skip to main content
10.1145/3294109.3295624acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

WindyWall: Exploring Creative Wind Simulations

Authors Info & Claims
Published:17 March 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Wind simulations are typically one-off implementations for specific applications. We introduce WindyWall, a platform for creative design and exploration of wind simulations. WindyWall is a three-panel 90-fan array that encapsulates users with 270? of wind coverage. We describe the design and implementation of the array panels, discussing how the panels can be re-arranged, where various wind simulations can be realized as simple effects. To understand how people perceive "wind" generated from WindyWall, we conducted a pilot study of wind magnitude perception using different wind activation patterns from WindyWall. Our findings suggest that: horizontal wind activations are perceived more readily than vertical ones, and that people's perceptions of wind are highly variable-most individuals will rate airflow differently in subsequent exposures. Based on our findings, we discuss the importance of developing a method for characterizing wind simulations, and provide design directions for others using fan arrays to simulate wind.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

teifp1036.mp4

mp4

146.7 MB

References

  1. Duzgun Agdas, Gregory D. Webster, and Forrest J. Masters. 2012. Wind speed perception and risk. PloS one 7. no. 11 (2012): e49944.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. AS220 Industries. https://moderndevice.com/product/wind-sensor-rev-p/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Atmel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATmega328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Arduino. https://www.arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/arduino-mega2560_R3-sch.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Sylvain Cardin, Daniel Thalmann, and Frederic Vexo. 2007. Head mounted wind. In Proceedings of the 20th annual conference on Computer Animation and Social Agents (CASA2007). no. VRLAB-CONF-2007--136, 101--108.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Tom Carter, Sue Ann Seah, Benjamin Long, Bruce Drinkwater, and Sriram Subramanian. 2013. UltraHaptics: multi-point mid-air haptic feedback for touch surfaces. In Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. ACM, 505--514. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Amber Choo, Xin Tong, Diane Gromala, and Ari Hollander. 2014. Virtual reality and mobius floe: cognitive distraction as non-pharmacological analgesic for pain management. In Games for Health 2014. Springer, 8--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Leonidas Deligiannidis, and Robert JK Jacob. 2006. The vr scooter: Wind and tactile feedback improve user performance. In IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI 2006). IEEE, 143--150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Mark H. Draper, Erik S. Viirre, Thomas A. Furness, and Valerie J. Gawron. 2001. Effects of image scale and system time delay on simulator sickness within head-coupled virtual environments. Human factors 43, no. 1 (2001): 129--146.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Diane Gromala, Xin Tong, Amber Choo, Mehdi Karamnejad, and Chris D. Shaw. 2015. The virtual meditative walk: virtual reality therapy for chronic pain management. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 521--524. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Sidhant Gupta, Dan Morris, Shwetak N. Patel, and Desney Tan. 2013. AirWave: non-contact haptic feedback using air vortex rings. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing. ACM, 419--428. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Felix Hülsmann, Julia Fröhlich, Nikita Mattar, and Ipke Wachsmuth. 2014. Wind and warmth in virtual reality: implementation and evaluation. In Proceedings of the 2014 Virtual Reality International Conference. ACM, 24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Hiroshi Ishii, Sandia Ren, and Phil Frei. 2001. Pinwheels: visualizing information flow in an architectural space. In Ext. Abst. CHI 2001: 111--112. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Weina Jin, Amber Choo, Diane Gromala, Chris Shaw, and Pamela Squire. 2016. A virtual reality game for chronic pain management: a randomized, controlled clinical study. In MMVR. 154--160.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Lynette A. Jones, and Hong Z. Tan. 2013. Application of psychophysical techniques to haptic research. IEEE transactions on haptics 6. IEEE, no. 3 (2013), 268--284. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Terry K. Koo, and Mae Y. Li. 2016. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine 15, no 2, PMC, 155--163.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Yuichiro Kojima, Yuki Hashimoto, and Hiroyuki Kajimoto. 2009. A novel wearable device to present localized sensation of wind. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computer Enterntainment Technology. ACM, 61--65. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Sandip D. Kulkarni, Charles Fisher, Eric Pardyjak, Mark Minor, and John Hollerbach. 2009. Wind display device for locomotion interface in a virtual environment. In EuroHaptics conference, 2009 and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems. World Haptics 2009. Third Joint. IEEE, 184--189. