skip to main content
10.1145/3568294.3580205acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageshriConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Utility Belt for an Agricultural Robot: Reflections on Performing Design Research in the Field

Published:13 March 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

By performing design research in the field, designers can better understand the target context, needs, values, and concerns of their users, and iterate on potential solutions. This, in turn, helps designers apply their work to unexplored territories. We illustrate the opportunities and requirements of this method through a case study of the development of a multi-purpose utility belt for an agriculture robot. We benefited from being able to observe current practices, collaborating to test prototypes with on-site roboticists and farmers, and sharing documentation in the moment. On the other hand, it could be challenging to improvise space for the design work or to find the right times to interrupt locals, and to negotiate the documentation activity with people who have concerns about being recorded.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

video1007.mp4

mp4

53.8 MB

References

  1. Steven Dow, Wendy Ju, and Wendy Mackay. 2013. Projection, Place and Point-of-view in Research through Design. The SAGE Handbook of Digital Technology Research (2013), 266--285.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Natalie Friedman, Kari Love, RAY LC, Jenny E Sabin, Guy Hoffman, and Wendy Ju. 2021. What robots need from clothing. In Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021. 1345--1355.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jean Hardy, Chanda Phelan, Morgan Vigil-Hayes, Norman Makoto Su, Susan Wyche, and Phoebe Sengers. 2019. Designing from the rural. Interactions 26, 4 (2019), 37--41.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Brigitte Jordan and Austin Henderson. 1995. Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The journal of the learning sciences 4, 1 (1995), 39--103.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Selma ?abanović, Sarah M Reeder, and Bobak Kechavarzi. 2014. Designing robots in the wild: In situ prototype evaluation for a break management robot. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction 3, 1 (2014), 70--88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Donald A Schön. 1984. The architectural studio as an exemplar of education for reflection-in-action. Journal of Architectural Education 38, 1 (1984), 2--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Utility Belt for an Agricultural Robot: Reflections on Performing Design Research in the Field

    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
      HRI '23: Companion of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
      March 2023
      612 pages
      ISBN:9781450399708
      DOI:10.1145/3568294

      Copyright © 2023 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: 13 March 2023

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • abstract

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate242of1,000submissions,24%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)81
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader