By now we are able to control one particular camera. We are able to drive the NEMA motors properly and handle horizontal movement.

Included are the scripts for motion control and video processing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Mt1Lz62AW0p8WMhLqsUHOx9Ud8YlL-_e/view?usp=sharing Code for Video Processing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/120m2BRCIG2b0SLR_bQflnva5cOJMdAqp/view?usp=sharing Motion control code

Hardware:

At this point, fabrication of the final construction has begun. Brackets, housing, and other parts were designed and laser-cut, then implemented into the system. Edits and iterations were made according to encountered problems, such as bending and inbalance. Scale established.

SLD / DXF Files : https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1K6em43-udjc0ojtTFieh-pTkDOsMLkYD?usp=sharing

01_Title

Audience

02_Statement

Designed to disrupt traditional piece-viewer exhibition dynamics, Audience focuses their attention on what it decides is most interesting, turning willing viewers into performers. Audience also taps into the context of surveillance and camera technology in modern society to further impact viewers.

Audience recognizes individual viewers, judges which is most interesting, and locks on to the chosen subject with all three of its cameras. The performer is now aware that the Audience attention, and resultingly the attention of other surrounding viewers, is focused on them- the goal is to highlight the reaction to this attention.

The piece in itself is quite uninteresting, what was interesting was when it is able to interact with the audience. In which case the name of the project can be viewed in two different ways. The first is that it in itself is an observer and audience to the people around it. The second is that it requires an audience to really be able to function interestingly. We found this to be a quite interesting theme, as the observed and the observing roles are quite vague in this particular scenario. What the audience makes out of this interaction can be up to their own interpretation.

03_Relation to Course Themes

Essentially, Audience is a 3-camera tree apparatus mounted in a suitcase, with each camera capable of pan and tilt motions. However, with such simple motions, Audience creates the impression of a foreign object with a purpose to research and observe, hopefully inspiring curiosity and caution within viewers.

Audience can serve as an interesting experiment demonstrating the significance of context of utilized technology, behavior, appearance, and the synthesis of the three. Furthermore, robotic sculpture in itself carries a connotation that can’t be ignored, and contributes to the impact of this particular piece in a major way. Generally speaking, while complexity adds a unique dimension to robotic sculpture, it is not essential to creating an artistic narrative / message.

04_Outcomes

Hardware:

Audience was generally successful as a physical piece. The decision to have three cameras, arguably the stand-out characteristic of the piece, was extremely important, as the impression of “multiple viewers” within the “Audience” would not have been nearly as impactful otherwise (two cameras can give off the impression of eyes, and don’t communicate a “crowd”). Stainless steel beams support the structure as it towers out from the suitcase and over viewers- the scale of the piece successfully established the intended subtle power dynamic / surveillance feeling. Laser cut braces, exposed Arduino, loose wiring, and suitcase form communicate an autonomous and “scavenged tool used in a dystopian future”, suggesting a higher power utilizing the tool, and tying into the fears associated with surveillance.

Software:

The software part is the essential driving force behind the moving motion of the cameras. For this project, the code contains mainly of two parts: the openCV python code that captures video feeds and attempts to do facial recognition, and the Arduino script that receives commands and drive the motion for the 6 motors.

For the openCV part, the program opens all three cameras and produces a script that runs facial recognition to capture all possible faces. The general behavior would be when a face is captured, the camera would try to focus on the person. The program would send the Arduino commands through a concurrent worker, which in turn drives the Nema or servo motors to turn to the correct position. Thus the camera would follow the person around.

The more interesting behavior is invoked with state assignment and randomness. Each of the cameras shifts between multiple states, Bored, Tracking, Following, Scanning. Each of the states involves different behavior, of which the most notable is following. While each camera is essentially controlled separately, it is possible for them to coordinate. When a certain tracking camera decides that the person is quite interesting, it may pull the other two cameras to follow its movement, creating the idea that you are being observed by all three cameras.

The Arduino script simply receives commands and provoke the correct motion in the six motors.

05_Video Documentation

06_Reflections and Challenges

The main shortcoming that comes with the system was in fact the ability to upscale the project to three cameras. Rather early into the development, we had a rather fluent working model with a single camera. However, the OpenCV code with three HD camera feeds consumed a large proportion of the USB bandwidth of the laptop running the system. We had to downscale the image quality and separate to different USB ports for each camera. Which in fact provided difficulties for Arduino control as it had to share a port with one of the cameras

The second challenge was with Arduino port writing in real-time with OpenCV video control. It was very difficult to make the Arduino control reflected in real-time, and the project was short-lived because of some port write capacity problems in the Arduino, which blocks any further write attempts about 2 minutes into the project being turned on.

07_Citations

Source code:

https://towardsdatascience.com/face-detection-in-2-minutes-using-opencv-python-90f89d7c0f81 OpenCV facial recognition reference

https://courses.ideate.cmu.edu/16-375/f2021/text/code/StepperWinch.html#stepperwinch Arduino script

https://courses.ideate.cmu.edu/16-375/f2021/text/code/suitcase-scripting.html#suitcase-motion-demo-py Pyserial script reference

CAD files:

08_Photo Documentation:

09_Contributions

Ethan:

Original brainstorm / ideation

Visual / artistic direction

Design research / BoM

Prototype fabrication / iteration

Final fabrication

Alex:

“Behavior” brainstorm / ideation

“Behavior” research

Software iteration

Final software

Statement of Narrative

In this piece, we wanted to express the deification of a temperamental robotic cuttlefish.

We set out to create a temperamental cuttlefish in suitcase with mind of its own. It wakes up when people approach its box and squirts water at whoever disturbed its sleep.

The viewer first experiences a closed box, which opens as they approach. They then would see the cuttlefish, eyes glowing and the light from the spotlight reflecting off of the fabric, making the entire piece shine. This creates a spooky, mystical effect. The cuttlefish then waves its arms around, the servos making a cranky sound that speeds up as the user stays in front of it. Finally, they get squirted with a splash of water before the cuttlefish closes the box, going back to sleep.

Course Themes

We wanted to make our project surprisingly animate. The robot starts off in the form of a box, then turns into an animate anthropomorphized individual. We use the autonomous behavior of the robot to create a narrative ritual that the viewer unknowingly participates in by stepping up to the box. We use simple machines and laser-cut components to create animation, such as through the tentacles.

Outcomes

Viewers either seemed hesitant to come close to the piece, or went very close and tried to interact with it. The people who saw others getting squired were more wary to approach. The cuttlefish seemed intimating to most people, especially those who saw the tip of the squirt bottle. Even simple LED lights were interpreted as cameras by viewers, adding to the anthropomorphism of the cuttlefish.

Video

Citations

Concept Citations

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharaoh_cuttlefish
• Flooding of the Nile – Wikipedia

Technical Citations

• 12v Electric Linear Micro Actuator – The Smallest Actuator – Progressive- Automations
• Curved Laser Bent Wood : 10 Steps (with Pictures) – Instructables

Technical Documentation

All code to run the Cuttlefish are in this Drive folder.

All CAD files and DXF’s are in this Drive folder.

Photographs:

Specific Technical and Artistic Contributions

Annie: Mechanical and electrical design, electrical assembly, physical assembly, artistic direction

Jonny: Electronics assembly, code, plot development

Why this specific Title

The title “Who are you?” was to force an introspection for the guests that look at the piece. The piece was really meant for people to ponder on how they see themselves.

In the end, the main concept we wanted to enforce was

“There are not so great things about you that you should accept, love, and forgive.”

We wanted the guest to accept “the demons” they have or see in themselves.

The Guest Experience

The guest would have been enchanted by the sudden start of the machine. They see in the blue light an angel that falls and rises repeatedly.

As they come closer, the light changes to red and that angel has now become a devil.

As they have drawn nearer, they would see the mirror in the back of the apparatus. They see themselves but they also see these quotes and questions in the laser cuts.