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Sandip D. Kulkarni, Mark A. Minor, Mark W. Deaver, and Eric R. Pardyjak. 2007. Output feedback control of wind display in a virtual environment. In 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 832--839.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Jaeyeon Lee, and Geehyuk Lee. 2016. Designing a non-contact wearable tactile display using airflows. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, 183--194. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Anke Lehmann, Christian Geiger, Bjorn Woldecke, and Jorg Stocklein. 2009. Poster: Design and evaluation of 3D content with wind output. In IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI 2009). IEEE, 151--152. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Benjamin Long, Sue Ann Seah, Tom Carter, and Sriram Subramanian. 2014. Rendering volumetric haptic shapes in mid-air using ultrasound. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 33, no. 6 (2014), 181. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Weiquan Lu, Henry Been-Lirn Duh, Steven Feiner, and Qi Zhao. 2014. Attributes of subtle cues for facilitating visual search in augmented reality. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 20, 3, 404--412. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Mitsuru Minakuchi, and Satoshi Nakamura. 2007. Collaborative ambient systems by blow displays. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction. ACM, 105--108. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Taeyong Moon, and Gerard J. Kim. 2004. Design and evaluation of a wind display for virtual reality. In Proceedings of the ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology. ACM, 122--128. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Jason D. Moss, Jon Austin, James Salley, Julie Coats, Krysten Williams, and Eric R. Muth. 2011. The effects of display delay on simulator sickness. Displays 32, no. 4 (2011): 159--168.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Omar Mowafi, Mohamed Khamis, and Wael Abouelsaadat. 2015. AirDisplay: Experimenting with air flow as a communication medium. In Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 316--323.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Multicomp. http://www.farnell.com/datasheets/1772996.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Takuya Nakano, Shota Saji, and Yasuyuki Yanagida. 2012. Indicating wind direction using a fan-based wind display. In International Conference on Human Haptic Sensing and Touch Enabled Computer Applications. Springer, 97--102. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Mark Nazemi, Diane Gromala, and Mehdi Karamnejad. 2014. Virtual reality as analgesia: an alternative approach for managing chronic pain. International Journal of Creative Interfaces and Computer Graphics (IJCICG) 5, no. 2 (2014): 75--86. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Processing. https://processing.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Nimesha Ranasinghe, Pravar Jain, Shienny Karwita, David Tolley, and Ellen Yi-Luen Do. 2017. Ambiotherm: enhancing sense of presence in virtual reality by simulating real-world environmental conditions. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM 1731--1742. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Rajinder Sodhi, Ivan Poupyrev, Matthew Glisson, and Ali Israr. 2013. AIREAL: interactive tactile experiences in free air. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 32, no. 4 (2013): 134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Daniel Spelmezan, Rafael Morales González, and Sriram Subramanian. 2016. SkinHaptics: Ultrasound focused in the hand creates tactile sensations. In 2016 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS). IEEE, 98--105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Yuriko Suzuki, and Minoru Kobayashi. 2005. Air jet driven force feedback in virtual reality. IEEE computer graphics and applications 25, no. 1 (2005): 44--47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Jouke C. Verlinden, Fabian A. Mulder, Joris S. Vergeest, Anna de Jonge, Darina Krutiy, Zsuzsa Nagy, Bob J. Logeman, and Paul Schouten. 2013. Enhancement of presence in a virtual sailing environment through localized wind simulation. Procedia Engineering 60 (2013): 435--441.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Craig Wisneski, Hiroshi Ishii, Andrew Dahley, Matthew G. Gorbet, Scott Brave, Brygg Ullmer, and Paul Yarin. 1998. CoBuild 1998: 22--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Bob G Witmer and Michael J Singer. 1998. Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments 7, 3 (1998), 225--240. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. WindyWall: Exploring Creative Wind Simulations

    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 '19: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction
      March 2019
      785 pages
      ISBN:9781450361965
      DOI:10.1145/3294109

      Copyright © 2019 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 the author(s) 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: 17 March 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      TEI '19 Paper Acceptance Rate36of110submissions,33%Overall Acceptance Rate393of1,367submissions,29%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader