4.4 Article

ANISMA: A Prototyping Toolkit to Explore Haptic Skin Deformation Applications Using Shape-Memory Alloys

出版社

ASSOC COMPUTING MACHINERY
DOI: 10.1145/3490497

关键词

Haptic; tactile; toolkit; authoring; shape-memory alloy; SMA; skin; deformation; design; fabrication; programming; prototyping; software; hardware

资金

  1. Assistive Augmentation research grant under the Entrepreneurial Universities (EU) initiative of New Zealand

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article presents ANISMA, a software and hardware toolkit for prototyping on-skin haptic devices. The toolkit utilizes shape-memory alloys to generate various skin deformation stimuli and incorporates expert knowledge to make it more accessible for researchers in human-computer interaction. The toolkit provides design, programming, and verification functions, as well as the ability to export and print the layout of the haptic devices on the skin, offering convenience for researchers and designers.
We present ANISMA, a software and hardware toolkit to prototype on-skin haptic devices that generate skin deformation stimuli like pressure, stretch, and motion using shape-memory alloys (SMAs). Our toolkit embeds expert knowledge that makes SMA spring actuators more accessible to human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers. Using our software tool, users can design different actuator layouts, program their spatio-temporal actuation and preview the resulting deformation behavior to verify a design at an early stage. Our toolkit allows exporting the actuator layout and 3D printing it directly on skin adhesive. To test different actuation sequences on the skin, a user can connect the SMA actuators to our customized driver board and reprogram them using our visual programming interface. We report a technical analysis, verify the perceptibility of essential ANISMA skin deformation devices with 8 participants, and evaluate ANISMA regarding its usability and supported creativity with 12 HCI researchers in a creative design task.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据