Wave haptics: Building stiff controllers from the natural motor dynamics

International Journal of Robotics Research

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 5-21

  Diolaiti, Nicola ^a   Niemeyer, Günter ^a   Tanner, Neal A ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Current amplifier; haptics; Motor control; Motor dynamics; Wave variables

Indexed keywords

BANDWIDTH; CONTROL EQUIPMENT; POSITION CONTROL; SENSORS; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS;

CURRENT AMPLIFIER; MOTOR CONTROL; MOTOR DYNAMICS; WAVE VARIABLES;

HAPTIC INTERFACES;

EID: 33845764767     PISSN: 02783649     EISSN: 17413176     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0278364907073779     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Abbott, J. J. and Okamura, A. M. (2005). Effects of position quantization and sampling rate on virtual-wall passivity. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 21 (5). 952-964.
2. Colgate, J. and Brown, J. (1994). Factors affecting the z-width of a haptic display. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Diego, CA, May, pp. 3205-3210.
3. Colgate, J. and Schenkel, G. (1994). Passivity of a class of sampled-data systems: Application to haptic interfaces. American Control Conference, Baltimore, MD, June, pp. 3236-3240.
4. Daniel, R. and McAree, R. (1998). Fundamental limits of performance for force reflecting teleoperation. International Journal of Robotics Research, 17 (8). 811-830.
5. Darian-Smith, I. (1984). The sense of touch: Performance and peripheral neural processes. In Handbook of Physiology, Section I: The Nervous System. Volume III: Sensory Processes, Part 2, ed. J Brookhart, VB Mountcastle, American Physiological Society, Bethesda, MD, pp. 739-788.
6. Diolaiti, N. and Niemeyer, G. (2006). Wave haptics: Providing stiff coupling to virtual environments. Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, Washington DC, USA, March, pp. 185-192.
7. Diolaiti, N., Niemeyer, G., Barbagli, F., and Salisbury, J. K. (2006). Stability of haptic rendering: Discretization, quantization, time-delay and coulomb effects. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 22 (2). 256-268.
8. Fiene, J. and Niemeyer, G. (2004). Switching motor control: An integrated amplifier design for improved velocity estimation and feedback. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, New Orleans, LA, USA, April, Vol. 5, pp. 4504-4509.
9. Gillespie, B. and Cutkosky, M. (1996). Stable user-specific rendering of the virtual wall. ASME IMECE, Vol. DSC Vol. 58, Atlanta, GA, November, pp. 397-406.
10. Hannaford, B. and Ryu, J. (2002). Time-domain passivity control of haptic interfaces. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18 (1). 1-10.
11. Karnopp, D. C., Margolis, D. L., and Rosenberg, R. C. (2000). System Dynamics: Modeling and Simulation of Mechatronic Systems, 3rd edn. John Wiley and Sons.
12. Kawai, M. and Yoshikawa, T. (2004). Haptic display with an interface device capable of continuous-time impedance display within a sampling period. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 9 (1). 58-64.
13. Koren, Y. and Ulsoy, A. (1982). Control of DC servo-motor driven robots. Proceedings of Robot 6 Conference, Detroit, March.
14. Lawrence, D., Pao, L., Dougherty, A., Salada, M., and Pavlou, Y. (2000). Rate hardness: A new performance metric for haptic interfaces. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 16 (4). 357-371.
15. Leonhard, W. (2001). Control of Electrical Drives, 3rd edn. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
16. Mahvash, M. and Hayward, V. (2004). High fidelity passive force reflecting virtual environments. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 21 (1). 38-46.
17. Massie, T. and Salisbury, J. (1994). The phantom haptic interface: a device for probing virtual objects. ASME Winter Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, Vol. 55-1, pp. 295-300.
18. Mehling, J. S., Colgate, J. E., and Peshkin, M. A. (2005). Increasing the impedance range of a haptic display by adding electrical damping. WHC '05: First World Haptics Conference, Pisa, Italy, March, IEEE Computer Society, pp. 257-262.
19. Miller, B., Colgate, J., and Freeman, R. (2000). Environment delay in haptic systems. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Francisco, CA, April, pp. 2434-2439.
20. Niemeyer, G., Diolaiti, N., and Tanner, N. (2005). Wave haptics: Encoderless virtual stiffnesses. ISRR 2005: International Symposium of Robotics Research, San Francisco, CA, USA, October.
21. Niemeyer, G. and Slotine, J. (1997). Using wave variables for system analysis and robot control. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Albuquerque, New Mexico, April, Vol. 2, pp. 1619-1625.
22. Niemeyer, G. and Slotine, J. (2004). Telemanipulation with time delays. International Journal of Robotics Research, 23 (9). 873-890.
23. Paynter, H. (1960). Analysis and Design of Engineering Systems, ser. Class 2.571. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
24. Shimoga, K. (1993). A survey of perceptual feedback issues in dextrous telemanipulation. Part II: Finger-touch feedback. IEEE Annual Virtual Reality International Symposium, pp. 271-279.
25. Stramigioli, S., van der Schaft, A., Maschke, B., and Melchiorri, C. (2002). Geometric scattering in robotic telemanipulation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18 (4). 588-596.
26. Tanner, N. and Niemeyer, G. (2004). Practical limitations of wave variable controllers in teleoperation. IEEE Conference on Robotics, Automation, and Mechatronics, Singapore, December.