A haptic virtual borescope for visual engine inspection training

3DUI - IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces 2008

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 19-26

  Vembar, Deepak ^a   Duchowski, Andrew T ^a   Sadasivan, Sajay ^a   Gramopadhye, Anand K ^a  

^a South   (United States)

Author keywords

I.3.6 computer graphics : methodology and techniques ergonomics; J.4 computer applications : social and behavioral sciences psychology

Indexed keywords

3D USER INTERFACES; BLACK BOXES; COLLISION DETECTION; CRITICAL COMPONENTS; EMPIRICAL ANALYSES; EMPIRICAL EVALUATIONS; ENGINE CASING; ENGINE INSPECTION; FORCE-FEEDBACK; HAPTIC FEEDBACKS; I.3.6 [COMPUTER GRAPHICS]: METHODOLOGY AND TECHNIQUES-ERGONOMICS; IN-LINE; J.4 [COMPUTER APPLICATIONS]: SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES-PSYCHOLOGY; TURBINE MAINTENANCE; VIRTUAL CAMERAS; VIRTUAL SPACES; VISUAL INTERFACES;

ACCIDENTS; AIRCRAFT ACCIDENTS; AIRCRAFT ENGINES; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CAMERAS; ELECTRIC GENERATORS; ENGINES; GAS TURBINES; HAPTIC INTERFACES; INSPECTION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MOCKUPS; OPTICAL INSTRUMENTS; PIPE FLOW; SPACE PROBES; THREE DIMENSIONAL; VIRTUAL REALITY;

USER INTERFACES;

EID: 49749125068     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/3DUI.2008.4476586     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. American Society for Nondestructive Testing. Recommended Practices No. SNT TC-1A, 2001.
2. F. Barbagli, K. Salisbury, C. Ho, C. Spence, and H. Z. Tan. Haptic Discrimination of Force Direction and the Influence of Visual Information. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception, 3(2):125-135, 2006.
3. S. Garbaya and U. Zaldivar-Colado. The affect of contact force sensations on user performance in virtual assembly tasks. Virtual Reality, 11(4):287-299, 2007.
4. T. P. Grantcharov, V. B. Kristiansen, J. Bendix, L. Bardram, J. Rosenberg, and P. Funch-Jensen. Randomized clinical trial of virtual reality simulation for laparoscopic skills training. British Journal of Surgery, 91(2):146-150, 2004.
5. S. Greenberg and C. Fitchett. Phidgets: easy development of physical interfaces through physical widgets. In UIST '01: Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST), pages 209-218, New York, NY, 2001. ACM.
6. S. G. Hart and L. E. Staveland. Development of a multi-dimensional workload rating scale: Results of empirical and theoretical research. In P. A. Hancock and N. Meshkati, editors, Human Mental Workload, pages 139-183. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Holland, 1988.
7. B. M. Howard and J. M. Vance. Desktop haptic virtual assembly using physically based modelling. Virtual Reality, 11(4):207-215, 2007.
8. T. Lim, J. M. Ritchie, R. G. Dewar, J. R. Corney, P. Wilkinson, M. Calis, M. Desmulliez, and J.-J. Fang. Factors affecting user performance in haptic assembly. Virtual Reality, 11(4):241-252, 2007.
9. T. H. Massie and J. K. Salisbury. The PHANToM haptic interface: A device for probing virtual objects. In Proceedings of the ASME Winter Annual Meeting, Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, pages 295-302, 1994.
10. M. K. O'Malley and G. Upperman. A Study of Perceptual Performance in Haptic Virtual Environments. Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics, 18(4), 2006.
11. I. Rock and J. Victor. Vision and Touch: An Experimentally Created Conflict between the Two Senses. Science, 143(3606):594-596, 1964.
12. L. B. Rosenberg and B. D. Adelstein. Perceptual Decomposition of Virtual Haptic Surfaces. In Proceedings of the IEEE 1993 Symposium on Research Frontiers in Virtual Reality, pages 46-53, 1993.
13. N. E. Seymour, A. G. Gallagher, S. A. Roman, M. K. O'Brien, V. K. Bansal, D. K. Andersen, and R. M. Satava. Virtual Reality Training Improves Operating Room Performance: Results of a Randomized, Double-Blinded Study. Annals of Surgery, 236(4):458-464, 2002.
14. P. F. Stringfellow, S. Sadasivan, D. Vembar, A. T. Duchowski, and A. K. Gramopadhye. Task Analysis of Video Borescope Operation for Use in a Virtual Training Tool. In Proceedings of Institute of Industrial Engineers Annual Conference, 2005.
15. P. Ström, L. Hedman, L. Särnå, A. Kjellin, T. Wredmark, and L. Felländer-Tsai. Early Exposure to Haptic Feedback Enhances Performance in Surgical Simulator Training: A Prospective Randomized Crossover Study in Surgical Residents. Surgical Endoscopy, 20(9):1383-1388, 2006.
16. D. Vembar, S. Sadasivan, A. T. Duchowski, P. F. Stringfellow, and A. K. Gramopadhye. Design of a Virtual Borescope: A Presence Study. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Reno, NV, USA, Jul 2005. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
17. C. R. Wagner, R. D. Howe, and N. Stylopoulos. The Role of Force Feedback in Surgery: Analysis of Blunt Dissection. In 10th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, page 73, 2002.
18. B. G. Witmer and M. J. Singer. Measuring Presence in Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire. Presence, 7(3):225-240, 1998.
19. Y. Zhang, T. Fernando, H. Xiao, and A. Travis. Evaluation of Auditory and Visual Feedback on Task Performance in a Virtual Assembly Environment. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 15(6):613-626, 2006.