, as a contribution towards a standard method for ensuring that wearable haptic studies do better than vague and subjective "tight yet comfortable" guidelines.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

upp1079pv.mp4

mp4

5.6 MB

References

  1. 2019. Gulick II Tape Measure (Model 67020). (2019). https://www.fitnessmart.com/products/gulick-ii-tape-measure?variant=27555940167Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Parisa Alirezaee, Roger Girgis, Taeyong Kim, Joseph J Schlesinger, and Jeremy R Cooperstock. 2017. Did you feel that? Developing Novel Multimodal Alarms for High Consequence Clinical Environments. In International Conference on Auditory Displays. Happy Valley, PA, USA, 175--181. https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/58377Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jeffrey R Blum, Ilja Frissen, and Jeremy R Cooperstock. 2015. Improving Haptic Feedback on Wearable Devices through Accelerometer Measurements. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology (UIST '15). ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 31--36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2807442.2807474Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. James C. Craig and Carl E. Sherrick. 1969. The role of skin coupling in the determination of vibrotactile spatial summation . Perception & Psychophysics 6, 2 (1969), 97--101. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03210689Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Daniel J. Fernandes, Gisele M. Abrah a o, Carlos N. Elias, and Alvaro M. Mendes. 2011. Force Relaxation Characteristics of Medium Force Orthodontic Latex Elastics: A Pilot Study . ISRN Dentistry 2011 (2011), 1--5. http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2011/536089Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Barry G Green and James C Craig. 1974. The roles of vibration amplitude and static force . Perception & Psychophysics 16, 3 (1974), 503--507. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03198578Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Gary L Harrelson, Deidre Leaver-Dunn, A Louise Fincher, and James D Leeper. 1998. Inter- and Intratester Reliability of Lower Extremity Circumference Measurements . Journal of Sport Rehabilitation 7, 4 (nov 1998), 300--306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jsr.7.4.300Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Paul B. Higgins and Anthony G. Comuzzie. 2012. Measures of Waist Circumference . In Handbook of Anthropometry, Victor R. Preedy (Ed.). Springer New York, New York, NY, Chapter 51, 882. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978--1--4419--1788--1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Pakhan Kanchana and Keith Godfrey. 2000. Calibration of force extension and force degradation characteristics of orthodontic latex elastics . American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 118, 3 (2000), 280--287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mod.2000.104493Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. J. Ng and J. Man. 2004. Vibro-Monitor: A Vibrotactile display for Physiological Data Monitoring. In Human Interface Technologies Conference. 8. http://www.ece.ubc.ca/ elec518/previous/hit2004/papers/NgMan.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. S Papetti, H J"a rvel"a inen, B L Giordano, S Schiesser, and M Frö hlich. 2017. Vibrotactile Sensitivity in Active Touch: Effect of Pressing Force . IEEE Transactions on Haptics 10, 1 (2017), 113--122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2016.2582485Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Oliver Schneider, Karon MacLean, Colin Swindells, and Kellogg Booth. 2017. Haptic experience design: What hapticians do and where they need help . Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 107, May (nov 2017), 5--21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.04.004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Hendrik a. H. C. Van Veen, Jan B. F. Van Erp, Trevor Dobbins, and Chris Jansen. 2005. Waypoint navigation with a vibrotactile waist belt . ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 2, 2 (2005), 106--117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1060581.1060585Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Towards Consistent Haptic Coupling with HaptiStrap: Doing Better than "Tight yet Comfortable"

    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
      UIST '19 Adjunct: Adjunct Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology
      October 2019
      192 pages
      ISBN:9781450368179
      DOI:10.1145/3332167

      Copyright © 2019 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 14 October 2019

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • poster

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate842of3,967submissions,21%

      Upcoming Conference

      UIST '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader