Exercise 3 - 02/20/2018

Problem Statement

The Short Version:

• What do we want to do:
  • A gesture recognition and tracking device that will direct user input to a computer and interpret the data as natural mouse movement.
• Who do we want to do it for:
  • Our project has the potential to be used for everyone that currently uses a regular mouse and wants an alternative.
  • This product would have the most significant impact on those that have trouble handling a mouse, such as a victim to Arthritis or motor control disabilities.
• Why we want to do it:
  • We want to provide a universal input device that is convenient and easy to use.

The group has decided to address the need for gesture control to provide an easy way for people to interact with technology. To achieve this, the group would like to utilize a hardware and software solution with a motion tracking or motion capture method that could be encoded on the device and converted to a communication layer that external devices can communicate with.

It is imperative to note that interacting with technology can be very difficult for a lot of people that have a disability or discomfort. A large problem in the space of accessible technology, especially a niche market such as this, is that the solution is cumbersome, falters in performance, and/or is overpriced.

Although in the next steps of this exercise we detail multiple use cases, the ultimate design will focus on only one of these groups. Each group poses unique challenges and design specifications and at this stage or our product it would be impossible to address them all. We decided to elaborate on the problems of multiple groups to determine which group's problems can be realistically overcome and which one can serve as the platform for a more transferable solution in the future.

Statement/Restatement

1. The Real Problem Contrasted with the Stated Problem

Initial Statement: Current computer input devices are limited by the users environment and/or user physical ability.

Restatement: Productivity and usability are decreased when a user has trouble precisely and comfortably using a mouse (controlling the cursor).

2. Actual Statement and Inferred Boundaries:

Actual Statement:

• Using a mouse precisely and comfortably requires a certain level of hand dexterity.
• Hand Dexterity can be inhibited by physical condition, age, disease, etc.
• User performance suffers depending on the type and size of surface being used.

Inferred Boundaries:

• A mouse can only accept input through a limited range of motions, like clicking, scrolling, and moving the mouse forward, backward, or side to side.
• Users with physical ailments such as arthritis have problems using traditional mice accurately. Either it causes them pain, discomfort, or imprecision.
• Laser point mice have trouble reading on certain surfaces.
• Wired mice have a limited range of motion which can be inconvenient
• Traditional mice only have left click, right click, middle mouse click, and scroll wheel.

3. Identifying Meaningful Goals:

Meaningful goals:

• Create a small user device that allows mouse-like inputs (i.e. cursor control) without the need to physically hold something.
• Create a small user device that allows mouse-like inputs (i.e. cursor control) without the need of a mouse pad/compatible surface.

Inferred goals:

• Create an alternative for people with motor control disabilities for a mouse.
• Create a comfortable alternative for people frustrated with normal computer mouses.

4. Relationship between Input and Output

Inputs

• A person’s reason for wanting an alternative (i.e. hand control issues, always using laptop on lap, etc.).
• User controls cursors without a traditional mouse.

Outputs

• Expected mouse inputs into a computer.

Unknown

• For people with a disability:
  • How much of a struggle is moving their hand precisely? (whether from discomfort or lack of motor controls).
  • What are they physically capable of doing?

Kepner-Tregoe Analysis

Situation analysis (SA)

Timing/Trend - increase in technology surrounding computer-user interfaces and medical devices. People with certain disabilities are living longer and are enabled in more ways today and they may need/want to use the computer. Laptops and WI-FI are extremely commonplace and people want to use their laptops with mouse-like inputs while sitting on the couch, on a train, etc.

Impact - Generally moderate impact. For individuals with poor control due to a disability, the impact would be huge because they would have a lot more accessibility than before. For people that want something like this for convenience, the product has low urgency but would still have a significant impact on their comfort while using their computers.

We know that common computer mouses have certain requirements for normal use. The alternative to overcoming those requirements has three parts: 1) the user’s hand piece that captures data or is being tracked by 2) A sensor suite that collects the hand piece motion and thus user’s inputs and 3) A program or service that collects the aforementioned data and translates it to cursor inputs. Additionally depending on design choices, we need to implement how the sensor/data tracking suite interfaces with a personal computer (i.e. USB, bluetooth).

Problem analysis (PA)

Identity - Typical Mouses require steady hand and wrist movements on a flat, compatible surface.

Location - Anywhere a mouse alternative is needed such as on the go, at work, in class (on the really tiny desks), etc.

Timing - This is a problem that users are facing today. However, we are trying to anticipate the growing base of computer users that suffer from physical ailments due to age or disease. Additionally, people will continuously use computers on the go so this solution will address concerns with using a mouse in unorthodox places.

Magnitude - The immediate effect would be significant to those that need something like this to have mouse-like control such as arthritis victims.

Decision analysis (DA)

In order to eliminate the problems associated with the typical mouse, we need to eliminate the base cause: the physical mouse. By having a physical peripheral device to be manipulated, we isolate the users who have trouble operating such a device. Therefore the actions needed to be taken are to remove the device and determine a way to operate a computer without it, e.g. gesture control.

Potential problem analysis (PPA)

In order to avoid the recurrence of the problem or the development of subsequent problems, we need to focus on rethinking the interface entirely instead of improving on the typical mouse. We need to do research into what kind of motion is most accessible to our target audience and build a design encompassing those parameters. To avoid future usability issues with our product we need to test our product with a various user groups and under various environmental variables throughout the design process.

KT Problem Analysis - What, When, Who, Where, Why, How Tables

We answered the questions in the KT tables at the end of lecture 3 to the best of our abilities.