Quotes such as:

• Who are you?
• Have you truly accepted all of yourself?
• What do you see?
• What do you want to see?
• The inner turmoils of man stem from unable to make peace with their inner demons.
• “To confront a person with his own shadow is to show him his own light” Carl Jung

This would cause the viewer to introspect about their own self. It tries to deliver a message that when we look close enough we will see faults but we should accept those faults.

Final Project Trailer

Relation To Course Themes

The device is fairly simple. The whole device is made of 3 main active components

• Stepper Motor: to turn the Zoetrope
• Two ultrasound Sensors: One to turn and start the machine. The other to change the RGB Light
• An RGB LED Strip: this strobes the Zoetrope and causes the images.

This simple device and with a simple effect had the potential to tell an intriguing narrative. It causes the viewer to be mesmerized by the effect but also allows their presence to alter what they saw.

In addition, the mirror at the back allows the visitor to be part of the piece.

Outcomes

Even though, there were some pitfalls. People were drawn in the piece and were amazed at how well it seemed to work.

There was some difficulty in getting the space dark enough for the zoetrope to be shown. We needed to add an enclosure that would limit the light to the piece but it added to intimate nature.

The figurines could only hold small distinct features. This caused the viewer to really focus on the small changes that were happening between state changes.

All in all, there were some design fallbacks that really ended up serving the narrative better.

From a technical perspective, we learned how zoetropes worked and how we could adjust the illusion with just a light color change. We also learned how measurements should be done for laser cutting and how trial and error play a large part.

In the end, the piece did feel personal. The fact that the quotes were not readable added to the mystery of it. People enjoyed that it wasn’t int their face.

After Thoughts

The piece was in a way a success. It was a conversation starter and it was mesmerizing to see. There was a comment that there was a smear effect that caused people to not see the figurines as much.

We were initially scared of adjusting the duty cycle for it fearing that it might cause the figures to not stick out as much.

After some testing after the facts, we did modify the code so the duty cycle is smaller and the smearing was reduced. (Thanks Zack)

People can see the reduced smearing here

There were some comments that it would have been nice to have lighting throughout the piece. This would have been a nice feature but time and budget was a bit out of our hands

Photos of the Device

Photo Gallery from the show

External References

• John Edmark had created a few 3d printed pieces that would come to life with a turntable and a strobe light

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=401312374631932

• Pixar has a done a 3D Zoetrope that was inspired by the Zoetrope done at Studio Ghibli.

• Garth pointed us to an artist named Gregory Barsamian. We were able to find some popular zoetropes he made such as the scream and animatronic
• There is some strong inspiration from Carl Jung and Alan Watts. Both of them talk extensively about exploring and accepting your shadow/dark side. This is a small article on the subject.

Technical Documentations & Reference

The code can be found at

https://github.com/EbrahimKaram/WhoAreYou

You can download the code as a zip here

Cad Files of the cuts can be found in the link below.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fWrsJiacJ24VHIt78bk-Gvvs3DH_f-pJ/view?usp=sharing

There is a playlist of the weekly progress videos that were done for the piece in the link below

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgK8ktcGDGs8UTsSelbhrGaLpSCA9uN-X

Contributions

Evangeline: She designed and laser-cut all of the pieces. The mirror and the figurines of the zoetrope were mainly her efforts. There were a lot of struggles in making the Zeotrope be the right size for the piece and tremendous trials and errors.

Ebrahim: He worked on the electronics and code that brought the experience to life. This includes the strobe light and the speed rotation.

The design was done collaboratively.

Concept

When we had first drafted what we wanted to accomplish with our “Magical Canvas,” we knew we wanted to invoke that idea of time passing and progressing. The idea behind our project was to demonstrate the passing of time and how change is inevitable. So, we took the idea of a blank canvas where there was a barren surface and we transformed it into a beautiful idealistic landscape. And from the perspective of the audience, that is exactly what we wanted to show: a blank piece of acrylic becoming a Claude Monet inspired landscape.

Reflection

How does our project fall inline with the courses themes? We were able to use robotic movement and mechanisms to create an art piece, one that was animated in a surprising manner. By using conveyor belts, pulleys, and magnets, we were able to facilitate the motion of pop-up mechanisms to create a landscape mimicking one of Monet paintings. Using the autonomous behavior helps enhance the narrative medium especially for our project, because if we use an opaque piece of acrylic, the audience doesn’t know that there is a mechanism under the acrylic layer. Thus, the pieces of fabric seem to slide by “magic”, coming together to create a landscape. There is always this misconception that robotics are just for the practical and technical uses, but this project and all the other RfCP projects prove that autonomous behavior and robotic movement can create artwork.

Outcome

Creating our final project was a journey of trial and error. In regards to the soft material manipulation, there were lots of adjustments made along the way. We had initially started with a more busy design with more pop-up elements but noticed that with what could be accomplished with our fabric ribbons, that would not be as feasible. There were many prototypes that went into coming up with the fabric ribbons and how they would be structured. Initially, paper was not meant to be used in our design at all but it proved to be an interesting medium to work with alongside the fabric, especially because it added more spring to the fabric’s free structure. We discovered that if we were to create pleats in the fabric to fold up the pop-up paper elements then it would be easier to unfold as the magnet dragged the fabric. We also learned that with the paper’s springiness it would be hard to keep the pleats on the side of the suitcase before being unravelled, so we used sewing pins to fasten the fabric and as the fabric unravelled the pins would detach. Working with the paper and the fabric taught us a lot about mixed media and how they affect one another. It was unexpected seeing how the construction paper completely changed the movement effect of the fabric and it was a challenge to work with. However, with the various prototypes, we were able to come up with a working design.

As far as fabricating the model, even that process required some trial and error to see which model design would be most appropriate. We started out by building a model which consisted of one base horizontal panel and two upright vertical panels, with one stepper motor attached to each vertical panel and a belt between the two. We realized that this wasn’t scalable because of two things. One, using two stepper motors where one was the “idler pulley” and the other actually had its motor powered was a waste of a stepper. Two, the two panels wouldn’t be that supportive, and having one panel connect the stepper and the idler pulley would be better.

Next, we built a model which consisted of a stepper and an idler pulley, with one panel connecting the two and a belt with a coupler moving between them. While the belt was functional, we discovered the panels needed to be taller in order to account for the heights of the other coupler pieces, which were larger than the one we were using, and would have to have the magnets glued on top. We also realized we needed to build a model with walls so that the panels would be better supported, and we needed to organize the panels so that there would be enough room for 4 motors, but the whole model would fit in the small space of the suitcase. This required a lot of measurement and planning with paper drawings before using Fusion360 to create the actual model and laser cutting and assembling the model.

While assembling the model, we ended up running into issues we hadn’t previously considered, like the strength of the magnets on the coupler pieces causing them to “lift” to meet the magnets on the other side of the acrylic, and the belts not being perfectly tensioned. We ended up fixing this by using rods that went through most of the coupler pieces (minus the one without holes to put the rod through), so the pieces could only slide linearly and not rise. We also raised the magnets to a level where they were touching the acrylic by having them be situated on top of mini platforms, which were then glued to the couplers.

As for the code, it was pretty simplistic. The only trial and error that was needed was to see which speeds the magnets should move at to produce the most dramatic effect, so we could hardcode a “start” and “reset” mode and have each motor start, move the magnet along the belt for some seconds at a particular speed, and then stop.

Final Setup/Results

For our final exhibition, we had set up three ribbons that would be unravelled in a sequence. First, a ribbon holding a waterlily would unravel and then a ribbon with two swans, and finally for our showstopper, we had a bridge be unravelled onto the suitcase. The lighting was set to add extra reflection onto the sheer fabric and create an effect that the fabric was “water.”

References/Inspiration

We wanted to create a landscape that mimicked Claude Monet’s iconic waterlily painting:

soft material references:

We took a lot of inspiration from the other IDeATe class, Kinetic Fabrics, thanks to the help of Professor Olivia Robinson. In addition, a lot of references were made to tutorials on how to create pop-ups.

