About my blog

The aim of the ITD course (ID4220) at the Delft University of Technology is to provide Design For Interaction Master students with in-depth theoretical and practical interaction design knowledge to help develop future products based on user-product social interaction. ITD proceeds through a sequence of iterations focusing on various aspects of the brief and the design, and culminates in an experiential prototype.

This blog is managed by Walter A. Aprile: please write if you have questions.



De meningen ge-uit door medewerkers en studenten van de TU Delft en de commentaren die zijn gegeven reflecteren niet perse de mening(en) van de TU Delft. De TU Delft is dan ook niet verantwoordelijk voor de inhoud van hetgeen op de TU Delft weblogs zichtbaar is. Wel vindt de TU Delft het belangrijk - en ook waarde toevoegend - dat medewerkers en studenten op deze, door de TU Delft gefaciliteerde, omgeving hun mening kunnen geven.

Posted in April 2011

What now after User Study 2?

In short our findings:

  • People do pick up the phone
  • They have increased happiness
  • The phone is not always being used as intended
  • People don’t really listen


  • The basis is good but now we need to capture the user more
  • We need some added interaction

Another thing we discussed is the language of the messages… Now it is Dutch but maybe we should go for English, we have contemplated about this subject before but we need to make a final decision.

In other words we need to take our design to the next (and final?) level…

Week 11 – User Study (Results II)

Week 11 – User Study (Results I)

Week 11 – User Study

User Test is conducted.

woollahra…Check this, it is the prototype for user test. When you want to tag yourself, just "break" it!
Your group members’ feelings will be shown on the "egg", red means cherish, blue means unhappy and orange means happy. When you "break" the egg, the lights will be went out. Then you can start tagging! Don’t forget the gestures are shake, hit and hold.
For now, taggy eggy is not standalone.
 B was the interviewer, K controled computer, R took  notes, E filmed the tests. We got 6 participants in totall.
 test control pannel
Let’s see some quotes&insights from the user test.

* Lights are not totally clear, people refer to a traffic light, red means bad, blue/green means good and orange is in between.
* Gestures are clear to everybody. They understand shaking as happy, and hitting is referred to angry and aggressive. cherishing and holding the egg were also understood.
* People liked the shape, and to hold it.
* People want to twist the egg. they started to turn the two sides in the opposite direction straight away, like it is a natural gesture people make when they get a round shape with a crack in it.
* The concept was difficult to understand right away. the users had difficulties with remembering the the colors and what they mean, and which options were possible to set a tagg (shake, punch and hold etc.). They didn’t seem to understand why they have to "break" the egg to tagg.
* Most people didn’t understand or saw advantages on why to have such a product. Quotes on this:
"oh, so now i need to keep an egg next to my telephone?"

"I don’t like technology, everything with computer is not for me. So I don’t like this, because its not for me."

"I do’t want to express emotions via technology, that does not fit.

" I get a bit irritated from this, It is another product that gets ourself disconnected from the real world. Society works to much to a technology controlled world."

We could there are some worries and concerns about this concept. In general, the elderly people can understand the product and gestures. They like the shape, but they don’t like technical stuff. We need to think about the gestures and colors, to make sure our settings are natural to users.

Happy theory&Prototype plan



Tagging 1: we came, we saw and made a shitload of tubes

Hi there,

Today we worked on expanding our prototype. We created a lot of tubes to guide the ping pong balls using a wooden mold we lathed ourselves. They had to be quite precise and slightly tapered. We rolled transparent sheets around it with tape. This seemed like an easy task, but the sheets proved to be quite hard to handle. So we produced a lot of crappy tubes. But in the end we got 4 good tubes.


In the meantime, our programmers duo improved the Max program. We are now able to control 4 fans independently and explored the possibilities of tagging using the accelerometer.

Finally, we had to deliver a Prototype plan. The last hours of the day we spent on this.

Hopefully next week our prototype will be in such an advanced state we can conduct a true user test. We expect to gather a lot of useful data here by input of the user. In general, we want to know if the user understands our concept, in detail we would like to know the following things:

 1. Does the user understand and like the way of tagging and doesn’t it disturb the playing?

 2. Does the tagging of the music make sense (giving meaning/value to the just played piece)?

 3. Does the user understand and interpret the feedback in the way we intended? (inspiring, incentive to play better, challenging, rewarding, etc.) 

