Personal and Ubiquitous Computing

, Volume 16, Issue 8, pp 1025–1038

Landmarke: an ad hoc deployable ubicomp infrastructure to support indoor navigation of firefighters

  • Leonardo Ramirez
  • Tobias Dyrks
  • Jan Gerwinski
  • Matthias Betz
  • Markus Scholz
  • Volker Wulf
Original Article

Abstract

Indoor navigation plays a central role for the safety of firefighters. The circumstances in which a firefighting intervention occurs represent a rather complex challenge for the design of supporting technology. In this paper, we present the results of our work designing an ad hoc ubicomp infrastructure to support navigation of firefighters working in structure fires inside the zone of danger. We take a wider approach, complementing the technical questions with the development of effective navigation practices based on technology available today. We provide an overview of the complete design process, from the theoretical and empirical underpinnings to the construction and evaluation of three iterations of the platform. We report the results of our evaluation and the implications and tensions uncovered in this process, and we discuss the challenges and implications of it for the design of ubicomp for firefighters.

Keywords

Indoor navigation Navigation Orientation Mobile ad hoc network Firefighting Wearable computing Sensor networks Ad hoc deployment Ubiquitous computing Human–computer interaction 

References

  1. 1.
    Arduino Project (2009) Arduino home page. Available at http://www.arduino.cc
  2. 2.
    Bell G, Dourish P (2007) Yesterday’s tomorrows: notes on ubiquitous computing’s dominant vision. Pers Ubiquit Comput 11(2):133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown B, Laurier E (2005) Maps and journeys: an ethno-methodological investigation. Cartogr Int J Geogr Inf Geovis 40(3):17–33Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buchenau M, Suri JF (2000) Experience prototyping. In: Proceedings of the 3rd conference on designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques DIS’00. ACM, New York, 424–433Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Certeau M (2002) The practice of everyday life. University of California Press, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crabtree A (2004) Taking technomethodology seriously: hybrid change in the ethnomethodology-design relationship. European Journal of Information Systems 13(3):195–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crabtree A (2004) Design in the absence of practice: breaching experiments. In: Proceedings of the 5th conference on designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques DIS’04. ACM, New York, 59–68Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Denef S, Ramirez L, Dyrks T, Stevens G (2008) Handy navigation in ever-changing spaces—an ethnographic study of firefighting practices. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Designing interactive systems DIS’08. ACM, New York, 184–192Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Denef S, Ramirez L, Dyrks T (2009) Letting tools talk: interactive technology for firefighting. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems—CHI EA ‘09. ACM, New York, 4447–4452Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dillon A, Richardson J, McKnight C (1993) Space—the final chapter: or why physical representations are not semantic intentions. In: McKnight C, Dillon A, Richardson J (eds) Hypertext: a psychological perspective. Ellis Horwood Ltd., Chichester, pp 169–192Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Downs R, Stea D (1977) Maps in minds: reflections on cognitive mapping (Harper & Row series in geography). Joanna Cotler Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dyrks T, Ramirez L, Denef S, Meyer D, Penkert B (2009) Designing for firefighters—building empathy through live action role-playing. In: Proceedings of the 6th international ISCRAM conference, 218–226Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ehn P (1990) Work-oriented design of computer artifacts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fahy RF (2002) US fire service fatalities in structure fires, 1977–2000. Technical report, NFPAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaver W, Sengers P, Kerridge T, Kaye J, Bowers J (2007) Enhancing ubiquitous computing with user interpretation: field testing the home health horoscope. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems—CHI’07. ACM, New York, 546Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gaver W, Boucher A, Law A, Pennington S, Bowers J, Beaver J, Humble J, Kerridge T, Villar N, Wilkie A (2008) Threshold devices: looking out from the home. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems—CHI’08. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gaver W, Bowers J, Boucher A, Law A, Pennington S, Villar N (2006) The history tablecloth: illuminating domestic activity. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM conference on designing interactive systems DIS’06. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Golledge RG (1999) Human wayfinding and cognitive maps. In: Golledge RG (ed) Wayfinding behavior cognitive mapping and other spatial processes. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 5–45 Chapter 1Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4(2):155–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heft H (1996) The ecological approach to navigation: a Gibsonian perspective. In: Portugali J (ed) The construction of cognitive maps. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrechtv, pp 105–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hengchang L, Jingyuan L, Zhiheng X, et al (2010) Automatic and robust breadcrumb system deployment for indoor firefighter applications. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Mobile systems, applications, and services. ACM, New York, 21–34Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Landmarke Projekt (2009) Landmarke Project Website. Available at http://www.landmarke-project.de
  23. 23.
    Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL, Collins A, Wardell J (1987) Exploring environments by hand or foot: time-based heuristics for encoding distance in movement space. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 13(4):606–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Leonard D, Rayport JF (1997) Spark innovation through empathic design. Harv Bus Rev 75:102–115Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lynch K (1960) The image of the city. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Miller LE, Wilson PF, Bryner NP, Francis MH, Guerrieri JR, Stroup DW, Klein-Berndt L (2006) RFID-assisted indoor localization and communication for first responders. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Advanced Radio Technologies, NTIAGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Miller LE (2006) Indoor navigation for first responders: a feasibility study. Technical report. National Institute of Standards and Technology NISTGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Naghsh AM and Roast CR (2008) Designing user interaction with robots swarms in emergency settings. In: Proceedings of the 5th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction (Nordichi’08)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nourbakhsh IR, Sycara K, Koes M, Yong M, Lewis M, Burion S (2005) Human-robot teaming for search and rescue. IEEE Pervasive Comput 4(3):72–78Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Platzer E (2005) Spatial cognition research: the human navigation process and its comparability in complex real and virtual environments. Ph.D., dissertation, Universität der Bundeswehr, Munich, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ramirez L, Denef S, Dyrks T (2009) Towards human-centered support for indoor navigation. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems—CHI’09. ACM, New York, 1279–1282Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ramirez L, Denef S, Dyrks T (2009) Towards human-centered support for indoor navigation. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on human factors in computing systems—CHI’09. ACM, New York, 1279–1282Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ramirez L, Dyrks T (2010) Designing for high expectations: balancing ambiguity and thorough specification in the design of a wayfinding tool for firefighters. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on designing Interactive Systems DIS’10. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Randall D, Harper R, Rouncefield M (2007) Fieldwork for design: theory and practice. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Scholz M, Schubert E (2010) Evaluation of wireless sensor technologies in a firefighting environment. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on networked sensing systems (INSS 2010), SpringerGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sengers P, Gaver B (2006) Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 6th conference on designing interactive systems DIS’06. ACM, New York, 108Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Steck SD, Mallot HA (2000) The role of global and local landmarks in virtual environment navigation. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 9(1):69–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Stevens G (2009) Understanding and designing appropriation infrastructures: artifacts as boundary objects in the continuous software development. Ph.D. dissertation, Universität Siegen, Siegen, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tsukada K, Yasumura M (2004) Activebelt: belt-type wearable tactile display for directional navigation. In: Proceedings of UbiComp 2004, Springer, 384–399Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tversky B (1993) Cognitive maps, cognitive collages, and spatial mental models. In: Hirtle S, Frank A (eds) Spatial information theory. A theoretical basis for GIS. Springer, Berlin, pp 14–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wright P, McCarthy J (2008) Empathy and experience in HCI. In: Proceedings of the 26th international conference on human factors in computing systems—CHI’08. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zimmerman J, Forlizzi J, Evenson S (2007) Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. In: Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Human factors in computing systems—CHI’07. ACM, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonardo Ramirez
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tobias Dyrks
    • 2
  • Jan Gerwinski
    • 3
  • Matthias Betz
    • 1
  • Markus Scholz
    • 4
  • Volker Wulf
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology FITSankt AugustinGermany
  2. 2.Department of Information Systems and New MediaUniversity of SiegenSiegenGermany
  3. 3.Department of Germanistics and Applied LinguisticsUniversity of SiegenSiegenGermany
  4. 4.TecO, Karlsruhe Institute of TechnologyKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations