Lines, Planes, & Spaces: 3-D Prototyping
HCID 521 Prototyping Studio | Week 2 | In-Class Activity
This week we proceeded to 3-D lo-fi prototyping. The additional dimension from paper prototyping (2-D) allows implementation and understanding in real world spaces. We practiced a 2-hour quick session in constructing a prototype of ecoATM. We were randomly assigned into teams of 4, and we had to turn in a 3-D physical prototype with a 5-minute presentation.
ecoATM
The topic was to re-design ecoATM (details), a device that recycles your used electronic devices and returns you money. Besides basic functions of the ecoATM, there were simply no other design constraints, and we were told not to focus on UI but to concentrate on the interaction pattern of using it.
First, we figured out all the required components of this device to analyze each function and how users interact with these components
- Touch screen
- A drawer for placing the device(s)
- Identification check
- Payment service (card and cash)
- Printer (receipt and QR code sticker)
After laying out a brief flow of interface, the printer component was divided into the cash outlet part (for receipt) and the drawer (for QR code stickers for devices). We also came up with several crucial factors of the design:
- Drawer to place the device must be firm and stabilized enough to protect the devices, big enough to contain all different types of electronic devices, and wide/tall enough to allow users to put their devices in without any barriers.
- Plugs for the devices should reachable to users and enable users to easily plug in to devices.
- Touch screen should be at both eye position and easy to reach by finger.
- Every component should be the same distance to users while no component should be the barrier of user using another one. This means, drawer is not allowed to located between touch screen and users. (At the timing when the component is functional. For example, not showing identification check component, if the ID check process is done, is acceptable.)
IDEAS
Before moving on to prototyping, we came up with several design ideas. One of our idea was sitting at the ATM instead of standing and leaving both screen and drawer on a horizontally flat service, since moving devices such as your old laptop can be a problem if standing. We even thought of the possibility of using the cover of drawer (container with a up-lifted or back-slided cover in this case) as the touch screen of the ATM, and applying several existing technology of touch screen and camera, putting the payment and identification components into touch screen.
We also conducted several secondary research on the internet and found different models of ecoATM. The latest one put all the components of ATM on a curved surface, visually and literally simplifying steps users taking while using product. After a long discussion between groundbreaking ideas and realistic ones based on existing models, we decided to go with the later one.
3-D LO-FI PROTOTYPING
Before we had a base of our design, I tossed out the idea of bringing back some techniques in paper prototyping, using it in a 3-D way: laying out the position of different components on a standing paper. Several post-its were made to represent different components in various sizes, just to visualize the idea in an quick and painless way instead of sketching out 3-D models. This helped us to figure out which layout would be the most effective way to interact with users.
We started to build our prototype by recycled boxes, white foam core boards, marker pens, cutting tools and tapes.
CRITIQUE
Feedback of our critique were mostly positive. The frequently received ones were practical point of view, good work in combining different components into one (such as putting payment and identification together), leaving the physical interaction part existing in current ATMs. Due to limitation of course hours we did not have an entire critique session. If we did, frankly I would like to receive more feedbacks with various perspectives, especially the disadvantages and concerns of our ideas, and how it compares to other teams’ prototypes.
LEARNING: WORKING WITH ADDITIONAL DIMENSION
Since I personally always want to learn to design in 3-D spaces, I do found some pros and cons in working with 3-D prototyping when it compares to traditional paper prototyping.
The advantages of 3-D lo-fi prototype:
- Able to implement and observe users’ interaction with products since having a more integrated scenario, especially the scenario could be more complicated while adding surroundings into consideration.
- It is still lo-fi, which means it can still be built in short time. That means the iteration between testing and re-design can still be fast with the help from 3-D prototype.
Some disadvantages or trade-off points of 3-D prototype:
- Scale. The scale you make for 3-D prototype depends on the understanding you want to acquire from process of creating and testing it. 1:1 scale one can be used to show more integrated ergonomic considerations, however it takes time to build one. Smaller ones can be built quickly and can easily show the whole picture of design, but it is not appropriate for several testing when environment or surrounding is in concern.
- Understanding in hardware: building 3-D prototype definitely needs some people with more hardware understanding, which brings up the issue of feasibility in hardware design. It can cause trouble if a team without hardware design background has finished several rounds of prototyping and testing, before finding out it is not pratical in hardware building. However, hardware is also an important role of interaction and interface design since it implies users operating interfaces in different ways (such as different interface design for same application between iPhone and HTC One). The lower the fidelity of prototype is, the less this issue influences entire design process.
CONCERN OF OUR OWN WORK
I was glad we came up with a lo-fi prototype that fully demonstrated our short-term secondary research. However, I had some reservation in coming up with a prototype of a relatively conservative idea. Since we were in initial stage of design, we should have come up with more thoughtful and groundbreaking ideas, which we did come up with during our discussion (but eventually implemented a conservative one), since this was the first prototype in our entire design process.
Based on my previous work experience in design (during both studying and working), in the very beginning stage of design, limiting ourselves to too many constraints instead of focusing on a single factor or two (like, eye position, or hand position while operating) might make ourselves lose chances to gain innovative and feasible ideas from feedback of user testing. Although our prototype was well-done, considering we had worked for only 2 hours, personally I think in earlier stage of prototype we should try to be bold in ideas, whether we are in professional or academic scene.
In this case, first, our secondary research had brought us several early assumptions without some actually testing, and it had limited us from developing ideas. Second, we should have demonstrated different ideas in paper in our group discussion instead of discussing them in words only. Third, especially in lo-fi prototyping stage, we should find the balance between optimizing design and speeding up the iteration between prototyping and testing, and I think it is not the best timing to take too many practical factors into consideration.
REFLECTION OF WORK DYNAMIC IN MHCI+D
Personally, this is actually a great lesson to learn in MHCI+D program, since we are studying with both experienced people and ones fresh out of school. Like what happened in this in-class exercise, we get to know there are no absolute pros and cons when it comes to work experience. Also, by observing advantages of different students, we acquire different points of view and perspectives, which strengthen our ability to work and communicate more flexibly.