Hugs & Kisses,

Your favorite,

Tagging 1 

optimizing & plans

Hi again, after got the period feedback and the meeting with Pieter, we are still struggling with some problems.

About the concept itself, we need to apply the "happiness" theories more and add more interactive element into our concept (for example, add effects to the pictures or add sound). We also need a new name for our concept:D to make it easier to understand and remember.

About the pictures part, we need to make the decision : people will send pictures by using an app or via website? To make the collage changeable, maybe looping the pictures is a good idea. So the numbers of the pictures can be not fixed and there are more possibilities of showing pictures.

About the prototype, because the limitation of the celling(not high enough in some apartments). It is difficult to use just one camera on top to track the motions. So we decide to use 4 webcams ( one in one corner) in our improved prototype latter. In last presentation, we got the feedback about the projection. To make it clear to see in both bright or dark environment, DCL screen is a perfect choice in final concept.

The good news is now we have our plan for the last design stage already. Here are the plan how can we optimize our program:

  • (1 hr)          A new way of detecting motion (from daniel saakes) has to be tested
  • (2 hr)          Finding out how to make webcams work directly with max 
  • (2 hr)              – finding out how to connect 4 webcams instead of 1
  • (0.5-2 hr)    Finding out how to use pictures instead of videos to beam on the wall
  • (1 hr)                – finding and implementing a fade-to-black option in max
  • (0.5 hr)          Just rewriting the programing to make it simpler&faster
  • (2 hr)             Finding a better way to beam pictures in a grid, instead of having to drag all separate windows
  • (1-4hrs)      Contacting experts for questions in between


Optimize our program: to make the motion tracking faster, we use lower resolution (32*24) instead of 320 240 pixel 





 To help us figure out these questions, this week we are going to test our prototype in an apartment.

Test plan


Set- up:

Location: aart van der leeuwenlaan, Leeuwenhof


Environment: The entrance hall of the apartment



Newsletter *12

Beamer *1

Laptop * 2

Speaker * 2

Video camera *1

Tape * 1 






Test process:



1. Preparation (Before the prototype test)

To get the collage pictures from the people from one apartment, a newsletter which explains our concept and the motivation is made (See below). By asking people to take pictures of the theme “Shoes”, we can get their feedback of our concept too.





“ Are you interested in this concept?”

Do you think it is ok for you to take a picture at home and send it to the system?”

Do you want to show your neighbors your personal objects?”

“ Are you interested in getting an overview of all the pictures from your neighbors?”


2. Prototype test 


– To see if they can understand the interaction between the floor and the wall

  • How people interact with the prototype
  • How do they perceive and react to the images and the sound
  • How does their emotion change ( expressions, words…) Do they look happier afterwards?



              Do you like it ? What’s your feeling about it?


  •  Does it bring you happy feeling? Can you understand the meaning?



    • How do you expect that you can interact with it?



      • Which way do you prefer to send the pictures? By app or by website? Wo



        • Do you have any themes you are interested in?



          • Do you think the concept is attractive enough to let you join? If not, do you have any comments                                          or 

            advises for us?



          It is the update till now. We will draw the conclusion soon. See you soon!





          Tagging 4 – Incorporating Feedback

          We have received a whole lot of feedback the last few weeks and tried to incorporate all of this today. We realized we are a bit behind on schedule and really need to step it up a bit to catch up, we plan to do this next week. We looked at products that are already available in the same field as our concept, communication/tagging/emotions. The one that stood out the most is called Vibe from Philips.

          This is still a concept, so it is not functional yet. The idea is that the necklace can sense what kind of emotion you are having, and share this with whoever else has a necklace. At a first glance this seems very, very similar to our product. The big difference, and plus point, for out concept, is that you tag your own emotion AND you can give/receive feedback.

