PHYSICAL COMPUTING - PROTOTYPING

PHYSICAL COMPUTING - PROTOTYPING

Aline

A clip-on sensor that tells you when you’re sitting too close to your screen.

ROLE

UX Research

Co-Design Production

Physical Prototype

TEAM

04 Designers

METHODS

User Research

Physical Prototyping

Digital Rendering

Video Prototype

DELIVERABLE

Digital Rendering

01

PROBLEM

Hours at a laptop

add up. Often,

the strain comes

down to how

close you sit.

Prolonged computer use frequently results in digital eye strain and musculoskeletal discomfort, often caused by poor ergonomics and improper screen distance

(Reddy et al., 2013) - Inspired by UN Sustainable Development Goal 3: Good Health and well being

02

CONCEPT

FIG. 01 - INITIAL CONCEPT SKETCHES

A webcam-sized sensor that clips to the screen and stays out of the way.

It detects how close you are to your laptop and triggers an on-screen alert when you lean in too far. Because clip-on devices can feel distracting or unconventional, we designed both the physical form and the digital interface to be as unobtrusive as possible.

03

PROCESS

Four Prototypes,

each one built

on the last.

With a three-person team, we chose four methods that complemented one another, each aimed at a different question about the product.

STEP 01

Cardboard

TESTS: SIZE & SHAPE

A quick way to turn the sketch dimensions into a form we could hold before modeling.

STEP 02

3D Model

TESTS: PHYSICAL DESIGN

We designed and printed our own housing so we had full control over the object at the center of the test.

STEP 03

Wizard of Oz

TESTS: BEHAVIOR &

DESIRABILITY

A behavioral test that let us watch real interactions as if the device already worked.

STEP 04

Video

TESTS: PERCEIVED IMPACT

A two-minute film of the problem and the product in use, shown to viewers for feedback.

04

WIZARD OF OZ TEST

We faked the sensor. Nobody could tell.

Building real sensing was beyond the scope of the course, so we simulated it. A 3D-printed housing on an inactive Arduino gave participants something real to look at, while a teammate triggered the alert by hand.

HOW THE TEST WAS RIGGED

PARTICIPANT

Leans in to read small text

FACILITATOR

Watches from across the table

HIDDEN TRIGGER

Bluetooth keyboard keybind

BETTERTOUCHTOOL

Software triggered alert overlay

TEST PROTOCOL

PARTICIPANTS

3

ROUNDS

3 - both webcam versions, then each one alone

TASK

Find the only letter “Z” in Latin passages set at 5-13 pt

TIME LIMIT

90s

MEASURED

Posture changes, response time, interview answers

QUESTIONS WE ASKED AFTER

01

How would you rate your overall first impression of the model’s look and quality on the laptop? (1–7)

02

Would you feel comfortable leaving this model attached to your laptop for long periods?

03

How easy or difficult was it to complete the task without thinking about the webcam?

04

Do you believe this alert system could improve your posture or reduce strain over time?

05

Did the webcam’s size or position interfere with your use of the laptop?

FINDINGS

“It would probably help my posture

a bunch.”

PARTICIPANT, BEHAVIORAL TEST

3 / 3

participants said it did what it set out to do and wanted to use it day to day

5 - 6

most common value rating: “simple but effective”

4 - 6

quality rating out of 7, fair for a low fidelity build

WHAT WORKED

Orange and red warnings prompted people to hold their distance and stay aware of their posture

Participants understood the intended function despite the low fidelity

The reveal drew shock and amusement: the manual trigger felt real

WHAT DIDN’T

The alert was hard to notice once someone was already too close

Some worried they’d get used to it over time

Visible sensors felt intimidating to some people

04

VIDEO PROTOTYPE

Two minutes to

show the problem

and the fix.

We refined the webcam’s design and the on-screen alerts for clarity and responsiveness, then filmed the product in use. Viewers called the webcam clean and appealing and said the film captured its purpose.

06

EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

Then I built the

sensor for real.

A new iteration that integrates hardware and firmware, so the device senses proximity and triggers posture feedback on its own, without external simulation tools.

MICROCONTROLLER

Adafruit QT Py SAMD21

Compact form factor, accessible GPIO pins and reliable processing for rapid prototyping.

SENSOR

VL53L4CD time-of-flight

High-precision proximity detection, low latency and a small footprint. ±1 mm precision, up to ~1,200 mm indoors.

SIGNAL PATH

01

Tof sensor

Measures distance to the user

02

QT Py

CircuitPython maps distance to a state

03

Serial

Prints SAFE, MID, or CLOSE

04

Python bridge

Fires a trigger when the state changes

05

BetterTouchTool

Shows the green, yellow, or red HUD

ON / OFF SWITCH

A BetterTouchTool shortcut runs a shell script: if the bridge is running it stops it, otherwise it launches a fresh background instance.

⌘

⇧

F

Wiring · I²C over STEMMA QT

QT Py 3V

VL53L4CD VIN

QT Py GND

VL53L4CD GND

QT Py SDA

VL53L4CD SDA

QT Py SCL

VL53L4CD SCL

Powered by 5V from the laptop over USB-C

DISTANCE THRESHOLDS

Placeholder values based on common ergonomic guidelines

SAFE

> 50 mm

Healthy viewing distance

MID

30-50 mm

Healthy viewing distance

CLOSE

< 30 mm

Healthy viewing distance

07

ENCLOSURE

Small enough to

forget it’s there

Rounded edges and a clean silhouette let it sit naturally on the top edge of a laptop screen without the bulk of most clip-on peripherals.

A - FORM FACTOR

Compact and minimal to keep users

comfortable and cut visual distraction

B - INTEGRATION

Internal supports and snap-fit features hold the board and sensor, keep the sensor exposed and route the cable.

C - MOBILITY

A two-part shell opens for resets, rewiring or upgrades and supports quick changes to tolerances and sensor alignment.

06

EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

What held up, and what I’d change.

STRENGTHS

The behavioral test produced feedback we applied directly to the video prototype

The video showed the product in action clearly and made its impact easy to see

The 3D-printed housing looked realistic enough to carry the behavioral test

WHAT I’D CHANGE

Make the visible sensors feel less intimidating

Get more out of the cardboard prototype, which ended up only a reference

Keep going on the functional build started in the embedded iteration

NEXT

Competitive analysis, then a fully functional product built on what testing taught us.

© 2026 Theo Tzankov · Designed and built in Framer, no templates.