The document discusses the development and applications of augmented reality (AR) technologies for urban visualization and user interaction, particularly in the context of rebuilding Christchurch after earthquakes. It highlights various AR tools, their user experiences, and the limitations such as interface complexity and tracking accuracy. It also emphasizes the potential for future improvements and ongoing research in areas like tracking, user experience, and web-based content management.

1. Visualising a New Christchurch
Mark Billinghurst
HIT Lab NZ
University of Canterbury

3. Christchurch Earthquakes

6. http://www.rebuildchristchurch.co.nz/content/christchurch-building-demolition-map

7. Christchurch Before and After

9.  Professional solutions available
 Autodesk REVIST, ESRI ArcGIS, Grass,etc

10. Emerging Novel User Interfaces
 Immersive visualization
 Multi-touch screens
 Gesture interaction
 Etc..

11. Limitations
 Interface
 Complex to use
 Unintuitive interaction
 2D display for 3D content
 Context of Use
 Remote visualization
 Separation from the real world
 Unable to show life-sized content

12. Augmented Reality
 Combines Real and Virtual Images
- Both can be seen at the same time
 Interactive in real-time
- Content can be interacted with
 Registered in 3D
- Virtual objects appear fixed in space

13. Augmented Reality Examples
 Put AR pictures here

14. AR and Architecture

15. AR and Archiecture
 Enhanced Maps
 AR overlay on printed material
 Outdoor AR
 In place visualization
 Mobile AR
 Urban Visualization

16. AR Markerless Tracking
 OPIRA Library
 Uses natural features for tracking
 Fast, robust performance

18. Interactive AR Maps
 Markerless tracking
 3D model overlay
 Gesture input

20. Enhanced City Plans
 CERA – CCDU Plan
 Using tablet to track off printed maps
 Overlay 3D city models onto real maps

21. User Experience
 Touch interaction
 Pointing selection
 Animated objects

22. Outdoor AR
 Highly accurate outdoor AR
tracking system
 GPS, Inertial, RTK system
 HMD
 First prototype
 Laptop based
 2-3 cm accuracy

23. Image Registration
AR Surveying Application

25. Mobile AR - Hardware
GPS
Example self-built working
Antenna
solution with PCI-based 3D graphics
PCI 3D Graphics Board
Tracker
Controller
PC104 Sound Card
DC to DC
Wearable
Converter CPU
Computer
PC104 PCMCIA
Battery
GPS RTK Hard Drive
correction
Radio
Serial
Ports
Columbia Touring Machine

26. 2008 - Location Aware Phones
Motorola Droid Nokia Navigator

27. Real World Information Overlay
 Tag real world locations
 GPS + Compass input
 Overlay graphics on live video
 Applications
 Travel guide, Advertising, etc
 Eg: Layar (www.layar.com)
 iPhone, Android based, Public API released
 Other companies
 Wikitude, Metaio, AcrossAir, Tochnidot, etc

28. Layar – www.layar.com

29. 3DOn
 Onsite Visualization Single Building
 GPS + Compass input
 Overlay graphics data on live video/Photos

30. HIT Lab NZ Outdoor AR Platform
 Cross platform
 Android, iPhone
 3D onsite visualization
 Intuitive user interface
 Positions content in space
 Camera, GPS, compass
 Client/Server software architecture
 Targeting museum guide/outdoor site applications

33. CityViewAR
 Using AR to visualize Christchurch city buildings
 3D models of buildings, 2D images, text, panoramas
 AR View, Map view, List view
 Available on Android market

35. User Experience
 While walking in the real world people can
see text, 2D images and 3D content on their
own phones

36. Interface Design (1/2)
Front face
Browsing Interface
Content
AR View
Detail View
Title Screen
Map View
Image Gallery
Instruction & List View
Panorama
Information

37. List View
List of all assets

38. Map View
Icons for buildings, viewpoints, panoramas

40. Building History Data

41. Photographic Images

42. Panorama Images
360 degree photo bubbles

43. Augmented Reality View

45. Survey Results
 Use of AR improved the user experience
 But no difference between AR and non-AR usefulness
 Favourite features
 AR and Panorama views most popular
 Users also enjoyed having rich data available
 Main Problems (50% reported no problems)
 UI design not intuitive (24%)
 System not responsive (16%)

46. Time Usage
 Percentage time spent in different views
 AR used more then 50% of time when available

47. Result - Distance Traveled
 As a measure of active exploration
 M=96.28 meters (SD=83.85, 0~315 meters)
Mann-Whitney U-test U = 167.00, p = 0.18
With AR
Without AR

48. Areas for Improvement
 Outdoor AR tracking
 Reduce tracking errors
 User interface design
 Make options more obvious
 Make system more responsive
 Some lag in loading content
 Touch input
 Responding to unintended touches

49. AR Urban Design Tool (2012)
 CERA CCDU Application
 Enhanced CityViewAR application
 Add VR view mode
 3D model viewing/interaction
 Add concept models of buildings
 Multiple buildings at single site
 Client/Server architecture
 Support for user generated feedback

50. VR View

51. Differing Views
 List View, Content View, Map View

52. Interaction
 Touch interaction
 Information filtering
 Building information
 Model panning, zoom, rotation

53. iceFest (2012)
 Outdoor AR for Antarctic Experience
 Visit Antarctica in real world
 Using handheld tablet

54. Map Views

55. Content Views

56. AR View
 View of ice superimposed over real world

57. Panorama
 Immersive 360 panorama

58. Feedback
 A = Satisfying, B = Ease to use
 C = Useful for learning, D = Better learning than internet

59. Looking to the Future

60. Next Steps
 Subsurface Visualization
 See underground infrastructure
 User evaluation
 Architects, Urban Designers, Public
 Develop authoring tool
 Web-based content management system
 Improve technology
 Tracking, 3D rendering

61. Subsurface Visualization
 Using AR to view underground infrastructure

62. Client/Server Architecture
Web Interface
Add models
Web application java
and php server
Android
application
Database server
Postgres

63. Web based Outdoor AR Server
 Web interface
 Showing POIs as
Icons on Google Map
 PHP based REST API
 XML based scene
data retrieval API
 Scene creation and
modification API
 Android client side
REST API interface

64. BASIC VIEW

65. PERSONAL VIEW

66. Augmented Reality 2.0 Infrastructure

67. Leveraging Web 2.0
 Content retrieval using HTTP
 XML encoded meta information
 KML placemarks + extensions
 Queries
 Based on location (from GPS, image recognition)
 Based on situation (barcode markers)
 Syndication
 Community servers for end-user content
 Tagging
 AR client subscribes to data feeds

68. Conclusions
• AR allows for information overlay in place
• CityViewAR provides pre earthquake viewing
• Opportunities for on-going development
• Important research problems need to be solved
– Wide area tracking
– User experience
– Social networking
– Etc..

69. Collaborators
 Jason Mills (PVI)
 Panoramas, 3D models
 Historic Places Trust
 Pre-1950 building information
 Christchurch City Council
 Statements of Significance
 CEISMIC
 Digital content

70. More Information
• Mark Billinghurst
– mark.billinghurst@hitlabnz.org
• Website
– www.hitlabnz.org