          We´ve learned from this that even though something seems very simple, it can still give a very interesting object. We talked with our tutor and we were finally able to make some definite decisions:

          – We are going to use ONE interactions, shaking, and use this in several ways. So different types of shaking modes. (i.e. slow is a negative emotion and fast is positive, we will starts with these two and possibly expand)
          – We will use light (diffuse light) and light patterns as feedback.
          – We will limit the group of friends to 5 people, each having their own color
          – The shape should invite shaking (i.e. does it make sense to want to shake a heart?)For now we are working on getting the shaking range working. We hope to test this next week. We are also exploring different shapes and different ways of playing with lights.

          User testing @ Exact


          Team Generation Y1

          again! This week we prepared the interactive model and a lot of questions, to
          do some serious user testing. Do people understand our send, receive, feedback
          cycle? Do they think the concept has value in the office environment? Do they
          understand all our intended interactions? Our aim for this day was to have an
          in depth discussion with our test participants about the concept and gain a lot
          of new insights. And of course, we wanted to see if people understood our
          intended interactions. The movie gives a short impression of the day.

          YouTube Preview Image

          thanks to Wei Lui, for arranging the testing at the exact office. It was very
          nice to be able to look around and test in a real office environment. We
          brought two models that day, one was our interactive prototype and the other
          one was an illustration of the ‘knocking on the door’ metaphor we are trying to



          we’ve developed a communicational tool for generation Y to be used at the
          workplace. It enables employees in a middle sized/big office to ‘knock on the
          door’ of their colleagues. Everybody has such a tool on their desk and by
          interacting with this tool, they can indicate their availability to talk. This
          device communicates instantly, which saves colleagues a walk through the
          office. The product is made in such a way that it gives a subtle hint of
          attention and it does not disturb people during meetings. The receiver can send
          back a response by interacting with the device. The sender will receive this
          feedback.  We tested this concept in four parts; sending,
          receiving, feedback and an interview. Users were encouraged to think aloud
          during the test and to discuss the quality. 

          the test, we’ve asked these questions 


          • How do
            you select a receiver with this product?
          • How do
            you send this message to another person?
          • How do
            you define the urgency of the message?
          • *How do
            you indicate what you want from this person?  (Currently, we only have a
            concept in which you can ask if someone is available)


          • Who sent
            you this message?
          • How
            urgent is this message? How can you
          • What does
            this person want from you?
          • How do
            you respond?

          (for the sender)

          • Has the
            receiver seen the message? How can you tell?

          about experiences

          • We’ve
            also asked some follow up questions and we’ve shown some illustrations
            with options we can incorporate in our final design.

          Would you like feedback after you send this message? What kind of feedback
          would you like?


          Possible interactions


          Interaction cards


          the testing, we noticed that the test took quite a long time. Besides
          testing the prototype, we also wanted to validate the purpose of our design. So
          we started some dialogues with people, using our little model, to ask
          them about communication in the office. The office communicator (software) was
          mentioned a lot. But people liked the idea of knocking on some one’s door,
          because it is very subtle and it doesn’t directly disturb people.


          of the day

          In the
          current office environment, there are already many ways of communicating.
          People can phone or chat via the office communicator, but most of our test
          participants indicated that they still prefer meeting in person. This meeting
          in person can be planned, but what if you just want to walk by? We’ve noticed
          that the office is quite big and it can be a long walk. Your colleague might be
          busy by the time you arrive and thus you lose time. We want to fill this niche
          with our office communication device. The people we spoke with liked this idea.
          We’ve asked them if they thought it would be important to have a level of
          urgency in the message, or if they thought it would be useful to send messages
          with different meanings. Comments we got was that if you have an urgent
          message, you would probably call someone anyways, so this device should only be
          used for subtle messages. Besides, people indicated that one clear kind of
          message would probably be more powerful than many different kind of messages.
          Besides, if you want to communicate a specific message, to a group, you would
          probably use the office communicator anyways. This made us decide to use the
          KISS principle; Keep It Simple Stupid. We will now focus on one particular
          message to communicate; I require your attention, can I come by? We will make
          sure that you can communicate this message as clearly as you can through our
          communication device. 


          let’s get busy with making this all happen! See you next time on our blog.




          © 2011 TU Delft