Interaction Analysis

1. Children and adults really like the moments of suspense when the puck is making its way through the pins.
2. We had not considered how small children are, so our two foot device could not be accessed on the table. Older siblings would put the puck through the top, while their younger sibling would watch and try to do the same by putting it in the bottom of the slot and pulling away quickly.
3. Adding more drama to the moment when the puck hits the bin would definitely be great. It’s definitely the moment with the most potential for surprise and delight.
4. After the visit, we realized that there are a lot of benefits to both being low-tech and high-tech, and distinct trade-offs when turning an interaction from one to the other. Our project had a lot of understandability and approachability as it was pretty technically basic, so it got a lot of initial attention, but didn’t have the technical robustness or surprise to retain users.

Engineering Analysis

1. The most surprising oversight we had was in how the discs pile up in the bins. We had tested it and removed the discs before every drop, but didn’t consider how a user may not think to do that as well.
2. There were no prominent failures during the hour and a half demo! Everything worked consistently.
3. As mentioned before, both the discs piling up as well as the height requirements when placed on a table were big technical oversights.

Revision Plan

  1. One of the most fundamental experiences to be modified is how the user actually interacts with the machine. Instead of having the user drop the disk into the machine, we intend on having some sort of a mechanism that will shoot the disk into the machine. Another fundamental experience to be modified is what happens when the disk reaches the bottom of the machine. Instead of simply playing a sound, we plan on having a way more dramatic experience for the user.
  2. Some technical limitations with our project is the servo not being flush with the board, the board being flimsy, the disks not falling all the way down into the bins, and the disks collecting in one of the bins. Making the servo flush with the board is just another engineering problem we have to figure out. Making the board less flimsy can be resolved using a more stable stand than one that uses superglue. Making sure the disks fall into the buckets can be resolved by using a different material for the disks. Disk collection can be resolved by allowing the disks to fall through a slot into a big bin under the machine.
  3. A new capability we will be adding is being able to control the angle and/or speed at which the disk enters the machine.
  4. A lot more trial and error will come into play during this iteration of the project simply because there are a lot more aspects of the project that are more on the abstract side of things.
  5. We will focus on each component of the project one at a time, testing each component as soon as it is complete. After all the components are done being implemented, we can test the full machine.
  6. Shooter based input (as described in 3); Adding lights, colors, misters; Making it less flimsy; Adding a collection bin; Replacing switches with photoreceptors; Replacing disks; Critical rate-limiting path is the shooter based input. We will be sure to try and implement that feature of the project first.
  7. None (at the moment)