Technical Material

Feedback

To our relief and surprise, during the final showcase, our project was able to work most of the time. What was least ideal was that we needed to manually reset and bin the fabrics before redoing our demonstration, but the audience was happy enough to wait. Everyone who saw our functioning project wanted to know how were able to achieve the movement of the fabric and were interested to hear it was solely through magnets on a conveyor belt. This machine was able to create an art piece solely through movement and it created a landscape for the audience to see.

Specializations

Model Fabrication/Code – Sunjana Kulkarni

Soft Materials/Art – Ankita Bhanjois

The Project Narrative

In a quite literal whirlwind of light, sound, and natural elements, we build an isolated world that can take on many forms. The choreography between elements follows a certain flow, a natural progression of the color wheel with corresponding levels of movement. By enclosing the most kinetic pieces of the project, we have separated the viewer from the action and allowed the room for wonder in how it must feel inside this boxed-off world – they should wondering, does the air feel different in there? What would it be like to be small and within this world and looking out into this mysterious world of colorful lights and changing shadows?

A reflection on the relationship of the project to the course themes

In the beginning of the course we discussed the different ways robotic motion can create unstimulated, random motion or on the flip side, a choreography. Our project aimed to narrate a story of changing seasons using an animation that consisted of both these motions. While our rotating servo motors, spinning fans, and programmed light choreography were the basis of our animation and story, it all behaved as the code directed it too. On the other hand, the wind spinning the reflective paper, and the way the patterns were projected on the black screens could not be accurately predicted and we relied on their random motion to give us the specific effect we desired. In short, a simple machine has the capability to have its every motion be controlled and yet the produces a totally unexpected output motion.

We can think of this relationship between controlled and random movement in real-life changing seasons as well. While, it is known that Summer starts in June followed by Fall in December, the weather of each individual day is unknown to us. The random abnormal appearance of rain, strong winds, and an appearing sun on a cold day are the elements of nature that surprise us. This by extension goes us to show how a robotic sculpture can have every movement choreographed but can also still surprise us by creating random kinetic motions.

A discussion of outcomes: the successes and failures of our choices

The process we used to formulate our project idea took the path of resource confined thinking – though we knew we always had the option to order more supplies or materials, there was something appealing about making use of everything that was already available to us in the IDeATe spaces.

The successful parts of this choice:

• a less constrained timeline, as there was more flexibility with revisions (if we laser cut a part with the incorrect dimensions, we could revise it immediately instead of waiting for an order)
• more accessible knowledge about components we wished to include: using servos and fans from the lab meant help on how to use these resources was more readily available
• also using a variety of resources to create multiple unique kinetic motions allowed us a lot of room to create different behaviors and scene settings. At first, it felt like we had too much going on but once we planned everything out and got things functioning, having many elements actually worked in our favor.

The failures of this choice:

• we created a limitation for ourselves if the available resources did not perform as expected (we were excited the lab had PC fans available for our small scale project! however, we did not find out until assembly how severely they lack any torque)

We learned a very valuable lesson from the approach we took here: while we made an accurate bill of materials from the beginning, any and all specifications (size, power, current/voltage ratings, ranges of motion, compatibility) of already available materials should also be recorded in this process. It would make wiring everything up an easier task in the end.

Aside from the technical lessons, there was also an artistic inquiry explored in the use of the LED strips. The choosing of colors and transitions was joint effort, pulling from our personal experiences/knowledge of colors and their relationship to seasons but also understanding how different colors play with people’s emotions.

We were successful in creating a lighting choreographing that enacted wonder and a sense of “dancing” into each season. Additionally, our color choices were clear changes from winter to spring to summer to fall. One of our biggest successes was using the LEDs to create “flashes of lightning” simulating summer thunderstorms!

However, we would have loved to spend more time exploring the transitions between seasons. We weren’t able to define the subtle differences between how winter changes to spring vs. how fall changes to winter.

Performance Video

Technical Documentation

Code: All fans, servos, and LEDs were programmed to work synchronously from a single Arduino source code file.

