heart rate training concept

and the demo interface can be viewed here:

baslenssen.nlinterface.htmlOpen ↗

(flash required)

bass said:

Here are the slides of the final concept, which should explain themselves. If you guys have any comments/comments etc etc, i would really like to hear them, since all of you make a considerate amount of miles a year.

I currently own a Polar S720i, with the full assortment of cycling sensors (including the power kit). Its user interface is not perfect, but I find that it strikes the right balance of function and complexity. With that in mind, here are some comments on my immediate reaction to your work (which looks very polished - nice job on your final project):

Have you considered the size of your concept device? For the amount of information you appear to be cramming into the display, the head unit will have to be quite large. This will be a "turn off" for many people for reasons ranging from weight and aerodynamic effect, to difficulty of mounting on handlebars (have you considered people who have aerobars attached to their handlebars), interference with other gadgets (from simple things like map holders, to handlebar/aerobar-mounted hydration bottles).

Have you considered cost? A round shape looks great, elegant and futuristic, but not many manufacturers fabricate curved LCD panels. You depend on a complex GUI that requires a pretty high-resolution (color) display, as opposed to the simple, mostly 7-segment non-freely-addressable LCD display of the Polar S720 variants (or other cycling computers). This will drive the cost of your unit up.

Portability and multi-use. I am an amateur triathlete. I like being able to use my Polar S720 for both cycling and running (I could even for swimming, but I don't). Your proposed functionality focuses the device on one particular market and potentially shuts out customers that may cross-train and be interested in buying a device that serves their needs across the board.

Keep up the good work!

Berend

Berend, thanks for the reply.

squidwranglr said:

Have you considered the size of your concept device? For the amount of information you appear to be cramming into the display, the head unit will have to be quite large. This will be a "turn off" for many people for reasons ranging from weight and aerodynamic effect, to difficulty of mounting on handlebars (have you considered people who have aerobars attached to their handlebars), interference with other gadgets (from simple things like map holders, to handlebar/aerobar-mounted hydration bottles).

Well you are right about the size, it is large. The thing is that after a few series of user tests for the readability of the display the current display size is a minimum. This means that to communicate the information which it does right now, the minimum size of the display is the size it has right now. To save up space on the steer I managed to get the unit a little more compact by making the display curved. I havent actually thought about the interference with other gadgets... As for aerodynamics, im not really sure if the negative impact of this device is worth mentioning for the training sessions of an amateur cycling enthusiast.

squidwranglr said:

Have you considered cost? A round shape looks great, elegant and futuristic, but not many manufacturers fabricate curved LCD panels. You depend on a complex GUI that requires a pretty high-resolution (color) display, as opposed to the simple, mostly 7-segment non-freely-addressable LCD display of the Polar S720 variants (or other cycling computers). This will drive the cost of your unit up.

I have chosen to use a curved and fully round display for the reasons mentioned earlier. Now the case seems that curved/round lcd displays dont exist....they are all matrix based, and are rectangular or square.. because it is a concept that is not really a problem right now, but perhaps I will be looking into other display technology solutions. The costs will surely be higher than the conventional s720i but hopefully less than for instance a power hub...

squidwranglr said:

Portability and multi-use. I am an amateur triathlete. I like being able to use my Polar S720 for both cycling and running (I could even for swimming, but I don't). Your proposed functionality focuses the device on one particular market and potentially shuts out customers that may cross-train and be interested in buying a device that serves their needs across the board.

I have focussed very clearly on cyclists from the beginning, the design is also so that the device should be in the "line of sight" of the person who is using it. Again swimming and running bring a lot of constraints with them, for one the training history could never be displayed as clearly as it does right now, i think... that is why I have focused on cyclists. And again yes, I'm cutting out a few groups of potential users.

bass said:

What irritates me much while using the s720i is that I have actually no real idea what I'm doing regarding the heart rate training zones. I mean I think it is difficult to see where I am in a specific zone. For this reason and some other reasons I have chosen to make a proposition for a redesign of the s720i. I am a third year industrial design student, and this is my final bachelor project.

Interesting project, you seem to have done a lot of good work on the concept. Squidwranglr had some good points, and I would like to add a couple of comments as well.

First thing that hit me is the complexity and the high amount of information on the display. Safety is important when riding your bike, and you can only afford to look down at the display for brief moments. I would say that a 0.5 seconds glance should be enough to absorbe the information on the display. I suspect that with the amount of information on your big screen you would have to look at it for several seconds, and that's too much. Maybe something for your usability test?

As a design student you are probably familiar with the "KISS" rule - Keep It Simple Stupid... Many entrepreneurial projects fail because they have not adhered to this principle.

I also miss some other important information like actual HR, cadence, speed, distance, calories, etc, but I suspect you have thought about that, maybe available through another mode or something?

thanks for all the comments.
still working on the interface, but the project is already overdue, so am closing it off.

Here are some pics of the physical model on my road bike...

baslenssen.nlbike1.jpgOpen ↗
baslenssen.nlbike2.jpgOpen ↗
baslenssen.nlbike3.jpgOpen ↗
baslenssen.nlbike4.jpgOpen ↗

any comments, after seeing this?

bass said:

thanks for all the comments.
still working on the interface, but the project is already overdue, so am closing it off.

Here are some pics of the physical model on my road bike...

baslenssen.nlbike1.jpgOpen ↗
baslenssen.nlbike2.jpgOpen ↗
baslenssen.nlbike3.jpgOpen ↗
baslenssen.nlbike4.jpgOpen ↗

any comments, after seeing this?

That's huge man! Ever thought of designing a power meter for the commoner?

Induray said:

That's huge man! Ever thought of designing a power meter for the commoner?

I have deliberately chosen to use heart rate measurement instead of power measurement. The target user for this concept is the cycling enthusiast who is basically an amateur. The power meters are much more expensive, and my guess is that their added value on this level of cycling (amateurs) is negligible.
Heart rate meausurement is less expensive and CAN be used as a guideline in cycling training sufficiently.

I also know that in a few years time, when power taps will be much cheaper, also in europe, then of course there will be new options. But this is a concept that can be realized right now.

bass said:

I also know that in a few years time, when power taps will be much cheaper, also in europe, then of course there will be new options. But this is a concept that can be realized right now.

Power Taps are available in Europe - we've sold to France, Germany, Italy, Holland, and some Scandanavian countries as well as other locations.

Ric

bass,
My opinion as a fellow designer is if your professor is not a cyclist and doesn't come up with practical critiques of your work, You will get an A. It looks like you put in a lot of effort and thought into the whole process and expresses a deep understanding of the info junkie cyclist mindset. You should be able to communicate this well.

As a newbie cyclist, I would have the same reservations as others about size. In addition, what the unit offers to do can be boiled down to three pieces of data: current HR, the +/-, and zones A/B/C/D/E. The trendline graph data is useful post workout.

But then of course, you would end up with just a regular, run of the mill, HR monitor. That would be boring and unoriginal to say the least. So job well done on the execution of the project.

The only question I would have is the aerodynamics, and whether a slightly different shape would be beneficial. I suspect that what you have would actually be reasonable.

The physical design reminds me of Star Trek (which is a good thing) and I would if moving forward to actual production consider whether the current shape (original U.S.S. Enterprise) or a more elongated shape (The Next Generation) would provide any significant difference in air flow... or in customer acceptance. 🙂

I love the multiple training zones etc.

Editting to add one more comment.

The angle of the physical model (flat) would seem to make it susceptible to glare etc. Even though it may be less aero, I would angle it back just a little.