Class 24, Mon 11/23

The Project 3 physical computing concept presentations took place in this order:

1. Solus Sneakers, a wearable tech product featuring a sneaker with soles that can adjust to different terrains. The group conceived of three sensors/inputs with two outputs, with the sneaker self-powered by a piezoelectric transducer. I gave in-class feedback on considering a conceptual sensor that could detect ground textures, since the accelerometer and inclinometer were too similar. So the group’s final sensors were pressure, accelerometer, and topographic, plus GPS via a mobile app. Their outputs were electric rotary and linear (to allow a wheel to come out). The interview they conducted revealed the importance of clear diagram labels, for example. Group members: Karla Ramirez, Eric Rennie, Ercel Williams, and Jaiden Williams.
2. The AutoDoor, a smart home device inspired by automatic car door openers, applied instead to an automatic home door opener. I gave feedback on figuring out how to effectively verify identity so that the door opens for the right person. The group came up with a “Tri-Sensor” consisting of a microphone to detect voice quality and commands, a PIR motion sensor to detect distance from the door, and a camera to use with facial recognition software. Their output was an electric motor connected to a hydraulic door hinge, and during group feedback, they also realized that LED lighting and/or a speaker could be used to give visual and/or audio feedback to alert people to the door being opened. They conceived of a voice command to close the door. The interview they conducted surfaced concerns around privacy and security, for example. Group members: Antonio Almaguer, Makeda Boone, Sahan Jayalath, and Ling Mei Wu.
3. Medication Organizer, a smart product designed with the elderly in mind, that can be loaded with enough pills for a week, for example, and that can sort and dispense the right pills at the right times. Inputs are buttons and a weight (pressure) sensor, and output are speakers (for computer-voice alerts), LEDs, and motors to revolve the pill containers. After hearing in-class feedback, they thought a counter would be needed to keep track of pill numbers, and a way to override the device if it malfunctions. Group members: Donnell Maylor, Stephany Pena, and Ryan Rahul.
4. NOVID, a smart mask initially conceived of to solve the problem of not being heard by others when wearing a mask, but that also tried to solve the problem of detecting COVID-19. The group discussed multiple sensor inputs, such as a throat transdermal microphone, a breath sensor, a thermo sensor, and outputs such as a fan, an infrared light, and lightweight speakers. I had suggested an OLED display on the outside of the mask to show a transcription of what the person said, via speech-to-text code, and the group incorporated that into their sketch. Their interviewee suggested Bluetooth connectivity. Group members: Zarina Barsh, Jason Chang, and Danielley Ostolaza.

Each of your Project 3 grades factored in your participation from classes 21-24, your Arduino quiz answers, your group’s Physical Computing Concept Outline (including influence and circuit research links and explanations), an interview with someone outside the class to obtain critical feedback on your group’s idea, the p5.js sketch (which ideally loaded at least one image file and illustrated a human-activated change to your concept via a key-press or mouse-click), and the quality and comprehensiveness of your group’s presentation. The presentation file was evaluated in a similar manner to the ones you did for Project 1.

As with the first group project, the most important “takeaway” is meant to be the process — ideation, sketching, research, communication, collaboration on the “deliverables.” In this case, the learning goal was how you can utilize sensors and actuators in a concept project to creatively solve a particular problem of interest. This class marked the end of the Physical Computing module.

Print this page