CAD files: We used all our individual CAD Models to create an assembly so that we could visualize our final piece as one unit and this allowed us to make more confined measurements as one of our constraints was the small size of our suitcase. After initial prototyping and multiple iterations given below are our final CAD designs:

Individual Member Contributions

• Kanvi:
  • Technical contributions:
    • Electronic Design/Wiring
    • Arduino programming of fans, servos, lights, etc.
    • Laser Cutting, Soldering
    • Decorating Box
  • Artistic Contributions:
    • Seasons concept idea – life in a box
    • Creating a pattern of changing lights to depict each season i.e. how can I program to depict a thunderstorm?
• Anaya:
  • Technical contributions:
    • Mechanical Design and CAD of base plate, light projection pieces, box, etc.
    • Laser Cutting
    • Constructing the tree and stands for fans
    • Decorating Box
  • Artistic Contributions:
    • Snow globe concept idea, light projections to achieve seasons effect idea
    • What geometric shapes of projections can potentially give an effect for a season? Will circles show as snow?

Resources and Citations

Using a 4pin fan with the Arduino:

• https://create.arduino.cc/projecthub/tylerpeppy/25-khz-4-pin-pwm-fan-control-with-arduino-uno-3005a1
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJK2JF8wOu8&t=76s&ab_channel=ScienceFun

FastLED Library and Documentation:

• https://github.com/FastLED/FastLED/wiki/Overview

Project Narrative

The concept
‘Where Did Alam Go?’ is an interactive installation that depicts selective rejection of people based on their religion. The installation is inspired by a group of Rohingya Muslims who were deported because of the Citizenship Amendment Act. The act by the Indian government accepts illegal migrants who are Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Parsi, Buddhist, and Christian but those who are Muslim. The installation is an abstract  representation of this unjust law. Personally this installation is trying to also subtly showcase my search for my departed loved ones, like Alam.

Performance objectives
The installation is a rejection system which rejects people in India based on their religion. The hand crank operates the conveyor belt that represents India, where people of different religions are being tried for their religion. The swinging gavel, representing the judicial system, selects specific people to hit them off the conveyor belt. They are hit and therefore “rejected” into a suitcase placed under the conveyor belt, representing their displacement and the uprooting of these innocent people from their livelihoods. The installation being driven by the guests seeds a thought of how they are an accomplice to this brutal discrimination. Their participation is intended to make them realize how we all involuntarily or voluntarily are a part of this injustice happening against our fellow human beings.

Viewer experience
Guests started with a sense of curiosity to figure out the mystery behind Alam missing and what the machine does. They were excited to interact with the installation by turning the crank, and then surprised to see the gavel knocking certain people off the conveyor belt. Once they understood the idea of rejection they felt disappointed to be the one initiating and participating in this act of discimination. They felt sad to see the condition of the forcefully displaced people in the suitcase. They left the exhibit with a thought of how they involuntarily or voluntarily are a part of the injustice happening against our fellow human beings.

Our goals
‘Where did Alam go?’ is intended to generate an awareness regarding the injustice happening against people based on their religion. The goal is to ‘Where did Alam go?’ is intended to generate awareness regarding the injustice happening against Muslims in India. The goal is to make the audience think about how we are all involuntarily accomplices in the discrimination of our fellow human beings. The hand driven crank allows the guest to interact with the installation making the experience more engaging and relatable.

Relationship to Course Themes

One thing that we were able to accomplish in our project was making people in the audience feel complicit. Instead of having people just watch the conveyor belt with people go by, they had to participate in the action. The person had to turn the crank, causing the conveyor belt to move and eventually causing the green people to get aggressively hit by the gavel. This meant that the users were aiding in the process, which symbolized how people can be complicit with the harmful actions of the government. Several people told us that they felt they were a part of the wrongdoing because they were moving the belt forcing people to get hit. By making people part of our installation we were able to pull people into the narrative and spark emotion. 

Furthermore, the action of the gavel hitting the green people had a large impact on our audience. When a green person passed by one sensor the gavel would rise slowly until it was nearly 90 degrees and then pause there until the green person was right in front and hit them aggressively into our “suitcase”. The motion of the person being struck by the gavel really resonated with people and made them wonder and ask why it was happening. With this simple motion we were able to create an emotion, understanding of and empathy for the green people who represented Rohingya Muslims in India.

Overall, I think this piece was able to bring awareness to the government policy in India that is deporting the Rohingya Muslims in a visual and impactful way. This piece effectively demonstrated selection and rejection with the nuisance of making the audience complicit. We were able to learn how our simple mechanism and coding was able to affect people in such a powerful way. I think this piece did advance our understanding of how we understand and utilize political and protest art.

Outcomes

The project turned out to be a success. It informed our guests of the issue we wanted to address. The gavel striking the people gave the installation surprisingly animate qualities. The interactive hand crank mechanism made the experience more engaging and impactful. Creating early prototypes and previz 3D models helped us create an installation as we imagined it. Early documentation of experience goals, emotional arc and journey maps helped us produce the impact we aimed for. 

We did not have enough time to achieve some of our stretch goals like lighting the installation using sensors and LEDS to highlight different areas that would tell the story more impactfully. We should have used more time to test our final installation to ensure its smooth functioning during the show. 

Video Performance

Video High Res

Technical Documentation

Soildworks CAD:

Arduino Code:

Rendering:

3D Model of the installation-Previz

Human CAD drawings for laser cut

Design Documentation

Experience design documentation

Photos

Specific Contributions

Mimi

• Designed (in solidworks), laser cut, and assembled the box, the gavel system and the shaft holder mechanism
• Prototyped the conveyor belt and gavel system
• Designed clamp for gavel in solidworks and 3D printed it
• Chose parts to fit in with design
• Coded the movement of the gavel and the detection of the people
• Laser cut all the people and their stands

Both

• Conceptualize / iterate the idea
• Assemble conveyor belt system

Anjali

• Ideation and concept design
• Visual design
• Experience design and documentation
• CAD drawing for humans and their fixtures
• Prototyped the magnet mechanism for humans
• Fabricated the humans
• Created pre-visualisations of the installation in Maya
• Created the project video

Narrative statement

The Scare-case is an interactive, travel-size version of the Fridge Scare, a common jump scare technique used in horror movies where audience members are scared after they expect.

The objectives of our performance were to create an interactive experience that controlled the emotions and expectations of the visitor. We achieved interaction by encouraging the visitor to open and close the suitcase’s lid. We attempted to control the visitor’s emotions and expectations in a Fridge-Scare-esque manner, by removing the fright when expected and delivering the fright when not.

Narrative description of experience

The suitcase begins closed and rattles in order to grab a visitor’s attention in both a visual and auditory way. Once the visitor is close enough, the rattling ceases, thus inviting the visitor to open the suitcase and see what spooky mysteries lie inside.

To the visitor’s surprise and relief, opening the suitcase reveals an empty interior and the lack of a scare. After convincing themselves that the experience has concluded, the visitor closes the suitcase lid in order to reset the suitcase for the next visitor.

As soon as the lid is closed, the false lid springs open as the suitcase begins to violently rattle once more! Hopefully, this elicits a jump scare from the visitor, given their lowered guard. After the scare concludes, the false lid slowly re-closes and the suitcase waits patiently for its next victim.

Course themes present in Scare-case

One theme in this course was that a robot was a machine that was “surprisingly animate.” We attempted to achieve this in our piece through the use of sensors and motors. More specifically, through the use of distance sensors, motion sensors, and motors, we were able to surprise visitors based on expected animation and unexpected animation.

The expected animation came in the initial rattling of the suitcase powered by the DC motors and triggered by the motion sensor. This rattling marks the beginning of the visitor’s experience with the machine. We’d categorize this animation as expected since there is a clear and easy-to-understand relationship between the motion sensor and the resulting rattling.

The unexpected animation came in the sudden opening of the false lid. This was an event not within the initial scope of the machine. We were able to take this surprising event and elevate the surprise even more by using sensors to detect when the lid was re-closed, and thus when the visitor was least likely to expect a new event.

Our sculpture demonstrates how lackluster animation of a robot can be wielded as a tool to lower one’s guard in order to later heighten the surprise of future animation.

Outcomes: successes? failures? lessons learned?

The most successful part of this project I think was creating some that was “surprisingly animate”. Movement in general can have varying degrees of apparent life or energy and something that moves and stops moving in relation to the people moving around it was a strong concept to hold onto. Where there could have been more refinement with more time, might have been the building and mechanics of the pop-up false lid. if it had a quality of movement closer to the joltiness of the “rattle” movement, it might have been a more cohesive piece.

The main issue I noticed as people approached the suitcase in the gallery, was that they didn’t know what to do with the suitcase. Ideally a piece does not need the creator standing right by it explaining and telling the viewer how it is meant to be experienced. To simplify, earlier in the process, we cut out the idea to have speakers and noises emit from the suitcase. Perhaps this may have been a good way for the piece itself to encourage people to actually open the suitcase.

Performance video

Citations

• This soft-close hinge served as inspiration for initial motor-controlled hinge prototype:
  • https://www.amazon.com/Support-70N-120N-Kitchen-Wardrobe-Top-Upward/dp/B08BHTVCT2
• Garth’s sample CircuitPython code for the Raspberry Pi Pico and various sensors/motors served as the foundation of our code:
  • https://courses.ideate.cmu.edu/16-223/f2021/text/code/index.html
• An example of a Fridge Scare from The Purge (2013):
  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQco3rtbjqc

Supporting technical documentations

Program source code

Mechanical CAD files

Laser-cut files for gears, false lid, and hinges.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Y5cURw3J6UZVCzGKslVZdzoijgcBHqmP/view?usp=sharing

Design element photographs

Group contributions

Sue:

• Designing and implementing all the code for the suitcase
• Assembling the hinge
• Calibrating and collecting marker values for sensors and motors
• Wiring all of the motors and sensors to the Raspberry Pi Pico
• Building the functional prototype of a false lid and hinge
• Other general assembly here and there, with a focus on function instead of fashion

Ana:

• Project concept, story boarding
• Laser cut pieces
• Aesthetic design and execution
• Rattle motors setup and wiring
• Some of the installation of motors and building

The viewer is drawn in by the piece. The piece then activates to show you an animated figure that is illuminated by a blue light.

This figure transforms from a fetus into an angel. As you step in closer to observe the figure and to also get a closer look at yourself in the mirror in the back, the figure is illuminated by a red light instead and now instead transforms into a devil.

There are quotes and questions at the back for the viewer to stop and ponder.

“The most terrifying thing is to accept oneself completely”

carl Jung

Has the guest accepted themselves completely with their good and bad traits?

Are you at peace with your demons?

There are videos of the project in the link below.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ilrTLhvp2Bp4DPPHF_XD7xJffvvBUvgV?usp=sharing

The MVP

We made a model that had red demonic features and blue angel-like features. These features would appear under different lights.

The final product

You might not see much with the frame rate of the phone recording.

The Trial with Evangeline. To show which sensors get triggered

• Progress:
  • The hinge has been fully assembled and attached to the suitcase
  • The false lid is close to being done (parts have been CADed)
• To-do:
  • Attach the false lid to the hinge and suitcase
  • Attach the “false lid lifting lever” stepper motor to the suitcase
  • Attach the rattling mechanism to the cardboard base

Electronics:

• Progress:
  • Rattling DC motors are sautered to wires
• To-do:
  • Wire up and attach the lid ultrasonic sensor to the Pico board
  • Wire up and attach the outer ultrasonic sensor to the Pico board
  • Wire up and attach the outer pir motion sensor to the Pico board
  • Wire up the rattling DC motors to the Pico board
  • Wire up the “false lid lifting lever” stepper motor to the Pico board

Code:

• Progress:
  • Independent code for ultrasonic sensor and motion sensor is done
• To-do:
  • Write code for the entire mechanism and its logic