Transparency of a Phantom premium haptic interface for active and passive human interaction

This paper compares two methods for determining the transparency bandwidth of an impedance based haptic interface with a Phantom 1.0 A haptic device. Active user induced (AUI) interaction tests, where the system excitation is generated by a human user, show that transparency bandwidth is limited to approximately 2 Hz. Passive user induced (PUI) interaction tests, where the system excitation is generated by the haptic device with a passive human operator, show that bandwidth can extend up to 50 Hz. Experimental results show that the apparent bandwidth limitations for the AUI interaction tests are dependent on the human user's inability to excite higher frequencies. Consequently, this measurement approach is insufficient for determining system bandwidth of the human operator-haptic interface system. Furthermore, data seem to indicate that there is no appreciable difference in the ability of the Phantom manipulator to display environmental impedances in either AUI or PUI interactions regardless of the user.

[1]  Daniel J. Schneck.  Mechanics of Muscle , 1991 .

[2]  Frank Tendick,et al.  A Critical Study of the Mechanical and Electrical Properties of the PHANToM Haptic Interface and Improvements for Highperformance Control , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[3]  Katherine J. Kuchenbecker,et al.  Characterizing the Human Wrist for Improved Haptic Interaction , 2003 .

[4]  John J. Craig,et al.  Introduction to Robotics Mechanics and Control , 1986 .

[5]  Neville Hogan,et al.  Impedance Control: An Approach to Manipulation: Part I—Theory , 1985 .

[6]  Michael D. Williams,et al.  Toward event-based haptics: rendering contact using open-loop force pulses , 2004, 12th International Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, 2004. HAPTICS '04. Proceedings..

[7]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Control law design for haptic interfaces to virtual reality , 2002, IEEE Trans. Control. Syst. Technol..

[8]  Septimiu E. Salcudean,et al.  Analysis of Control Architectures for Teleoperation Systems with Impedance/Admittance Master and Slave Manipulators , 2001, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[9]  ÇavuşoğluMurat Cenk,et al.  A critical study of the mechanical and electrical properties of the PHANToM haptic interface and improvements for high-performance control , 2002 .

[10]  R N Stiles.  Acceleration time series resulting from repetitive extension-flexion of the hand. , 1975, Journal of applied physiology.

[11]  J. Edward Colgate,et al.  Robust impedance shaping telemanipulation , 1993, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[12]  Francis L. Merat,et al.  Introduction to robotics: Mechanics and control , 1987, IEEE J. Robotics Autom..

[13]  Myung Jin Chung,et al.  Adaptive controller of a master–slave system for transparent teleoperation , 1998 .

[14]  Il Hong Suh,et al.  A design method of a haptic interface controller considering transparency and robust stability , 2000, Proceedings. 2000 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2000) (Cat. No.00CH37113).

[15]  Michael Goldfarb,et al.  Transparency and Stability Robustness in Two-Channel Bilateral Telemanipulation , 2001 .

[16]  Ferdinando A. Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Linear combinations of nonlinear models for predicting human–machine interface forces , 2002, Biological Cybernetics.

[17]  Dale A. Lawrence.  Stability and transparency in bilateral teleoperation , 1993, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..