Module 3 Activity Research
Weekly Activity
wenqi huang
Project 3
Module 3
Across this project, I developed Pressure Stone, a handheld physical computing prototype that translates squeeze pressure into a single LED’s brightness. The goal was to create a calm, tactile interaction where internal tension becomes visible in a simple, non-intrusive way. The design stayed intentionally minimal—one pressure sensor and one LED—so the work could focus on interaction quality rather than adding features.
Workshop 1
Workshop 2
Activity 1: For Activity 1, I focused on testing the core interaction of the Pressure Stone: how pressure input should translate into LED brightness in a way that feels stable, readable, and calming. I treated the prototype as a testing tool rather than a finished object, so each iteration targeted one variable (sensor sensitivity, mapping range, smoothing, and response timing) and I documented the results through short recordings and notes. The biggest issue revealed early was that the brightness response could become inconsistent—small sensor noise caused flicker, and the usable pressure range sometimes felt “compressed,” where different squeeze strengths produced similar brightness. Through quick refinements and small user checks, Activity 1 helped me narrow down what needed to improve before moving toward a final build. I learned that the interaction quality depends on both software and physical conditions: sensor placement and material compression affect the readings, and the code needs smoothing and clamping to make the feedback trustworthy. By the end of Activity 1, I had a clearer direction for Activity 2: refine stability and expand the usable pressure range, while keeping the system minimal (one sensor + one LED) so the feedback stays simple and intuitive.
Activity 2: For Activity 2, I focused on making the Pressure Stone feel closer to a final prototype by testing whether the system was working “as required” and identifying any major outlying issues. Building on Activity 1, I narrowed the testing to the parts that most affected the final experience: LED readability, material impact on sensor input, and the overall reliability of the pressure-to-brightness response. I documented each test with photos/videos and short notes so I could compare options directly rather than relying on memory. The main issue I addressed in Activity 2 was how the material and internal build affected performance. Different softness/thickness changed the usable pressure range and sometimes made the LED response feel compressed or inconsistent. I also tested LED diffusion and placement so the light read as a soft glow instead of a harsh hotspot, and so it stayed visible in different lighting conditions. These tests made it clear that the physical form is part of the interface: the same code can feel very different depending on how the sensor is mounted and how the material transfers pressure. By the end of Activity 2, I had a clearer direction for the final prototype: keep the interaction minimal (one sensor + one LED) but improve consistency through better sensor mounting, more controlled compression inside the stone, and a diffusion setup that supports calm feedback. Activity 2 helped me move from “it works” to “it works reliably and reads clearly,” which will guide the final adjustments before submission.
Project 2
Project 3 Final Prototype
PLACEHOLDER TEXT, put a description here or you will lose grades
Powered by w3.css