lynx   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure from:Collaborative Work Enabled by Immersive Environments

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Fig. 8. Manufacturing planning in a CAVE system: the left person is presenting the layout from her viewpoint, while having a discussion with the right person who is viewing the same layout. Source: photography by Jan Siebel.

Figure 8 Manufacturing planning in a CAVE system: the left person is presenting the layout from her viewpoint, while having a discussion with the right person who is viewing the same layout. Source: photography by Jan Siebel.

Related Figures (8)

pO MRE SR, eae ee LRG. | VR systems, designed to provide a sense of presence, consist of a number of hardware devices and software. The hardware typically consists of visual and audio output, a tracking system, powerful graphics computers, and in some cases, may have haptic feedback. The visual output comprises three-dimensiona screens that can be attached directly to the user’s head (called Head Mounted Displays (HMDs) or VR headsets, see Fig. 2) or a stationary screen such as a projection-based Powerwall or a Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE see Fig. 8). AR systems use mainly so-called see-through headsets (see Fig. 2 on the right) or hand-held devices (smartphones, tablets). The required software is based on VR-capable graphics engines or scene graph systems to execute the applications. This task could also be performed by a VR authoring system, which has the additional task of building the scene and implementing the application ogic. Depending on the use case, 3D modeling tools can also be applied to create the 3D content. To realize CVEs the VR software needs a special collaboration module to enable communication and synchronize the user interaction with the VE. In this way, the VEs can be experienced by more than one user and collab- oration between the users can take place. At this moment, we are talking about collaborative VEs or CVEs.
pO MRE SR, eae ee LRG. | VR systems, designed to provide a sense of presence, consist of a number of hardware devices and software. The hardware typically consists of visual and audio output, a tracking system, powerful graphics computers, and in some cases, may have haptic feedback. The visual output comprises three-dimensiona screens that can be attached directly to the user’s head (called Head Mounted Displays (HMDs) or VR headsets, see Fig. 2) or a stationary screen such as a projection-based Powerwall or a Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE see Fig. 8). AR systems use mainly so-called see-through headsets (see Fig. 2 on the right) or hand-held devices (smartphones, tablets). The required software is based on VR-capable graphics engines or scene graph systems to execute the applications. This task could also be performed by a VR authoring system, which has the additional task of building the scene and implementing the application ogic. Depending on the use case, 3D modeling tools can also be applied to create the 3D content. To realize CVEs the VR software needs a special collaboration module to enable communication and synchronize the user interaction with the VE. In this way, the VEs can be experienced by more than one user and collab- oration between the users can take place. At this moment, we are talking about collaborative VEs or CVEs.
Fig. 2. Concept of a CVE with mixed collaboration modes and xR technologies. Left: Avatars of remote collaborators participating via VR HMDs or a CAVE. Center: Col- laborator participating through a video call on their desktop PC or hand-held device. Right: Present (co-located) collaborators using AR HMDs. Source: own representation.
Fig. 2. Concept of a CVE with mixed collaboration modes and xR technologies. Left: Avatars of remote collaborators participating via VR HMDs or a CAVE. Center: Col- laborator participating through a video call on their desktop PC or hand-held device. Right: Present (co-located) collaborators using AR HMDs. Source: own representation.
Fig. 4. A shared CVE consists of several replications of the shared 3D scene on the local systems of the users. The replicated scenes require synchronization between all systems to ensure a consistent CVE for all participants [68]. Source: own representation based on Active transactions in collaborative virtual environments, by Peciva, 2007. The available collaboration paradigms depend on the connectivity and com- nunication architecture. The most basic setting is to display user avatars and 1 chat window to communicate. This results in a very small network commu- uication data volume, as only the transformation matrices of the users have to 9e synchronized between application instances. Instead of a chat, it is also pos- sible to start a conferencing tool like Zoom or Teams, which will increase the ransmitted data volume. The next step to ease the communication is to enable voice over IP, this is more challenging on a technical level as the application 1eeds to access microphone devices and stream the data to other nodes as well is play the voice streams locally of collaborating users. Even more challenging s synchronizing the scene graph, the simpler version is to just synchronize the visibility and transformation of 3D assets, but each asset is already shipped with ach copy of the application.
Fig. 4. A shared CVE consists of several replications of the shared 3D scene on the local systems of the users. The replicated scenes require synchronization between all systems to ensure a consistent CVE for all participants [68]. Source: own representation based on Active transactions in collaborative virtual environments, by Peciva, 2007. The available collaboration paradigms depend on the connectivity and com- nunication architecture. The most basic setting is to display user avatars and 1 chat window to communicate. This results in a very small network commu- uication data volume, as only the transformation matrices of the users have to 9e synchronized between application instances. Instead of a chat, it is also pos- sible to start a conferencing tool like Zoom or Teams, which will increase the ransmitted data volume. The next step to ease the communication is to enable voice over IP, this is more challenging on a technical level as the application 1eeds to access microphone devices and stream the data to other nodes as well is play the voice streams locally of collaborating users. Even more challenging s synchronizing the scene graph, the simpler version is to just synchronize the visibility and transformation of 3D assets, but each asset is already shipped with ach copy of the application.
Fig. 5. Three major challenges for the acceptance of immersive approaches, here as an example in virtual navigation tasks. Source: own representation. The effective implementation and efficiency of CVEs are intimately linked to the effects that virtual immersion and associated technologies have on users, and therefore, by extension, to their ability to accept them. Indeed, virtual immersion may place users in different psycho-physiological and behavioral states than those observed in the real world. Numerous issues are to be considered when developing CVEs and here we present three major ones of those (Fig. 5).
Fig. 5. Three major challenges for the acceptance of immersive approaches, here as an example in virtual navigation tasks. Source: own representation. The effective implementation and efficiency of CVEs are intimately linked to the effects that virtual immersion and associated technologies have on users, and therefore, by extension, to their ability to accept them. Indeed, virtual immersion may place users in different psycho-physiological and behavioral states than those observed in the real world. Numerous issues are to be considered when developing CVEs and here we present three major ones of those (Fig. 5).
Fig. 6. Concept for asynchronous remote collaboration between two users. Source: own representation from Asynchronous manual work in mixed reality remote collaboration, Mayer et al., 2022.
Fig. 6. Concept for asynchronous remote collaboration between two users. Source: own representation from Asynchronous manual work in mixed reality remote collaboration, Mayer et al., 2022.
Fig. 7. MR collaboration between two users on an assembly task [67]. Right: VR envi- ronment with virtual hands replacing the controllers. Left: AR environment including hand tracking and virtual assembly parts which will be mapped to the physical parts. Source: own representation from Asynchronous manual work in mixed reality remote collaboration, Mayer et al. 2022.
Fig. 7. MR collaboration between two users on an assembly task [67]. Right: VR envi- ronment with virtual hands replacing the controllers. Left: AR environment including hand tracking and virtual assembly parts which will be mapped to the physical parts. Source: own representation from Asynchronous manual work in mixed reality remote collaboration, Mayer et al. 2022.
Fig. 9. Example of collaborative setup for training involving a trainer and a trainee. and a control screen, which is particularly suitable to train operators for instance (see also Subsect. 4.3 and Fig.9). In such a situation, the trainer not only sees the actions of the trainee in the virtual environment, but can also trigger events or scenarios thanks to a dedicated interface.
Fig. 9. Example of collaborative setup for training involving a trainer and a trainee. and a control screen, which is particularly suitable to train operators for instance (see also Subsect. 4.3 and Fig.9). In such a situation, the trainer not only sees the actions of the trainee in the virtual environment, but can also trigger events or scenarios thanks to a dedicated interface.
Лучший частный хостинг