The integration of virtual reality (VR) in education, particularly for collaborative activities and feedback, is recently trending with the continuous development of technologies. So, this paper reports a pilot study as part of an ongoing E-learning project for address the questions: 1. how can tertiary education design courses adopt VR systems in student projects in collaboration with external organizations, and 2. what are the perceptions of the students and external organization regarding the use of VR systems for cross-discipline and cross-location collaborative prototyping? The process of VR use for the learning activities are grouped into four categories: 1) introduction of basic features of VR tools (two hours), 2) self-learning/experiencing the tools — HTC Vive headsets with Masterpiece VR, SculptrVR, Google Blocks, and Sketchbox (15-20 hours), 3) co-creating design objects by adopting the selected VR tools — ScuptrVR and Google Blocks (two to four hours), and 4) presentation and get feedback in live VR space — Sketchbox with import models (2X30 min). The students responded that, for the collaborated project with a company based in another city, the VR setup is a great tool for demonstrating 3D models of the designed objects. It shows the detailed view of a product or a concept, it creates useful space for creativity, and it saves time. On the contrary, the technology is still in the early phase for the modelling purpose, still too cartoonish, lacks functions for engineering design, and gives dizzy feeling. This study involved collocated student teams of engineers and future study should include students of different study programs and campuses working for the same client as part of their respective courses.

1. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Cross-Location and Cross-
Disciplinary Collaborative
Prototyping Using Virtual
Reality in Higher Education
 Fei Yu1 & Md Saifuddin Khalid2, Associate Professor
 Mads Clausen Institute1 & Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics2
 University of Southern Denmark (SDU), Sønderborg1 & Odense2
Presenter’s Email: skhalid@health.sdu.dk
18th European Conference on e-Learning, Nov 7-8, 2019
Aalborg University, Copenhagen, Denmark

2. Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
VR in Education:
Collaboration and
Feedback
Purpose:
Non-collocated students and industry
partner/client collaboratively design or at
least present and discuss with the clients
and end-users for feedback on the design or
prototype in the 3D space.
Authentic Learning experience
Research Questions:
 How can tertiary education design courses adopt
VR systems in student projects in collaboration
with external organizations, and
 what are the perceptions of the students and
external organization regarding the use of VR
systems for cross-discipline and cross-location
collaborative prototyping?

3. Department of Sports Science and Clinical
Biomechanics
sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
A pilot study
Company University collaboration
KOMPAN
Semester project 2IB, Think
Business – ideation
Three groups – 14 IB engineering
students
Feb. 2019 – Jun. 2019
The Task: Design a sensor-based
monitoring system for outdoor
playgrounds
Identify number of players
Identify activities
Etc.2D and 3D drawings can be downloaded
from here:
www.kompan.dk/leg/multi-leg/moments-
mini-smaborn-og-forskoleborn/to-tarne-
med-tunnelbro

4. Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
ChallengesDifferent geographic locations
Odense – Sønderborg
Cross disciplines
IB engineering
Sport and health science
Connection via VR
Prototyping
Presenting
Feedback
Yu & Khalid (2019)

5. Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Steps to answer the
first research
question
How can tertiary education design
courses adopt VR systems in student
projects in collaboration with external
organizations?
1. The selection and installation of VR
systems at two locations,
2. collaborating with external
organization,
3. facilitating the course activities for
students to learn VR systems and to
work on the problem and scope in
collaboration with the external
organization, and
4. facilitating the VR-mediated
collaborative prototyping and
feedback activities with the
stakeholders of the external
organization.

6. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
State-of-the-art: Review
of literature
 VR can be broadly categorized (Greenwald,
2018) as standalone, tethered, and mobile (see
Table 1).
 Only HTC Vive is designed and marketed by
explicitly stating that it is ideal for multi-user
environments and allows connecting external
sensors.

7. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Summary of virtual reality headsets

8. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Motion Lab Odense
2 powerful PCs
2 HTC Vive VR Kit
6 HTC Vive Trackers
Strap kits & extra cusions
4m x 4m play area
Yu & Khalid (2019)

9. Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
VR Lab Sønderborg
3 powerful PCs
1 HTC Vive Pro
2 HTC Vive
4m x 2m play area
Yu & Khalid (2019)

10. Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
VR Tools
 “MasterpieceVR is a collaborative sculpting and
painting tool that allows users to easily create 3D
content in virtual reality.”
 ”SculptrVR's 10,000x zoom enables massive
creations with tiny details! SculptrVR makes it easy to
create, explore, and share incredible sculptures with
friends. With SculptrVR’s intuitive tools, but powerful
tools, you can make anything!”
 ”Blocks by Google lets you easily create 3D objects
in virtual reality, no matter your modelling experience.
Using six simple tools, you can bring your
applications to life, create a volumetric masterpiece,
or simply let your imagination run wild.”
 ”Sketchbox is the #1 Design and Collaboration tool
for AR/VR. Work together with your whole team in
Sketchbox, and feel like you’re in the same room,
even if you’re on different continents. Perfect for
collaborative design sessions, presentations, and
design reviews. Instantly start a VR meeting.”
Yu & Khalid (2019)

11. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
The learning activities as a process
• Basic features in
MasterpieceVR
(1hr)
• In class assignment
(1.5 hr)
Introduction of the basic
features in VR tools.
• MasterpieceVR
• ScuptrVR
• Google Blocks
• Sketchbox
Self-
learning/experiencing
the tools (15-20 hours) • ScuptrVR
• Google Blocks
Co-create surrounding
(2-4 hours)
• Sketchbox
• Import the models
Present and feedback
(2X30 min)
(excluding the first introduction to VR tools and features)

12. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Design object 1 – Created in Blocks (by Google), Image
from Sketchbox during presentation

13. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Design Object 2 – Created in SculptrVR,
image from Sketchbox during presentation
Yu & Khalid (2019)

14. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Design object 3 – Created in SculptrVR,
Image from Sketchbox during presentation
Yu & Khalid (2019)

15. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
A student is presenting the concept to a
company stakeholder in Sketchbox
Yu & Khalid (2019)

16. Department of Sports Science and Clinical
Biomechanics
sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
VR-Integrated
Prototyping:
Decisions by Groups
No group adopted MasterpieceVR for co-
creating the surroundings. Defective – only
the person importing can see, no redo, and
cannot save the co-created object.
Two groups used SculptrVr to draw
surroundings.
The third group chose Blocks by Google.
The students argued that Block has a
better user interface and features for
designing the objects.
Exported OBJ files are imported to
Sketchbox for presentation.
A student is presenting the concept to a
company stakeholder in Sketchbox

17. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Students’ reflections on
VR systems learning
experience
Questions Asked
What are the VR tools used during the whole process?
What are the features used to create the surroundings?
Why?
Describe the development process briefly.
How long time did you spend on learning/experiencing the
tools?
How long time did you spend on creating the surroundings?
Will you use VR for other projects? If yes, what will be the
purpose? And Why?
 Pros
 VR technology shows great potential in the early
phase product design.
 It is easy to learn these VR sculpting and painting
tools.
 It creates a design space with a realistic sensation,
and unlimited space and materials for mockup, which
is ideal for creativity.
 The multi-user access feature supports collaborative
design and creation.
 It is useful for quick mock-up and prototyping.
 VR technology provides useful tools for
demonstration and feedback.
 The design object can be presented intuitively.
 It can show both the overview of the concept or the
detail of an object.
 It links people into the same shared virtual space.
 There is a benefit of saving on time and cost for e.g.
travel and other running costs
Yu & Khalid (2019)

18. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Students’ reflections on
VR systems learning
experience
Questions Asked
What are the VR tools used during the whole process?
What are the features used to create the surroundings?
Why?
Describe the development process briefly.
How long time did you spend on learning/experiencing the
tools?
How long time did you spend on creating the surroundings?
Will you use VR for other projects? If yes, what will be the
purpose? And Why?
 Cons
 The sculpting software is still in the early
development phase (modelling).
 The drawings created by these VR tools are too
cartoonish.
 The currently available VR tools are not designed for
technical drawing and 3D modelling, i.e. missing
engineering-oriented functions.
 The current VR headset is still not as comfortable as
a wearable device. It is too big for head-wearing and
it creates dizzy feelings
 Technical issues
 The VR system adopted for communication is not
very reliable with multiple users.
 Sketchbox crashed a few times when the students
present the design objects, mostly during the loading
phase.
 The size of design object, being imported the virtual
environment, is dependent on the minimum computer
power of all PCs’ being connected.
Yu & Khalid (2019)

19. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Students’ reflections on
VR systems learning
experience
Questions Asked
What are the VR tools used during the whole process?
What are the features used to create the surroundings?
Why?
Describe the development process briefly.
How long time did you spend on learning/experiencing the
tools?
How long time did you spend on creating the surroundings?
Will you use VR for other projects? If yes, what will be the
purpose? And Why?
 Time spent for learning
 Per student, 15 to 20 hours for self-learning of
the VR tools, and then two to four hours for
creating the surroundings.
 Two hours introduction lecture, one hour
presentation and feedback, 20-27 hours per
group in VR.
 Future interest for collaborative use of VR
 The questionnaire results indicate that 13 out
of 14 students decided to use VR in their
future projects.
 The use of VR will be mainly for
communication purpose, i.e. demonstrate the
design object in VR to present the concept for
feedback or stimulate new ideas or transfer
knowledge.
 One student, who will not use VR in the near
future projects, thinks that the technology is
not ready for product design, and other
modelling and prototyping methods are much
easier.
Yu & Khalid (2019)

20. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Feedback from the
company
Verified Narrative
“The experience with non-collocated project
members and the collaborative design and
feedback process in the virtual reality
environment shows potential for KOMPAN. We
develop playgrounds and fitness equipment
structures in Berlin and Brno. The designers at
those places need to communicate and
collaborate on the design and development of
structures that are complicated. I see potential
in working on similar scenarios in the company.
In this project, the industry-academia
collaboration would have benefited through the
product development if we had involved a more
complicated playground structure of an
ongoing project. […]”
Yu & Khalid (2019)
After the first VR presentation, the company
stakeholders asked for a step by step guideline
on how to create a shared VR environment and
how to import 3D models into it.
Interview with industry case’s client
representative for the students’ projects: A senior
manager of KOMPAN fitness Institute in
Odense.

21. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Conclusion and Scope of Future Work
This pilot study explored the existing VR hardware and software for collaborative design and prototyping
by non-collocated members of design teams and presenting the prototypes to the external organization
as the client for the product requirement.
A senior manager of KOMPAN fitness institute played the role of a client and provided authentic learning
(Lombardi, 2007) opportunity for the students’ projects.
SculptrVR and Google Blocks were used to co-create the surroundings and Sketchbox was used to
import the models and remote presentation.
From the health perspective, guidelines should be developed to inform the reasons behind experiencing
dizzy feelings, protocols for troubleshooting and maximum duration of VR-based activities should be
specified.
Future research: Students with heterogeneous backgrounds (i.e. not engineering only) to work
collaboratively. Assumption: Need for greater lab/technological support and peer-group learning.
Yu & Khalid (2019)

22. Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
AcknowledgementsThis work, as a pilot study of a project
entitled “VR and AR technology blend for
cross-location teaching in physical
movement and health domain:
Investigation with two innovation and
entrepreneurship programmes’ students”,
is supported by SDU E-learning Project
Fund 2019.
Great thanks to Senior Manager Morten
Zacho from KOMPAN for his valuable
contribution and feedback to the project.
We would also like to thank the students
for their participation and inputs.

23. sdu.dk#sdudk
November 2019
Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics
Yu & Khalid (2019)
Fei Yu Md. Saifuddin Khalid
skhalid@health.sdu.dk
Thanksforyourattention
Yu, Fei, and Md. Saifuddin Khalid. ‘Cross-Location and Cross-Disciplinary Collaborative Prototyping
Using Virtual Reality in Higher Education’. In Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on E-
Learning, edited by Rikke Ørngreen, Mie Buhl, and Bente Meyer, 609–17. Copenhagen: Academic
Conferences and Publishing International (ACPI), 2019.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335096880_Cross-location_and_Cross-
disciplinary_Collaborative_Prototyping_Using_Virtual_Reality_in_Higher_Education
fei@mci.sdu.dk