Determining the haptic feedback position for optimizing the targeting performance on ultrasonic tactile displays

Alongside questions of how to create haptic effects on displays via alternative hardware, recent work has explored rendering options with respect to haptic effects, i.e. when and where to provide haptic feedback. In particular, recent work by Zhang and Harrison for electrostatic haptic feedback noted that the optimal technique for haptic feedback during interaction is the Fill technique, where haptic effects are rendered at all times when a user's finger is within the bounds of the target. In this paper, we explore whether this result generalizes to an alternative haptic rendering technology that uses ultrasonic vibrations to create haptic sensations, a technique called the “Squeeze Film Effect”. In contrast to prior work, our results indicate that positioning the haptic feedback as a discrete linear stimulus centred on the target provides an optimal trade-off between speed, accuracy, and user preference. We highlight the implications of this work to the generalizability of haptic feedback: Haptic feedback can improve time, errors, and user satisfaction during interaction, but only if the correct form of feedback is used for the specific haptic effect generated by the hardware.

[1]  Seungmoon Choi,et al.  Vibrotactile Display: Perception, Technology, and Applications , 2013, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[2]  Laurent Grisoni,et al.  Finding the Minimum Perceivable Size of a Tactile Element on an Ultrasonic Based Haptic Tablet , 2016, ISS.

[3]  William Buxton,et al.  Issues and techniques in touch-sensitive tablet input , 1985, SIGGRAPH '85.

[4]  B. Lemaire-Semail,et al.  Squeeze film effect for the design of an ultrasonic tactile plate , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[5]  Roland Siegwart,et al.  Squeeze Film Air Bearings Using Piezoelectric Bending Elements , 2000 .

[6]  Daniel M. Johnson,et al.  Enhancing physicality in touch interaction with programmable friction , 2011, CHI.

[7]  J. Edward Colgate,et al.  T-PaD: Tactile Pattern Display through Variable Friction Reduction , 2007, Second Joint EuroHaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (WHC'07).

[8]  Nicolas Roussel,et al.  Surfpad: riding towards targets on a squeeze film effect , 2011, CHI.

[9]  Ali Israr,et al.  TeslaTouch: electrovibration for touch surfaces , 2010, UIST.

[10]  Xiaoying Sun,et al.  Effect of Electrostatic Tactile Feedback on Accuracy and Efficiency of Pan Gestures on Touch Screens , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[11]  J. Edward Colgate,et al.  Surface haptics via electroadhesion: Expanding electrovibration with Johnsen and Rahbek , 2015, 2015 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC).

[12]  Nicolas Roussel,et al.  STIMTAC: a tactile input device with programmable friction , 2011, UIST '11 Adjunct.

[13]  Yang Zhang,et al.  Quantifying the Targeting Performance Benefit of Electrostatic Haptic Feedback on Touchscreens , 2015, ITS.

[14]  Betty Lemaire-Semail,et al.  Design of a transparent tactile stimulator , 2012, 2012 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS).

[15]  Ivan Poupyrev,et al.  Haptic feedback for pen computing: directions and strategies , 2004, CHI EA '04.

[16]  Betty Lemaire-Semail,et al.  Texture Rendering Strategies with a High Fidelity - Capacitive Visual-Haptic Friction Control Device , 2016, EuroHaptics.

[17]  Ravin Balakrishnan,et al.  Evaluating tactile feedback and direct vs. indirect stylus input in pointing and crossing selection tasks , 2008, CHI.