Cutaneous Force Feedback as a Sensory Subtraction Technique in Haptics

Prattichizzo, Domenico; Pacchierotti, Claudio; Rosati, Giulio

doi:10.1109/toh.2012.15

Cited by 159 publications

(141 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That device was used in [10] to provide cutaneous feedback in an industrial application involving heavy duty machines, and in [11] for experiences of remote cutaneous interaction. A similar device has been also used in [12], where the authors presented a new approach to sensory substitution in haptics called sensory subtraction. They substituted haptic feedback, consisting of both cutaneous and kinesthetic forces, with cutaneous feedback only, in order to achieve the stability of the system and outperform other conventional sensory substitution techinques.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two Finger Grasping Simulation with Cutaneous and Kinesthetic Force Feedback

Pacchierotti

Chinello

Malvezzi

et al. 2012

Haptics: Perception, Devices, Mobility, and Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper presents an experiment of two finger grasping. The task considered is the peg-in-hole and the simulated force feedback is cutaneous or kinesthetic. The kinesthetic feedback is provided by a commercial haptic device while the cutaneous one is provided by a new haptic display proposed in this work, which allows to render at the fingertip a wide range of contact forces. The device consists of a mobile surface, which interacts with the fingertip, actuated by three wires directly connected to the motors placed on the grounded structure of the display. This work summarizes the design of the proposed display and presents the main relationships which describe its kinematics and dynamics. Results showed that cutaneous feedback exhibits improved performances when compared to visual feedback only.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two Finger Grasping Simulation with Cutaneous and Kinesthetic Force Feedback

Pacchierotti

Chinello

Malvezzi

et al. 2012

Haptics: Perception, Devices, Mobility, and Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since our results fit the sensitivity range of the finger pad characterized by Lederman [13] (see Table 1(a))-with few exceptions coming from the tasks performed with the spatula-we deem that our work has reached its aim. This means that the surgeon-tool contact forces meet the requirements for the use of sensory subtraction techniques [23,24] in a tele-operated robotic neurosurgery scenario. This kind of forces can be rendered by exploiting the solely surgeon's finger pads cutaneous channel, since it comprises forces that are lower than the threshold from which the haptic perception switch from the cutaneous to the kinesthetic channel.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the kinesthetic component (which can lead to instability) is removed from the complete haptic feedback, this approach is stable as the sensory substitution technique. In [23], the authors coined the term "sensory subtraction" for referring to this approach, which is not a complete haptic substitution, in the sense that it keeps only the cutaneous part of the force feedback and removes the kinesthetic feedback. In the same work, the authors proved that, during tele-operated needle insertion, a cutaneous-only feedback approach allowed a shorter task completion time and a lower penetration beyond a set of virtual fixture, compared to a complete cutaneous-and-kinesthetic feedback approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hand–tool–tissue interaction forces in neurosurgery for haptic rendering

Aggravi

Momi

DiMeco³

et al. 2015

Med Biol Eng Comput

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Haptics provides sensory stimuli that represent the interaction with a virtual or telemanipulated object, and it is considered a valuable navigation and manipulation tool during tele-operated surgical procedures. Haptic feedback can be provided to the user via cutaneous information and kinesthetic feedback. Sensory subtraction removes the kinesthetic component of the haptic feedback, having only the cutaneous component provided to the user. Such a technique guarantees a stable haptic feedback loop, while it keeps the transparency of the tele-operation system high, which means that the system faithfully replicates and render back the user's directives. This work focuses on checking whether the interaction forces during a bench model neurosurgery operation can lie in the solely cutaneous perception of the human finger pads. If this assumption is found true, it would be possible to exploit sensory subtraction techniques for providing surgeons with feedback from neurosurgery. We measured the forces exerted to surgical tools by three neurosurgeons performing typical actions on a brain phantom, using contact force sensors, whilst the forces exerted by the tools to the phantom tissue were recorded using a load cell placed under the brain phantom box. The measured surgeon-tool contact forces were 0.01 -3.49 N for the thumb and 0.01 -6.6 N for index and middle finger, whereas the measured tool-tissue interaction forces were from six to eleven times smaller than the contact forces, i.e., 0.01 -0.59 N. The measurements for the contact forces fit the range of the cutaneous sensitivity for the Powered by Edit orial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Syst em s Corporat ionhuman finger pad, thus, we can say that, in a tele-operated robotic neurosurgery scenario, it would possible to render forces at the fingertip level by conveying haptic cues solely through the cutaneous channel of the surgeon's finger pads. This approach would allow high transparency and high stability of the haptic feedback loop in a teleoperation systemResponse to Reviewers: REVIEWER 1 Comment no. 1: The methodology of the submitted work is good and, since it is a bench model, it might allow to replace other similar systems presented in previous works. However, the authors should make an extra effort to increase the clarity of the text. The added section 2 is a good help to put the work in context. However, section 1 appears as too long and lacks focus. I would recommend to severely shorten section 1 and merge it with section 2. Our answer:We thank the reviewer for the positive opinion on our work. To improve the clarity of the introductory part, we have removed an example of sensory substitution reference and an example of sensory subtraction application reference. Moreover, we have merged Section 2 Related Works with Section 1 Introduction, which now comprises the related works as a subsection.Comment no. 2: Also section 5 could be reorganized to strengthen the papers conclusion. Our answer:We have modified Section 4 Discussion as follow...

show abstract

“…Trials were randomized to avoid any learning effect. Data from the same experimental condition and subject were averaged before the analysis [20].…”

Section: Experimental Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design and Evaluation of a Wearable Haptic Device for Skin Stretch, Pressure, and Vibrotactile Stimuli

Aggravi

Pausé

Giordano

et al. 2018

IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-This paper presents a wearable haptic device for the forearm and its application in robotic teleoperation. The device is able to provide skin stretch, pressure, and vibrotactile stimuli. Two servo motors, housed in a 3D printed lightweight platform, actuate an elastic fabric belt, wrapped around the arm. When the two servo motors rotate in opposite directions, the belt is tightened (or loosened), thereby compressing (or decompressing) the arm. On the other hand, when the two motors rotate in the same direction, the belt applies a shear force to the arm skin. Moreover, the belt houses four vibrotactile motors, positioned evenly around the arm at 90 degrees from each other. The device weights 220 g for 115×122×50 mm of dimensions, making it wearable and unobtrusive. We carried out a perceptual characterization of the device as well as two human-subjects teleoperation experiments in a virtual environment, employing a total of 34 subjects. In the first experiment, participants were asked to control the motion of a robotic manipulator for grasping an object; in the second experiment, participants were asked to teleoperate the motion of a quadrotor fleet along a given path. In both scenarios, the wearable haptic device provided feedback information about the status of the slave robot(s) and of the given task. Results showed the effectiveness of the proposed device. Performance on completion time, length trajectory, and perceived effectiveness when using the wearable device improved of 19.8%, 25.1%, and 149.1% than when wearing no device, respectively. Finally, all subjects but three preferred the conditions including wearable haptics.

show abstract

Cutaneous Force Feedback as a Sensory Subtraction Technique in Haptics

Cited by 159 publications

References 49 publications

Two Finger Grasping Simulation with Cutaneous and Kinesthetic Force Feedback

Two Finger Grasping Simulation with Cutaneous and Kinesthetic Force Feedback

Hand–tool–tissue interaction forces in neurosurgery for haptic rendering

Design and Evaluation of a Wearable Haptic Device for Skin Stretch, Pressure, and Vibrotactile Stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About