Case Study: Designing an Audio-enhanced Weaving Loom
Case Study: Designing an Audio-enhanced Weaving Loom
Embedded Files
Introduction
Introduction
In this project, I led the design and development of Melodie, an audio-enhanced weaving loom that supports blind weavers across different levels of expertise in their work process through audio cues. This project was a collaboration between a local communal weaving studio and researchers at Northwestern University.
Demo
Demo
Figure 1. The video above plays a short demo of Melodie, an audio-enhanced weaving loom, that was shown at the ASSETS 2021 conference.
Impact
Impact
Demonstrated potential to introduce technology into traditional crafting practices for increased accessibility while maintaining the valuable aspects of manual labor.
Identified appropriate system configurations to provide novice weavers guidance during the learning process, increase awareness of system state and support new ways for weavers to experience their craft.
This line of work contributed an example of ways to approach partnership with local communities. Following this study, another project emerged in collaboration with our community partners involving accessible pattern design.
My Role
Lead Researcher, Designer and Developer
Team
Me
2 Researchers
1 Mechanical Engineer
Collaborators
Communal weaving studio available to blind weavers
Timeline
Jan 2019 - Feb 2020
Problem: How might we design tools to support accessible crafting among blind weavers?
Problem: How might we design tools to support accessible crafting among blind weavers?
Work involving accessibility in tech often positions disabled individuals as recipients, neglecting their capacity to create and participate in design.
The limited amount of work that has addressed accessibility in design and making has focused on high-tech tools (e.g., 3D modeling, circuitry), leaving opportunities to address the accessibility of traditional forms of making like crafting.
Goals
Goals
1. Understand blind weavers' work process and gauge how weavers feel about introducing new technologies in their process.
2. Develop an interactive prototype of a tool that supports blind weavers' process based on our understanding of their work practice.
3. Test our proposed idea to understand how blind weavers respond to it and determine whether it fits into their process.
Process
Process
Our process involved several phases and methods to obtain a well-rounded understanding of blind weavers' work practices:
1. Discovery and Research
Engaged with community through 60 hours of observations at studio and interviews with 15 weavers and sighted instructors to understand community practices and needs.
2. Design and Implementation
Designed and developed initial prototype of an accessible weaving tool based on research insights.
3. User Testing and Iterative Design
Invited 4 stakeholders to test and provide feedback to improve our prototype. Iterated on system design based on insights after every session.
Phase 1: Discovery and Research
Phase 1: Discovery and Research
After concluding observations and interviews with blind weavers, I analyzed and consolidated our data into the following key insights:
1. Weaving is a complex skill that takes time to master. Informants found it difficult to describe how they became more comfortable weaving and understanding where they are in the process. Instead, they referred to “a rhythm I have to follow. And sometimes, it’s sort of like music.”
Design Insight: We can leverage the rhythmic nature of weaving to support blind weavers through the less accessible aspects of their process.
2. Blind weavers attend to non-visual environmental cues (e.g., sound, tactile feedback) to identify mistakes and assess system state. However, sighted collaborators are more often the ones that bring these to weavers' attention. Weavers stressed the importance of addressing mistakes because their creations are gifted or sold.
Design Insight: Audio cues can fill gaps in ambient information to support weavers in keeping track of their process more confidently and minimize mistakes. These enhancements can build on the sense of “rhythm” our informants described to help weavers orient themselves while working.
3. Informants were open to the idea of introducing new technologies to support their process, but emphasized that technology should augment rather than replace the manual work that is a valued part of weaving.
Design Insight: Automating weavers' process is undesired. Technological enhancements should ideally fade into the background.
4. Weavers have varying needs and preferences in their work environment.
Design Insight: Any technological enhancements should support user customization so that weavers can tailor the experience to better fit their approach to weaving.
Phase 2: Design and Implementation
Phase 2: Design and Implementation
System Overview
Based on our research findings, I led our team in the design and implementation of Melodie (Musically-Enhanced Loom Designed for Interactive Weaving Experiences). Melodie was built on a floor loom (as opposed to a table loom) because this would allow for more complex weaving projects and is a familiar loom to residents at our field site.
Similarly, audio-enhancements would be most appropriate for this system because weavers already follow audio cues to guide their process, which they described as "a rhythm." Audio (as opposed to tactile or haptics) would also allow user customization using simple components.
The core structure and mechanics of the loom were not altered; our components were added on top of the loom such that technological enhancements faded into the background as much as possible.
Figure 2. Melodie system flow diagram showing the three basic steps of the weaving process: pressing treadles, passing the shuttle and pulling the beater.
