skip to main content
10.1145/3399715.3399874acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaviConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

TuVe: A Shape-changeable Display using Fluids in a Tube

Authors Info & Claims
Published:02 October 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

We propose TuVe, a novel shape-changing display consisting of a flexible tube and fluids, in which the droplets flowing through the tube compose the display medium that represents information. In this system, every colored droplet is flowed by controlling valves and a pump connected to the tube. The display part employs a flexible tube that can be shaped to any structure (e.g., wrapped around a specific object), which is achieved by a calibration made to capture the tube structure using image processing with a camera. A performance evaluation reveals that our prototype succeeds in controlling each droplet with a positional error of 2 mm or less, which is small enough to show such simple characters as alphabetic characters using a 7 × 7-pixel resolution display. We also discuss example applications, such as large public displays and flow-direction visualization, that illustrate the characteristics of the TuVe display.

References

  1. A. Nesbitt A. Gomes and R. Vertegaal. 2013. MorePhone: A Study of Actuated Shape Deformations for Flexible Thin-film Smartphone Notifications. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 583--592.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. A. Nakano A. Wakita and N. Kobayashi. 2011. Programmable Blobs: A Rheologic Interface for Organic Shape Design. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 273--276.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. S.Y. Mao R.H. Hewitt M.S. Weaver J.A. Silvernail K. Rajan M. Hack J.J. Brown X. Chu L. Moro T. Krajewski A.B. Chwang, M.A. Rothman and N. Rutherford. 2003. Thin film encapsulated flexible organic electroluminescent displays. Applied Physics Letters 83, 3 (2003), 413--415.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. A. DeVincenzi M. Blackshaw D. Leithinger, D. Lakatos and H. Ishii. 2011. Direct and Gestural Interaction with Relief: A 2.5D Shape Display. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 541--548.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. A. Olwal D. Leithinger, S. Follmer and H. Ishii. 2014. Physical Telepresence: Shape Capture and Display for Embodied, Computer-mediated Remote Collaboration. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on User interface Software and Technology. 461--470.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. E. Joyce D. Martinez Plasencia and S. Subramanian. 2014. MisTable: Reach-through Personal Screens for Tabletops. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3493--3502.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. T. Hutchison B.M. Buczyk N. Koizumi M. Inami D. Saakes, K. Chiu and R. Raskar. 2012. Shader Printer. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2012 Emerging Technologies. 18:1-18:1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. T. Igarashi N. Koizumi D. Saakes, M. Inami and R. Raskar. 2010. Slow Display. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2010 Emerging Technologies. 22:1--22:1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. C.P. Juan G. Antonio, P. Lahiru and V. Roel. 2016. WhammyPhone: Exploring Tangible Audio Manipulation Using Bend Input on a Flexible Smartphone. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 159--161.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. D. Iwai H. Asayama and K. Sato. 2015. Ballumiere: Real-time Tracking and Projection System for High-speed Flying Balls. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2015 Emerging Technologies. 7:1--7:1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. F. Nakaizumi H. Iwata, H. Yano and R. Kawamura. 2001. Project FEELEX: Adding Haptic Surface to Graphics. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 469--476.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. K. Hirota and M. Hirose. 1995. Simulation and presentation of curved surface in virtual reality environment through surface display. In Proceedings Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium. 211--216.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. T. Matsunobu J. Fujii and Y. Kakehi. 2018. COLORISE: Shape and Color Changing Pixels with Inflatable Elastofmers and Interactions. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 199--204.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. F. Taher J. Vidler J. Hardy, C. Weichel and J. Alexander. 2015. ShapeClip: Towards Rapid Prototyping with Shape-Changing Displays for Designers. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 19--28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. J. Peraino T. Shihipar C. Akiyama Y. Shuang K. Nakagaki, P. Totaro and H. Ishii. 2016. HydroMorph: Shape Changing Water Membrane for Display and Interaction. In Proceedings of the TEI '16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 512--517.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. N. Kadowaki and Y. Suzumori. 2011. Development of Slide Type Three-Port Valve for Slug Flow Chemical Process.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. K. Kobayashi and H. Onoe. 2018. Microfluidic-based flexible reflective multicolor display.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Takatsugu Kuriyama. 2008. Tokyo Arteria. http://en.papyri.net/artworks/tokyoart.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. B. Winslow L. Byron, G. Audrey and V. Roel. 2011. PaperPhone: understanding the use of bend gestures in mobile devices with flexible electronic paper displays. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1303--1312.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. D. Leithinger and H. Ishii. 2010. Relief: A Scalable Actuated Shape Display. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 221--222.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. J.P. Carrascal A. Visser L.L. Priyadarshana, V. Porter and R. Vertegaal. 2016. MagicWand: Exploring Physical Affordances with a Handheld Cylindrical Display Object. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3762--3765.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. D. Iwai M. Hiratani and K. Sato. 2018. Towards Shadow-Less Projection Mapping Using Mid-Air Image Projection by Retro-Transmissive Optical System., 3 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. S. Miyafuji and H. Koike. 2015. Ballumiere: Real-time Tracking and Projection System for High-speed Flying Balls. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2015 Emerging Technologies. 2:1--2:1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. S. Miyafuji and H. Koike. 2015. DisplayObjects: Prototyping Functional Physical Interfaces on 3D Styrofoam, Paper or Cardboard Models. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2015 Emerging Technologies. 2:1--2:1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. I. Miyazaki, Y. Itoh, Y.Tsujimoto, M.Ando, and T. Onoye. 2014. Ketsuro-Graffiti: Water Condensation Display. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology. 2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. K. Nakajima, Y. Itoh, T. Tsukitani, K. Fujita, K. Takashima, Y. Kitamura, and F. Kishino. 2011. FuSA Touch Display: A Furry and Scalable Multi-Touch Display. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces. 35--44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. D. Leithinger S. Follmer P. Schoessler, D. Windham and H. Ishii. 2015. Kinetic Blocks: Actuated Constructive Assembly for Interaction and Display. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 341--349.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Julius Popp. 2011. Bit.Fall. https://vimeo.com/22396196.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Julius Popp. 2011. Bit.Flow. https://vimeo.com/22390871.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Casual Profanity. 2009. Fluid Sculpture. https://vimeo.com/3599345.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Casual Profanity. 2010. Fluid Dress. https://vimeo.com/16871362.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. K. Hashimoto S. Eitoku and T. Tanikawa. 2016. Controllable Water Particle Display.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. T. Tanikawa S. Eitoku, K. Nishimura and M. Hirose. 2009. Study on Design of Controllable Particle Display Using Water Drops Suitable for Light Environment. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. 23--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. A. Olwal A. Hogge S. Follmer, D. Leithinger and H. Ishii. 2013. inFORM: Dynamic Physical Affordances and Constraints Through Shape and Object Actuation. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 417--426.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Z. Li S. Miyafuji, T. Sato and H. Koike. 2017. Qoom: An Interactive Omnidirectional Ball Display. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 599--609.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. C.P. Juan L. Vincent S. Paul, B. Jesse and V. Roel. 2016. ReFlex: A Flexible Smartphone with Active Haptic Feedback for Bend Input. In Proceedings of the TEI '16: Tenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 185--192.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. T. Suzuki, A. Ishiwata, T. Akagawa, and K. Komatsu. 2009. WATER LOGO '09. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b8WATdvv3o.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. K. nakagaki D. Leithinger U. Umapathi, P. Shin and H. Ishii. 2018. Programmable Droplets for Interaction. In CHI EA '18: Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Y. Itoh K. Fujita T. Fujimoto Y. Kojima, K. Aoyama and K. Nakajima. 2013. Polka Dot: The Garden of Water Spirits. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2013 Posters. 47:1--47:1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. D. Miyazaki Y. Morikubo, E. S. Lorenzo and N. Hashimoto. 2018. Tangible Projection Mapping: Dynamic Appearance Augmenting of Objects in Hands. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2018 Emerging Technologies. 14:1--14:1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. H. Yonehara. 2006. Recent trends in electronic paper. Pharmaceutical Library 51, 4 (2006), 281--286.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. T. Sato Z. Li, S. Miyafuji and H. Koike. 2016. OmniEyeball: Spherical Display Embedded With Omnidirectional Camera Using Dynamic Spherical Mapping. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 193--194.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. TuVe: A Shape-changeable Display using Fluids in a Tube

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            AVI '20: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces
            September 2020
            613 pages
            ISBN:9781450375351
            DOI:10.1145/3399715

            Copyright © 2020 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 2 October 2020

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Acceptance Rates

            AVI '20 Paper Acceptance Rate36of123submissions,29%Overall Acceptance Rate128of490submissions,26%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader