Top Banner
Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
40

Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Dec 13, 2015

Download

Documents

Alban Hunt
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces

Lynette Jones,Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Page 2: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Surface of average sized adult human: 1.8 m2

(1000 times that of retinae)

Density: 1250 kg/m3

Weight: 5 kg

Total number of axons converging on CNS: 1.1*106 Retina: 106 axons, Cochlea: 6*104 axons

Human skin

Page 3: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Haptics and Vision

Information Temporal capacity (bits/sec) acuity

Fingertip 102 5 ms

Ear 104 0.01 ms

Eye 106-109 25 ms

Time delays differ for hand and eye – hand is quicker than the eye

Page 4: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

SENSORY7 classes of Mechanoreceptor (17,000 – glabrous skin)2 classes of Thermoreceptor4 classes of Nocioceptors3 classes of Proprioceptor (0-300 in different muscles)

Information Channels in Human Hand

Page 5: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Sensory Receptor Properties and Haptic Display Design

Resolution and sensitivity of the sensors Temporal processing characteristics

(adaptation, summation) Spatial features of processing Delays in processing information (0.4-120

m/s)

Page 6: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Tactile Receptor Types (7)

Cutaneous and subcutaneous Fiber ModalityMechanoreceptors group

Meissner corpuscle A, Stroking, fluttering

Merkel disk receptor A, Pressure, texture

Pacinian corpuscle A, Vibration

Ruffini ending A, Skin stretch

Hair tylotrich, hair-guard A, Stroking, fluttering

Hair-down A Light stroking

Field A , Skin stretch

Page 7: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Receptors Processing Vibration, Texture

Page 8: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Tactile Tuning Curves

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

0.1 10 1000

Frequency (Hz)

Abs

olut

e th

resh

old

(mm

)

Merkel cell: 5-15 Hz

Meissner’s corpuscles: 20-50 Hz

Pacinian corpuscles: 60-400 Hz

Page 9: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Perceived intensity of vibration varies as a function of frequency as well as amplitude

If the amplitude of vibration is changed while frequency is maintained constant, at certain levels a noticeable change in rate occurs

Perception of Vibrotactile Stimuli – Frequency and Intensity Interact

Page 10: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Equal subjective intensity curves

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

20 30 40 50 60 70

PSE

(db

re:

sta

ndar

d)

Comparison frequency (Hz)

Standard 25 Hz

Page 11: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Spatial acuity of the skin Skin movement: 0.1-0.2 mm (Gould et al.,

1979)

Spatial frequency of grating: fingertip can distinguish 40-50 µm in spatial period of 0.7-1.0 mm (Morley et al., 1983)

On smooth glass surface, dot of height 1-3 µm and diameter of 550 µm can be detected by the fingertip (Johansson & LaMotte, 1983)

Temporal variation often improves acuity and spatially extensive stimuli improve performance

(Johnson & Phillips, 1981)

Page 12: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Temporal acuity and touch

Successiveness - 2 stimuli (1 ms duration) must be separated by 5.5 ms to be perceived as 2 at a single locus

Temporal order – 2 successive stimuli at separate sites must be separated by 20 ms in order to determine which site first

20 ms5 ms

Page 13: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Haptic Displays

Surface texture of object Contact in the environmentMoving probe across surface - volumeCompliance/stiffness of objectMass of objectThermal properties of object

Page 14: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Human Perception and Haptic Display Design

Scaling (gain) of information between object and operator

Bandwidth required to present information Mechanical properties of interface Magnitude of delays that are tolerable -

symmetric, modality specific

Page 15: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Force-reflecting Interfaces

Scaling (gain) of force between object and operatorRing finger

Women: 10 NMen: 18 N

Middle fingerWomen: 14 N

Men: 26 N

Index fingerWomen: 19 N

Men: 35 N

Activation force <1 N

Mean force: 0.8-0.9 N

Peak force: 1.8-3.3 N

Page 16: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

GOLGI TENDON ORGANTendon of Achilles

                                                                

       0-20 in mammalian musclesActivation force: 0.5 – 1.7 mN

Page 17: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Force Discrimination

0.01

0.1

1

10

0.1 10 1000

Force (N)

Dif

fere

ntia

l thr

esho

ld (

N)

6%

Page 18: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Weight Discrimination

0

0.04

0.08

0.12

0.16

Active lifting

Reflexlifting

Staticposition

Handpassive

Web

er fr

actio

n

Rapid motion

Page 19: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Fatigue and Perceived Force

