This stage, I watched some official recovery videos and analyzed the foot gestures of the injured professional athletes ( from the human foot gesture pespective), which aims to prove what foot stretching gestures that I have obtained form Peter Liu, therefore engage the final foot gestures applied in my project.

屏幕快照 2016-11-29 上午5.01.04.png

Figure 3.0


Figure 3.1

According to Figure 3.0 & 3.1, the measurements data were taken a injured ordinary user,by sitting with his leg stationary and perpendicular to the ground at as close to a 90-degree angle as he could. According to the analysis of these videos, all the feet and heel injuries need to use these basic stretching behaviors, and they pointed to the four different directions, left, right, front and back, allowing me to think of the players’ movement on the court.

As a consequence, these behaviors have been prooved through the interview, the documents from the specialist, and the case study, therefore they can be used in my final concept.


1. Achilles Tendon Rupture Rehab Plan

available at:  Gesture 1

2. Ruptured Achilles Tendon Rehab Program

available at: Gesture 2

3. Achilles Tendon Rupture Stretches & Exercises – Ask Doctor Jo

available at: Gesture 3

4. iXL Ep. 3 – Achilles Tendon Rupture Recovery

available at: Gesture 4

5. Alan Weibel. An Athlete’s Torn Achilles Recovery

available at: Gesture 5




Figure 2.0 Input : The digital set up of coach’s tactics

For the foot-based tangible interactive project, I analyzed a successful example, Mamba motion-tracking LED basketball court (“Nike Rise 2.0”,2015), which was created by the AKQA design team and NIKE.

It is more than just a simple basketball court with LED lights, instead it is a complex tangible interactive system, consisting of four big parts. In this system, there are two input interfaces and output interfaces respectively.

From the input vision, the first one is the wearable devices that are designed for the basketball players,which can be worn on the ankle , aimed to directly track motions’ data and transfer to the computer. The second is the exclusive software which is designed for the coaches to change various tactics and react to the computer as well as the big LED screen court.

article-02-c-large.jpg   Input: physcial wearable accessory’s recording device

output: The movement data from the wearable device

On the other hand, in terms of the output system, the first one is the computer which is responsible to receive the data from the tracking device and send the related instruction to the LED screen (which is under the court and shows on the surface). Another important output interface is consisted of the sensors inside the floor, they receive the instructions from the computer and finally generate the various graphics, showing on the LED screen.

In this system, the big traditional basketball court and the players’ feet gestures or movement are redesigned as the physical interfaces, whereas the software and the digital system are programmed as the digital interfaces. As a consequence, they work together accurately and therefore provide users with an enjoyable and unexpected tangible experience.

RESEARCH STAGE II—Why use the feet gestures to interact with the tangible interface ?



According to Springer, J., & Siebes, C. (1996), foot-based interaction was put into the spotlight due to the fact that the feet provide an alternative to the other body parts such as hands for accessible input and provides the opportunity to make the interaction more inclusive for special groups. Augsten, T. (2010) and Jota et al. (2014) proposed that there are areas that are difficult and awkward to be reached with hands. For instance, movements like touching the floors or objects beneath a surface are much more easier to be accomplished by feet rather than by hands. Simeone et al. (2014) states that feet can also been considered as an additional input channel and a crucial aid when it comes to reaction process that includes complicated gestures and multiple body parts.

These different features have contributed to the development of a large range of foot-related devices and research works from different fields and communities. For example, from the accessibility aspect, the foot mice and joysticks are developed to adapt to specific groups of users. From the wearable technology aspect, more trainers and insoles have been equipped with sensors to record, trigger and transform the data of users. From the computer vision aspect, different ways of tracking the feet and the journey they have conquered have emerged in various sport apps and other physical installations.


1. Springer, J., & Siebes, C. (1996). Position controlled input device for handicapped: Experimental studies with a footmouse. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics

available at: PDF

2. Jota, R., Lopes, P., Wigdor, D., & Jorge, J. (2014, April). Let’s kick it: how to stop wasting the bottom third of your large screen display. 

available at: PDF1

3. Simeone, A. L., Velloso, E., Alexander, J., & Gellersen, H. (2014, March). Feet movement in desktop 3D interaction.

available at: PDF2


Case study I —“Reactable”

屏幕快照 2017-01-06 下午5.06.36.png

According to Figure 1.2, today I would like to introduce an iconic representation of this kind of tangible product, which is named Reactable, which was conceived and developed since 2003 by a research team at the Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona. Simply put,Reactable is a creative musical instrument, designed in art technology, therefore allowing musicians and others to experience and create sounds and unique music songs. This musical installation is set up on a physical translucent round table, with some pucks which can connect with and transfer data to the digital system. Once the pucks are placed on the table surface, they are lighted and start to interact with other neighboring pucks, and they are works according to the positions and distance.

In this process, users can combine different elements of sounds, and then recreate the unique music melody throughout using some digital tools like synthesizers, effects and so on. It has been confirmed that it is one of the mostly earliest tangible interface, which works in a combination of physical (input) and digital (output) forms. There is no doubt that its working principle inspired a lot of new tangible products or installations as a role model.

It is true that the tangible interfaces are developing in various forms on different levels, in order to fully understand users, to develop different kinds of interactions that depend on various scenarios. In my research topic, I focus on a specific direction, tangible gesture user interfaces, which is a combination of the tangible and the gesture interface.

In terms of the features of tangible user interface, firstly the physical representations are essential, embodying mechanisms physical object for users to control, such as the physical installations or product. In addition, different levels within the physical representations are systematically related to the state of digital system according to the programming and design.

This means that the physical representation is the input resource for the users to control, then this action is recognized and send an instruction to the digital system that was programmed or coded, and the digital system produces a coupled information, at the same time providing an output or feedback to users throughout physical or digital forms. For instance, one of the earliest examples of a tangible user interface is the world well known mouse. Drop and drag a mouse on a flat platform, and you will have a pointer moving on a screen, it is a straight way to interact with a digital system through the operation of physical object, and the movements allows the device to clearly recognize the users’ behaviors which are activated in the digital system, such as pointer moves down when you move the mouse backward. Thus, the mouse became a user-ˇfriendly master input device, with the coordinated cooperation of hand and eye.



 Reactable  available at: Reactable Video



3-Figure9-1.pngReporting from Alan, D., Janet, F., Gregory, A., & Russell, B. (2004), human computer interaction explores the design and use of computer technology, focused on the interfaces between users and computers. In the field of HCI, I found it is true that known researches not only attempt to explore and create new technologies to improve the interaction experience, but also observe regarding how humans interact with computers in effective, convenient and enjoyable ways.

According to the Alan Cooper, User interface refers to the medium or space where the interactions emerge between humans and machines. For the purpose of effectively and multiply interacting with users, as an essential part of HCI, user interface had been created in enormous categories. It contains direct manipulation interface, graphic user interfaces, web-ˇbased user interfaces, touch screens, command line interface, hardware interfaces, voice interfaces, gesture interfaces, tangible user interfaces and so on.

屏幕快照 2017-01-06 下午4.50.04.pngIn 1997, the MIT Media Laboratory firstly proposed the concept of Tangible User Interface(TUI). It differs to the Graphical User Interface(GUI), which is based on intangible pixels that takes little advantage of this capacity. The TUI, however, is based on embodying digital information in physical space or object. Generally describing, according to Figure 1.1 from Ishii,H.(2008), the tangible user interface is a medium, which allows the user to interact with a digital system through the manipulation of physical objects connected to the digital system and can be seen as representations of the system. Through two decades, Tangible User Interfaces have emerged as a new interface type that serves as a bridge between the digital and physical worlds.

According to users’ knowledge and skills of interaction with the real world and tangible objects, more potentials have occurred thanks to the fact that tangible user interfaces can enhance the way in which people interact with intangible, digital information.


1.Alan, D., Janet, F., Gregory, A., & Russell, B. (2004). Human-ˇcomputer interaction.

2. Cooper,A. (2007)  About Face 3

3. Ishii, H., & Ullmer, B. (1997, March) Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms