Removable Input Modules for Touch-Screen Ergonomics

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Touch-screen devices lack physical reference points and tactile feedback, leading to usability issues, particularly for games and users with visual impairments, as fingers can easily misalign with input controls, and ergonomic arrangements of input controls on flat surfaces are difficult to achieve.

Innovation Solution

A charger device and composite user input device with removable input modules that provide tactile feedback and can be reconfigured around the periphery of touch-screen devices, using wireless communication and powered by a rechargeable source, forming a single composite device for improved ergonomics and usability.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If touch-screen devices use only flat touch-sensitive screens for input, then device simplicity is maintained, but tactile feedback is lost and finger misalignment occurs

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetactile feedbackVSAvoidinput control structure
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The input control system is segmented into separate removable modules that can be detached from the main device. Each module contains specific input controls (buttons, d-pads, etc.) that provide tactile feedback. This segmentation allows users to have physical tactile feedback without permanently increasing device complexity, as modules can be removed when not needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The input control configuration is made dynamic through removable modules that can be attached and detached as needed. This allows the device to transition between having physical tactile controls and a flat touch-screen interface, adapting to different usage scenarios and user needs without permanent structural changes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Ease of operation

If input controls are arranged on a flat touch-screen surface, then device simplicity is maintained, but ergonomic arrangements are difficult to achieve

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveergonomic arrangementVSAvoidcontrol configuration
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Ergonomic control arrangements are achieved by segmenting controls into separate removable modules that can be positioned in ergonomically optimal locations. Each module can be designed with controls arranged for optimal hand positioning and finger access, rather than being constrained to a flat surface layout.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The control arrangement moves from a two-dimensional flat surface to three-dimensional space through removable modules that can be positioned at different heights, angles, and locations around the device, enabling ergonomic arrangements that utilize spatial dimensions beyond the flat screen surface.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

3Ease of operation

If removable input modules are added to provide tactile feedback, then usability is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveusabilityVSAvoidsystem structure
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The removable modules serve multiple functions: they provide tactile feedback through physical controls, act as charging devices when attached to the main device, and can be stored independently when not in use. This multi-functionality justifies the added complexity by providing multiple benefits from a single addition.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The removable modules contain their own power sources and charging mechanisms, making them self-sufficient units. When attached to the main device, they automatically charge from it, and when detached, they can still function independently. This self-service capability reduces the burden on the main device and simplifies the overall system architecture.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Ease of operation

If physical input controls are permanently integrated, then tactile feedback is provided, but device portability and reconfigurability are reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetactile feedbackVSAvoidreconfigurability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

By segmenting the input controls into removable modules, the system maintains tactile feedback capabilities while enabling reconfigurability. Users can attach modules when tactile input is needed and remove them when portability or screen real estate is prioritized, adapting the device to different usage scenarios.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The input control system transitions from static permanently-integrated controls to dynamic removable modules, allowing the device configuration to change based on user needs. This dynamic approach provides both tactile feedback when required and enhanced portability when modules are removed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentEP3224693B1Charging device for removable input modules
Publication Date: 2019.12.25 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC
  • EP3224693B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3224693B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3224693B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A charging device for one or more input modules for a touch-screen device is described. The charging device comprises a charging mechanism and portions which are shaped to receive an input module. The charging mechanism comprises a power input and a power output. The power input is configured to receive power from an external power source and the power input is configured to provide power to one or more input modules which are attached to the charging device.