Haptic Feedback in Teleoperation in Micro- and Nanoworlds

Abstract

Robotic systems have been developed to handle very small objects, but their use remains complex and necessitates long-duration training. Simulators, such as molecular simulators, can provide access to large amounts of raw data, but only highly trained users can interpret the results of such systems. Haptic feedback in teleoperation, which provides force-feedback to an operator, appears to be a promising solution for interaction with such systems, as it allows intuitiveness and flexibility. However several issues arise while implementing teleoperation schemes at the micro-nanoscale, owing to complex force-fields that must be transmitted to users, and scaling differences between the haptic device and the manipulated objects. Major advances in such technology have been made in recent years. This chapter reviews the main systems in this area and highlights how some fundamental issues in teleoperation for micro-and nano-scale applications have been addressed. The chapter considers three types of teleoperation, including: (1) direct (manipulation of real objects); (2) virtual (use of simulators); and (3) augmented (combining real robotic systems and simulators). Remaining issues that must be addressed for further advances in teleoperation for micro-nanoworlds are also discussed, including: (1) comprehension of phenomena that dictate very small object (< 500 micrometers) behavior; and (2) design of intuitive 3-D manipulation systems. Design guidelines to realize an intuitive haptic feedback teleoperation system at the micro-nanoscale level are proposed.Keywords: Teleoperation, haptics, micromanipulation, nanomanipulation, molecular simulation, user testing.3 Micro-nanomanipulation is the manipulation of objects ranging from 1 mm down to 1 nm.The primary challenge for this type of manipulation is facilitating user interaction with an intangible world. This challenge has often been approached through the use of simulations (see Figure 1). In order to facilitate performance in such applications, new methods must be developed for user understanding of the physical mechanisms that dictate behavior of very small objects, including artificial or biological microscopic objects. Furthermore, users must be provided with intuitive interfaces to facilitate, for example, micro-nanoassembly operations (i.e., assembly of components ranging from 1 nm to 1 mm). To overcome these challenges, there is a need for teleoperation systems that enable the manipulation of objects in 3-D, while providing feedback on object interaction forces in real-time. This chapter proposes design guidelines for such systems. Users must be provided with knowledge about phenomena at this scale and intuitive interfaces 4 for object manipulation. Photos in figure come from Liu, Sun, Wang, and Lansdorp (2007) and Bargiel, Rabenorosoa, Clévy, Gorecki, and Lutz (2010).At the micro-nano scale, manual interaction with objects is impossible, owing to very small physical size of objects, as well as the fragility of the objects and tools, the complexity of force...

An Application-Based Review of Haptics Technology

“…The study emphasized the importance of haptic devices in teleoperation, micromanipulation, and nanoworld. The design of a haptic teleoperation control scheme, which is capable of controlling the actions of the human user and enables monitoring of items at the microscale level, was also discussed [26]. A bilateral telemanipulation system for controlling paramagnetic microparticles was also developed.…”

A Handheld Master Device for 3D Remote Micro-Manipulation

“…Haptic devices for teleoperated gripping has already been explored [20], [7], [4], [21], [9]. Bilateral haptic coupling can be modeled as a two-port system and is prone to instabilities when passivity criteria is not met [22].…”

“…The user interface generally consists of 2D screens, of input *This work was supported by the French National Research Agency through the ANR-Colamir project (ANR-16-CE10-0009), and partially by the French government research program "Investissements d'avenir" through the Robotex Equipment of Excellence (ANR-10-EQPX-44). 1 Sophia Sakr, Thomas Daunizeau, Stephane Regnier and Sinan Haliyo are with Sorbonne Université, CNRS, Institut des Systèmes Intelligents et de Robotique (ISIR), F-75005 Paris, France {sophia.sakr, sinan.haliyo}@sorbonne-universite.fr France barthelemy.cagneau@uvsq.fr devices like a mouse, joystick, buttons, and eventually of a generic haptic device [3], [4]. A skilled technician considers unconsciously their tools as an extension of themselves and it has an important impact on the workflow [5].…”

Teleoperation and Beyond for Assistive Humanoid Robots

“…The emergence of socioemotional challenges occurs when the humanoid robot, though remote from an operator, operates in an environment where other humans are present. Borrowing a term from Scholtz’s taxonomy (Scholtz, Theofanos, & Antonishek, 2002), when a human is not directly involved in producing the behavior of the robot, then he or she may be considered a “bystander.” Additionally, in contexts of assistive robotics, the robot may be working with a client, patient, consumer, or visitor (Bolopion, Millet, Pacoret, & Regnier, 2013; Gockley et al, 2005; Goodrich et al, 2012; Kanda et al, 2010; Robins, Dickerson, Stribling, & Dautenhahn, 2004; Tapus, Tapus, & Mataric, 2009; Thrun et al, 1999). When humans are present with a humanoid robot, either as bystanders or in other roles (Goodrich & Schultz, 2007), these humans will experience socioemotional responses to the humanoid.…”