2015
DOI: 10.5898/jhri.4.3.moualeu
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Model for Operator Endpoint Stiffness Prediction during Physical Human-Robot Interaction

Abstract: Physical contact established during interaction between a human operator and a haptic device creates a coupled system with stability and performance characteristics different than its individual subsystems taken in isolation. Proper incorporation of operator dynamics in physical human-robot interaction (pHRI) conditions requires knowledge of system variables and parameters, some of which are not directly measurable. Operator endpoint impedance, for instance, cannot be directly measured in typical haptic contro… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 39 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It integrates concurrent multimodal sensory and motor signals to properly execute a task based on its individual's goals. In the case of pHRI, the modification in human behavior can be seen as the modulation of the arm stiffness [Moualeu and Ueda 2015], gripped orientation [Bennis and Roby-Brami 2002], or applied force [Tran et al 2015]. Therefore, information extracted from interaction force and muscle activity may not resemble the perceived level of workload in physical human-robot interaction.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It integrates concurrent multimodal sensory and motor signals to properly execute a task based on its individual's goals. In the case of pHRI, the modification in human behavior can be seen as the modulation of the arm stiffness [Moualeu and Ueda 2015], gripped orientation [Bennis and Roby-Brami 2002], or applied force [Tran et al 2015]. Therefore, information extracted from interaction force and muscle activity may not resemble the perceived level of workload in physical human-robot interaction.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%