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Time (s)

Per

ceiv

ed fo

rce

(%M

VC

)

Page 20: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

0

3

6

9

12

15

Force control - Index finger flexor

2 4 6

Force (N)

Coe

ffic

ien

t of

var

iati

on (

%)

Haptic

Visual and haptic

Page 21: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

1

10

100

1000

1 10 100 1000

Dif

fere

nti

al t

hre

shol

d (

N.s

/m)

Reference Viscosity (N.s/m)

Viscosity Discrimination

Page 22: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Viscosity Discrimination

0

20

40

60

1 100 10000

Viscosity (N.s/m)

Web

er f

ract

ion

(%)

19%

Page 23: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Discriminability Parameters

Variable Weber fraction ResolutionAmplitude of vibrotactile 25% 0.1m stimulation (20-300 Hz)Frequency of vibrotactile11% 0.4 Hz stimulation (5-200 Hz)Pressure on skin 12% 2 gm/mm2

Force 7% 30 mN

Stiffness/compliance 17%

Viscosity 19%

Temperature (cold) 2% 0.02oC

Page 24: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Discriminability Parameters

Variable Weber fraction Range

Limb position 7% 5-9%

Limb movement 8% 4-19%

Force 7% 5-12%

Stiffness/compliance 17% 7-26%

Viscosity 19% 10-29%

Page 25: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Hand movements and physical properties

Surface texture

Size/volume

Temperature

Hardness

Weight

Page 26: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

Subjects

Web

er fr

acti

on

Individual Variability

Page 27: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1 100

SD

Pos

itio

n (

mm

)

Reference Viscosity (N.s/m)

Movement Amplitudes

low

high

Page 28: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 100

SD

Vel

ocit

y (m

m/s

)

Reference Viscosity (N.s/m)

Movement Velocities

low

high

Page 29: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Training for the haptically inept

FeedbackOptimal motor strategyImprove discrimination but not detection

Page 30: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Interface Mechanical Properties and Human Operator Performance

150

200

250

300

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Interface Stiffness (N/m)

Del

ay (

ms)

Page 31: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Human Operator Performance

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Interface stiffness (N/m)

Gai

n

Page 32: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Human Operator Performance

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

10 1000

Interface Viscosity (N.s/m)

Tim

e to

0.5

pt o

n St

ep

Res

pons

e Fu

nctio

n

Page 33: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Human Operator Performance

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

10 1000

Interface Viscosity (N.s/m)

Gai

n

Page 34: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Thermal Interfaces and Perception

Thermoreceptor range: 13-45o C Resolution: 0.02-0.05o C (transient) Thermal discriminability: 2% Neutral thermal sensation: 31-36o C Skin temperature correlates well with

perception of cold not warmth Thermoreceptors are NOT thermometers

Page 35: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Thermal thresholds

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Area (cm sq)

Ele

vati

on

in

sk

in t

emp

eratu

re (

deg

C)

Page 36: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Thermal Interfaces

Disadvantages Slow response Poor localization (improves with increases

in temperature – 40° C) Prodigious capacity for adaptation and

summation (intensity and areal extent traded)But could be analogous to color in visual

displays.

Page 37: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Illusions – can they be used to trick the haptic

system?

Size-weight illusions – visual and haptic phenomenon

Saltation effect Use auditory cues to enhance haptic

perception

Page 38: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Size-weight Illusion

0

5

10

15

20

0 200 400 600 800

Weight (g)

Perc

eive

d M

agni

tude

LARGE

SMALL

1.4

1.8

2.2

2.6

3

100Volume (cc)

350 gm

904 gm

Visual Haptic

(Masin & Crestoni, 1988) (Ellis & Lederman, 1993)

Page 39: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Saltation effect

At short and long time intervals (20-30 and > 200 ms) P1 will appear near to or coincident with P2

Warning stimulus (P1) 1 s prior to two taps on skin. Present a stimulus at one location (P2 red) and a second at another (P3 blue).

As time disparity increases above 50 ms the first stimulus travels back to its veridical locus

P1/P2 locus P3 locus

150 ms

110 ms

75 ms

< 25 ms

100 mm

Page 40: Human Factors and Haptic Interfaces Lynette Jones, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Conclusions

• Spatial and temporal processing characteristics of different modalities (pressure, vibration, temperature, force) vary, but can be used to enhance stimulus presentation in a haptic display

• Cross-modal interactions provide an additional tool for representing object properties