System Functionality
Melodie senses the three basic steps of the weaving process: (1) pressing treadles to open a shed, (2) passing the shuttle back and forth through the shed, and (3) pulling the beater to push perpendicular threads tightly together. After each interaction, the system delivers an audio cue.
Users can customize:
sound profiles (soundscapes)
volume
activation point (whether a sound will play immediately after pressing a treadle or only after pressing treadle all the way to the ground)
velocity threshold (how much force is required from weaver to experience sound feedback when pulling the beater).
Summary of Technologies
Two Teensy 3.2 Arduino boards manage the logic behind all interactions, each connected to a speaker.
Ultrasonic distance sensors (HC-SR04) detect treadle presses.
2" magnet attached to shuttle and an array of eight hall effect sensors distributed across the resting beam detect shuttle movements.
SparkFun Virtual Reality IMU Breakout senses interaction with beater and captures relevant information such as its position and velocity.
Desktop user interface built with Processing 3 (Java) that communicates with Arduino boards to switch system settings.
In addition to designing the system, I developed the desktop user interface and established its communication with Arduino boards. One of our team members, a Mechanical Engineer, identified the components we would need and built the system hardware. We both worked on programming the logic behind all interactions via Arduino IDE (C++).
Phase 3: User Testing and Iterative Design
Phase 3: User Testing and Iterative Design
In total, 4 stakeholders (three blind weavers of varying levels of expertise and one sighted instructor) tested and provided feedback on Melodie.
Tasks
As a warm-up exercise, I provided weavers a shuttle with a full bobbin and asked them to explore the sound feedback by pressing treadles, passing the shuttle and pulling the beater. Participants then performed a series of tasks that required them to weave one or two sets and explore each configuration of audio feedback available.
The team asked them to share thoughts at any point during interaction with the system and also followed-up after each task requesting their feedback.
Design Iterations
In addition to gathering feedback on how weavers felt about the idea of an audio-enhanced loom, these sessions allowed us to collect feedback to quickly iterate through our design and have an improved version ready for our next participant.
For example, volume control was added after feedback from our first participant, who reminded us that weavers would have different preferences and comfort levels with additional sounds in their environment.
Our second participant pointed out that different projects will prompt for various levels of intensity when pulling the beater, which we addressed by adding the velocity threshold setting before our next session.
Crucial Insights
Crucial Insights
Informants were excited about the concept of an audio-enhanced weaving loom. While they recognized the limitations of an early prototype, interacting with Melodie allowed them to imagine different use cases for its audio enhancements.
According to their feedback, audio cues could enhance the weaving process for blind weavers by providing novices guidance during the learning process, increasing awareness of system state (e.g., confirming a sequence is correct by seeking a particular melody) and enabling new ways to experience their craft when music and weaving come together.
However, participants brought several considerations to our attention.
Even though weavers want to personalize their experience with Melodie according to their individual wants and needs (e.g., to avoid becoming overwhelmed, creating a relaxing atmosphere) they also recognize that additional complexities come into play when bringing an audio-enhanced loom into their environment, which is a communal studio. Other weavers may find the additional audio feedback distracting or unpleasant, which could create a clash in access needs. Thus, informants pointed out headphone jack support as an important consideration moving forward. Similar to what we found during our generative phase, weavers also emphasized that technology should respect their agency. For instance, if a mistake is pointed out by the system, the weaver should decide whether or not they would like to address it.
For additional details, please refer to related publications below.
Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned
Technology never fails to surprise us---in both good ways and not-so-good ways! During one of our usability testing sessions, the audio feedback associated with the treadles was not working as expected. We resolved the issue on the spot, but this served as a reminder to have a backup plan, such as having audio files ready in case we needed to switch gears and perform a Wizard of Oz exploration instead.
Recruitment during usability testing came to an abrupt stop in February 2020 due to early concerns with COVID-19 in the United States. Lockdowns were not yet occurring at the time, but we decided to cancel upcoming sessions to err on the side of caution. Although we decided it was best to wrap up the study, it sparked reflection on whether and how a project like this could be further explored remotely.
Related Publications
Related Publications
Borgos-Rodriguez, K., Das, M. and Piper, A.M. (2021). Melodie: A Design Inquiry into Accessible Crafting through Audio-enhanced Weaving. In ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS), 14(1), 1-30.
Das, M., Borgos-Rodriguez, K., and Piper, A.M. (2020). Weaving by Touch: A Case Analysis of Accessible Making. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Proceedings (CHI 2020). Best Paper Honorable Mention.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse