On the Design of Virtual Reality Learning Environments in Engineering
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Background of VR Applications
3. Design of VR Applications
- To decide the most adequate realism level for achieving each objective, varying on a scale from very symbolic or schematic to very realistic.
- To choose the level of user interaction with the VR environment, which determines (i) the senses involved (e.g., tactile, sonic, or visual only), and (ii) the degree of control and immersion that the user will have.
- To select the hardware and software programming that best fit the objectives proposed, according to the options adopted in the previous steps.
- Then, the virtual world is modelled, interactivity is programmed, and the VR application is generated. It must be considered that reducing the response time is essential (as in any computer application) for obtaining a VR experience as real as possible and for minimizing cyber sickness.
- Finally, the VR device is tested by a group of pilot users. The result of the test allows for verification if the desired objectives are reached, and for making the necessary modifications otherwise.
3.1. Level of User Interaction and Control
- Passive Level: The user interaction with the VR environment is low. Such an environment is similar to a movie but in a 3D immersive environment. The user has no control over what happens. However, the user has the freedom to decide where to look and the interaction can involve several senses such as sight, hearing, and even touch (feeling what is happening around him). The most common example of passive VR is 360° video [43].
- Exploratory Level: In this interaction type, the VR environment allows the user both (i) to move around the virtual world and (ii) to choose where to look. Although this level implies a great improvement in functionality and immersion, interaction and control over the environment are scarce. Users can see and change their position in the virtual world but they cannot touch. By way of example, architectural walks or the simplest virtual museums may be quoted [44].
- Interactive Level: The user interaction with the VR environment is high. Such an environment allows users to explore, to control and even to modify the virtual environment. The level of interactivity can widely vary depending on (i) intended objectives; (ii) the number of senses acting; (iii) the available hardware devices; and (iv) the used programming software. Most of the current VR applications are included in this level.
3.2. Hardware Devices
- Google Cardboard© (Figure 4): The easiest and cheapest way to experiment with VR, having a smart phone with a gyroscope. Google designed such glasses in cardboard, and this simple design became as a reference for models made using other materials. The computer system is a smartphone where the user can run applications and videogames or play VR videos. Such a VR device includes two 40 mm focal length lenses and two magnets that interact with the phone magnetometers. The advantages of this system are: (i) low cost; (ii) large amount of content, especially 360° videos; and (iii) versatility, since it works with most smartphone models, whereas the disadvantages can be summarized by: (i) the low quality of the VR experience and (ii) the fact that it is uncomfortable to use.
- Samsung Gear VR© (Figure 4): A VR device with a much more rigid structure, a more attractive appearance, and a more comfortable use than the Google Cardboard©. Several additional elements are included in these VR glasses: better optics, better field of view (96° Samsung Gear VR© vs. 90° Google Cardboard©, see Table 1), and better head tracking due to a series of sensors placed specifically to achieve this end. Although its price constantly grows, it is still affordable. The main disadvantages are: (i) the low versatility, since these VR glasses only work with certain models of Samsung smartphones, and (ii) a relatively low level of immersion.
- Oculus Rift© (Figure 4): The origin of a real revolution of VR technology. Oculus Rift© was a project initiated by Kickstarter, the world’s largest funding platform for creative projects, and was later acquired by Facebook. The more significant hardware components included in this VR device are: (i) VR goggles; (ii) 360-degree surround headphones; and (iii) a sensor that records the movements of the user’s body. Oculus Rift© requires a high-end computer with a very high performance graphics card. Oculus Rift© does not have external sensors and only includes an infrared sensor inside the glasses, consequently, it is not capable of detecting movements within the virtual zone as HTC Vive© does. Therefore, the main disadvantage is the limited user movements allowed in space due to the restriction imposed by the cable linking the headset to the computer.
- HTC Vive© (Figure 2 and Figure 4): The high-end VR headset developed by the maker of HTC© mobile phones and the videogame corporation Valve©. In this VR device, a high level of immersion is achieved due to the use of (i) VR stick controls (used with the hands) that allow users to interact with objects within the VR environment, and (ii) sensors placed on the walls of the room that build a virtual space where the user can freely move. As in the case of Oculus Rift©, a high-end computer is necessary for using HTC Vive©.
3.3. Software for VR Programming
- Blender© (Blender Foundation, Amsterdam, Netherlands): The most popular free and open-source 3D animation and modelling software that currently exists. This software is difficult to learn.
- Autodesk 3DStudio Max© (Autodesk, San Rafael, CA, United States): The most used in technical applications of engineering and architecture and in the creation of videogames. This software is more affordable to learn.
- Autodesk Maya© (Autodesk, San Rafael, CA, United States): The most advisable in the production of films. The main shortcoming is the high complexity in learning.
- Unity3D© (Unity Technologies, San Francisco, CA, United States): The most popular 3D videogame development engine currently available in the market. It is a flexible graphic engine offering a wide range of resources. The main advantage is its versatility. By being cross-platform, any project can be exported to both mobile (Android, IOS) and desktop operating systems (Windows, Linux and Mac OS), as well as to videogame consoles. In addition, it is also compatible with VR platforms, and it is really useful for designing projects either in 2D and 3D. Furthermore, Unity3D is easy to learn and to use, and offers a free version with some limitations.
- Unreal Engine© (Epic Games, Cary, NC, United States): A total cross-platform engine which has been free since 2015. Unreal Engine© is optimized for currently available consoles (including Nintendo Switch© (Nintendo Co., Kyoto, Japan)). In addition, it supports mobile and all types of VR devices. Nowadays, Unreal© is the reference development engine for multiple videogame and serious game applications as it is more graphically advanced than Unity3D©.
4. Discussion and Conclusions
- Interactivity and realism are the most important features for motivating students to use a didactic VR application. Taking into account that students are used to handling videogames designed with the latest VR technologies, outdated didactic VR applications do not awake the interest of students. Consequently, a constant effort to update VR application is necessary.
- The students highly rated the realism of the VR applications developed by the authors. Even so, students demand the use of VR resources as much as possible in order to improve their learning experience, according to survey results. Thus, collaboration between experts in a specific subject and VR technicians is necessary for designing a useful and attractive VR environment for students.
- In general terms, all the students consider these didactic VR resources easy to use (as it would be expected, considering the students’ familiarity with the latest generation of videogames, which are designed with the same type of VR software).
- VR is not by itself educationally useful and, consequently, an ad hoc methodological approach must be developed using the VR as a didactic tool.
- According to students’ opinion, the most important aspects in a didactic VR tool to reach a good level of educational usefulness are: (i) a collection of interactive exercises or problems and (ii) the interactivity, which must be designed for didactic purposes and, hence, the allowed movements should enhance the expected learning.
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sutherland, I.E. The ultimate display. In Information Processing 1965, Proceedings of the IFIP Congress, London, UK, 1965; Macmillan and Co.: London, UK, 1965; pp. 506–508. [Google Scholar]
- Dobrzański, L.A.; Honysz, R. On the implementation of virtual machines in computer aided education. J. Mater. Educ. 2009, 31, 131–140. [Google Scholar]
- Vergara, D.; Lorenzo, M.; Rubio, M.P. Virtual environments in materials science and engineering: the students’ opinion. In Handbook of Research on Recent Developments in Materials Science and Corrosion Engineering Education, 1st ed.; Lim, H., Ed.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2015; Chapter 8; pp. 148–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richert, A.; Shehadeh, M.; Willicks, F.; Jeschke, S. Digital Transformation of Engineering Education. Int. J. Eng. Pedagog. 2016, 6, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vergara, D.; Lorenzo, M.; Rubio, M.P. On the use of virtual environments in engineering education. Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ. 2016, 50, 30–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Achuthan, K.; Murali, S. A comparative study of educational laboratories from cost & learning effectiveness perspective. In Software Engineering in Intelligent Systems; Silhavy, R., Senkerik, R., Kominlova, Z., Prokopova, Z., Silhavy, P., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 349, pp. 143–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hilfert, T.; König, M. Low-cost virtual reality environment for engineering and construction. Visual Eng. 2016, 4, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García, J.; Entrialgo, J. Using computer virtualization and software tools to implement a low cost laboratory for the teaching of storage area networks. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2015, 23, 715–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vergara, D.; Rubio, M.P.; Prieto, F.; Lorenzo, M. Enhancing the teaching/learning of materials mechanical characterization by using virtual reality. J. Mater. Educ. 2016, 38, 63–74. [Google Scholar]
- Vergara, D.; Rubio, M.P.; Lorenzo, M. New approach for the teaching of concrete compression tests in large groups of engineering students. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobrzański, L.A.; Jagiełło, A.; Honysz, R. Virtual tensile test machine as an example of material science virtual laboratory post. J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf. Eng. 2008, 27, 207–210. [Google Scholar]
- Vergara, D.; Rubio, M.P.; Lorenzo, M. Interactive virtual platform for simulating a concrete compression test. Key Eng. Mater. 2014, 572, 582–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tuan, Q.; Pedro, A.; Rok, Ch.; Taek, H.; Sik, Ch.; Ki, H. A framework for using mobile based virtual reality and augmented reality for experiential construction safety education. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 2015, 31, 713–725. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, D.; Lucas, J. Virtual reality simulation for construction safety promotion. Int. J. Inj. Control Saf. Promot. 2015, 22, 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vergara, D.; Rubio, M.P. The application of didactic virtual tools in the instruction of industrial radiography. J. Mater. Educ. 2015, 37, 17–26. [Google Scholar]
- Berg, L.P.; Vance, J.M. Industry use of virtual reality in product design and manufacturing: A survey. Virtual Real. 2016, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batista, C.; Seshadri, V.; Rabelo, R.A.; Reinhardt, P.; Moreira, P. Applying virtual reality model to green ironmaking industry and education: A case study of charcoal mini-blast furnace plant. Miner. Process. Ind. Metall. 2017, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, S.; Jung, K.; Noh, S.D. Virtual reality applications in manufacturing industries: Past research, present findings, and future directions. Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl. 2015, 23, 40–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vergara, D.; Rubio, M.P. Active methodologies through interdisciplinary teaching links: Industrial radiography and technical drawing. J. Mater. Educ. 2012, 34, 175–186. [Google Scholar]
- Hashemipour, M.; Manesh, H.F.; Bal, M. A modular virtual reality system for engineering laboratory education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2011, 19, 305–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sampaio, A.Z. Virtual reality technology applied in teaching and research in civil engineering education. J. Inf. Technol. Appl. Educ. 2012, 1, 152–163. [Google Scholar]
- Arnay, R.; Hernández-Aceituno, J.; González, E.; Acosta, L. Teaching kinematics with interactive schematics and 3D models. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ki, J.-S. Interactive training simulator for aerial working platform in a virtual environment. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2011, 19, 733–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, X.D.; Luo, S.; Lee, N.J.; Jin, F. Virtual machining lab for knowledge learning and skills training. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 1988, 6, 89–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crespo, R.; García, R.; Quiroz, S. Virtual reality application for simulation and off-line programming of the Mitsubishi move master RV-M1 robot integrated with the oculus rift to improve students training. Proc. Comput. Sci. 2015, 75, 107–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Górski, F.; Buń, P.; Wichniarek, R.; Zawadzki, P.; Hamrol, A. Immersive city bus configuration system for marketing and sales education. Proc. Comput. Sci. 2015, 75, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dickey, J.P.; Eger, T.R.; Frayne, R.J.; Delgado, G.P.; Ji, X. Research using virtual reality: Mobile machinery safety in the 21st century. Minerals 2013, 3, 145–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeFanti, T.A.; Dawe, G.; Sandin, D.J.; Schulze, J.P.; Otto, P.; Girado, J.; Kuester, F.; Smarr, L.; Rao, R. The StarCAVE, a third-generation CAVE and virtual reality OptlPortal. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2009, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuchera-Morin, J.E.; Wright, M.; Wakefield, G.; Roberts, Ch.; Adderton, D.; Sajadi, B.; Höllerer, T.; Majumder, A. Immersive full-surround multi-user system design. Comput. Graph. 2014, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobrzański, L.A.; Honysz, R. The idea of material science virtual laboratory. J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf. Eng. 2010, 42, 196–203. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, Z.; Liu, S.; Ji, M.; Liang, L. Virtual hydraulic experiments in courseware: 2D virtual circuits and 3D virtual equipments. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2011, 19, 315–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heradio, R.; de la Torre, L.; Galán, D.; Cabrerizo, F.J.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Dormido, S. Virtual and remote labs in education: A bibliometric analysis. Comput. Educ. 2016, 98, 14–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiang, S.; Wang, L.Ch. VGLS: A virtual geophysical laboratory system based on C# and Viustools and its application for geophysical education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chou, Ch.; Hsu, H.-L.; Yao, Y.-S. Construction of a virtual reality learning environment for teaching structural analysis. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 1997, 5, 223–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Sousa, M.P.A.; Filho, M.R.; Nunes, M.V.A.; Lopes, A.d.C. A 3D learning tool for a hydroelectric unit. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2012, 20, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vergara, D.; Rubio, M.P.; Lorenzo, M. A virtual environment for enhancing the understanding of ternary phase diagrams. J. Mater. Educ. 2015, 37, 93–102. [Google Scholar]
- Flanders, M.; Kavanagh, R.C. Build-a-robot: Using virtual reality to visualize the Denavit–Hartenberg parameters. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2015, 23, 846–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vergara, D.; Rubio, M.P.; Lorenzo, M. Multidisciplinary methodology for improving students’ spatial abilities in technical drawing. Sci. J. Educ. Technol. 2015, 5, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Villagrasa, S.; Fonseca, D.; Durán, J. Teaching case: Applying gamification techniques and virtual reality for learning building engineering 3D arts. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, Salamanca, Spain, 1–3 October 2014; ACM: New York, NY, USA; pp. 171–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez, N.A.; González, E.; Salinas, P.; Rios, H. Kinesthetic learning applied to mathematics using Kinect. Proc. Comput. Sci. 2013, 25, 131–135. [Google Scholar]
- Pantelidis, V.S. Virtual reality and engineering education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 1997, 5, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aukstakalnis, S.; Blatner, D. Silicon Mirage; the Art and Science of Virtual Reality; ACM, Digital Library, Peachpit Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Borisov, N.; Smolin, A.; Stolyarov, D.; Shcherbakov, P.; Trushin, V. The opportunities of applying the 360° video technology to the presentation of cultural events. In Interactivity, Game Creation, Design, Learning, and Innovation; Brooks, A., Brooks, E., Eds.; Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; Volume 196, pp. 256–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabassi, K. Evaluating websites of museums: State of the art. J. Cult. Herit. 2017, 24, 184–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Google Cardboard© | Samsung Gear VR© | Oculus Rift© | HTC Vive© | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Screen Type/Resolution | Depends on Smartphone | S. AMOLED 2.560 × 1.440 pixels | OLED 2.160 × 1.200 pixels | OLED 2.160 × 1.200 pixels |
Refresh Frequency (Hz) | Depends on Smartphone | 60 | 90 | 90 |
Platform Web | Google Play | Oculus Share | Oculus Home | SteamVR |
Field of View (°) | 90 | 96 | 110 | 110 |
Integrated Audio | No | No | Yes | Yes |
Integrated Microphone | No | No | Yes | Yes |
Controls | No | Touchpad | Xbox One Controller | Two wireless controllers |
Sensors | Accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity sensor | Accelerometer, gyroscope, proximity sensor | Accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, 360° positional tracking | Accelerometer, gyroscope, laser position sensor, front camera, base stations |
Connections | No | MicroUSB | HDMI, USB 2.0, USB 3.0 | HDMI, USB 2.0, USB 3.0 |
Minimum Requirements | A smartphone based on Android or iOS | Galaxy Note 5, S6, S6 edge, S6 edge+, S7, S7 edge. | NVIDIA GTX 970/AMD Radeon R9 290. Intel i5-4590, 8 GB RAM, HDMI 1.3 | NVIDIA GTX 970/AMD Radeon R9 290. Intel i5-4590, 4 GB RAM, HDMI 1.3 |
Price (€) | 5 | 99 | 699 | 899 |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Vergara, D.; Rubio, M.P.; Lorenzo, M. On the Design of Virtual Reality Learning Environments in Engineering. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 2017, 1, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti1020011
Vergara D, Rubio MP, Lorenzo M. On the Design of Virtual Reality Learning Environments in Engineering. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction. 2017; 1(2):11. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti1020011
Chicago/Turabian StyleVergara, Diego, Manuel Pablo Rubio, and Miguel Lorenzo. 2017. "On the Design of Virtual Reality Learning Environments in Engineering" Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 1, no. 2: 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti1020011
APA StyleVergara, D., Rubio, M. P., & Lorenzo, M. (2017). On the Design of Virtual Reality Learning Environments in Engineering. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 1(2), 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti1020011