ABSTRACT

‘Haptics’ is a technology that adds the sense of touch to virtual environments. Users are
given the illusion that they are touching or manipulating a real physical object. This seminar
discusses the important concepts in haptics, some of the most commonly used haptics systems
like ‘Phantom’, ‘Cyber glove’, ‘Novint Falcon’ and such similar devices. Following this, a
description about how sensors and actuators are used for tracking the position and movement of
the haptic systems, is provided. The different types of force rendering algorithms are discussed
next. The seminar explains the blocks in force rendering. Then a few applications of haptic
systems are taken up for discussion.

INTRODUCTION

2. a) What is ‘Haptics’?

Haptic technology refers to technology that interfaces the

user with a virtual environment via the sense of touch by applying forces,
vibrations, and/or motions to the user. This mechanical stimulation may be used to
assist in the creation of virtual objects (objects existing only in a computer
simulation), for control of such virtual objects, and to enhance the remote control
of machines and devices (teleoperators). This emerging technology promises to
have widereaching applications as it already has in some fields. For example,
haptic technology has made it possible to investigate in detail how the human sense
of touch works by allowing the creation of carefully controlled haptic virtual
objects. These objects are used to systematically probe human haptic capabilities,
which would otherwise be difficult to achieve. These new research tools contribute
to our understanding of how touch and its underlying brain functions work.
Although haptic devices are capable of measuring bulk or reactive forces that are
applied by the user, it should not to be confused with touch or tactile sensors that
measure the pressure or force exerted by the user to the interface.
The term haptic originated from the Greek word ἁπτικός (haptikos),
meaning pertaining to the sense of touch and comes from the Greek verb ἅπτεσθαι
(haptesthai) meaning to “contact” or “touch”.
2. b) History of Haptics
In the early 20th century, psychophysicists introduced the word
haptics to label the subfield of their studies that addressed human touch-based
perception and manipulation. In the 1970s and 1980s, significant research efforts in
a completely different field, robotics also began to focus on manipulation and
perception by touch. Initially concerned with building autonomous robots,
researchers soon found that building a dexterous robotic hand was much more
complex and subtle than their initial naive hopes had suggested. In time these two
communities, one that sought to understand the human hand and one that aspired to
create devices with dexterity inspired by human abilities found fertile mutual
interest in topics such as sensory design and processing, grasp control and
manipulation, object representation and haptic information encoding, and
grammars for describing physical tasks.
In the early 1990s a new usage of the word haptics began to emerge.
The confluence of several emerging technologies made virtualized haptics, or
computer haptics possible. Much like computer graphics, computer haptics enables
the display of simulated objects to humans in an interactive manner. However,
computer haptics uses a display technology through which objects can be
physically palpated.

WORKING OF HAPTIC SYSTEMS

3. a) Basic system configuration.
 Basically a haptic system consist of two parts namely the human part
and the machine part. In the figure shown above, the human part (left) senses and
controls the position of the hand, while the machine part (right) exerts forces from
the hand to simulate contact with a virtual object. Also both the systems will be
provided with necessary sensors, processors and actuators. In the case of the
human system, nerve receptors performs sensing, brain performs processing and
muscles performs actuation of the motion performed by the hand while in the case
of the machine system, the above mentioned functions are performed by the
encoders, computer and motors respectively.

3. b) Haptic Information

Basically the haptic information provided by the system will be the

combination of (i) Tactile information and (ii) Kinesthetic information. Tactile
information refers the information acquired by the sensors which are actually
connected to the skin of the human body with a particular reference to the spatial
distribution of pressure, or more generally, tractions, across the contact area.
For example when we handle flexible materials like fabric and paper, we sense the
pressure variation across the fingertip. This is actually a sort of tactile information.
Tactile sensing is also the basis of complex perceptual tasks like medical palpation,
where physicians locate hidden anatomical structures and evaluate tissue properties
using their hands. Kinesthetic information refers to the information acquired
through the sensors in the joints. Interaction forces are normally perceived through
a combination of these two informations.

3. c) Creation of Virtual environment (Virtual reality).

Virtual reality is the technology which allows a user to interact with

a computer-simulated environment, whether that environment is a simulation of the
real world or an imaginary world. Most current virtual reality environments are
primarily visual experiences, displayed either on a computer screen or through
special or stereoscopic displays, but some simulations include additional sensory
information, such as sound through speakers or headphones.
Some advanced, haptic systems now include tactile information,
generally known as force feedback, in medical and gaming applications. Users can
interact with a virtual environment or a virtual artifact (VA) either through the use
of standard input devices such as a keyboard and mouse, or through multimodal
devices such as a wired glove, the Polhemus boom arm, and omnidirectional
treadmill. The simulated environment can be similar to the real world, for example,
simulations for pilot or combat training, or it can differ significantly
from reality, as in VR games. In practice,
it is currently very difficult to create a
high-fidelity virtual reality experience,
due largely to technical limitations on
processing power, image resolution and
communication bandwidth. However,
those limitations are expected to
eventually be overcome as processor,
imaging and data communication
technologies become more powerful and
cost-effective over time.
Virtual Reality is often used to describe a wide variety of applications, commonly
associated with its immersive, highly visual, 3D environments. The development
of CAD software, graphics hardware acceleration, head mounted displays;
database gloves and miniaturization have helped popularize the motion. The most
successful use of virtual reality is the computer generated 3-D simulators. The
pilots use flight simulators. These flight simulators have designed just like cockpit
of the airplanes or the helicopter. The screen in front of the pilot creates virtual
environment and the trainers outside the simulators commands the simulator for
adopt different modes. The pilots are trained to control the planes in different
difficult situations and emergency landing. The simulator provides the
environment. These simulators cost millions of dollars. The virtual reality games
are also used almost in the same fashion. The player has to wear special gloves,
headphones, goggles, full body wearing and special sensory input devices. The
player feels that he is in the real environment. The special goggles have monitors
to see. The environment changes according to the moments of the player. These
games are very expensive.

3. d) Haptic feedback
Virtual reality (VR) applications strive to simulate real or imaginary scenes with
which users can interact and perceive the effects of their actions in real time.
Ideally the user interacts with the simulation via all five senses. However, today’s
typical VR applications rely on a smaller subset, typically vision, hearing, and
more recently, touch. Figure below shows the structure of a VR application
incorporating visual auditory, and haptic feedback
The application’s main elements are:
1) The simulation engine, responsible for computing the virtual environment’s
behavior over time;
2) Visual, auditory, and haptic rendering algorithms, which compute the virtual
environment’s graphic, sound, and force responses toward the user; and
3) Transducers, which convert visual, audio, and force signals from the computer
into a form the operator can perceive. The human operator typically holds or wears
the haptic interface device and perceives audiovisual feedback from audio
(computer speakers, headphones, and so on) and visual displays (for example a
computer screen or head-mounted display).Whereas audio and visual channels
feature unidirectional information and energy flow (from the simulation engine
toward the user), the haptic modality exchanges information and energy in two
directions, from and toward the user. This bidirectionality is often referred to as the
single most important feature of the haptic interaction modality.

HAPTIC DEVICES

A haptic device is the one that provides a physical interface between the user and
the virtual environment by means of a computer. This can be done through an
input/output device that senses the body’s movement, such as joystick or data
glove. By using haptic devices, the user can not only feed information to the
computer but can also receive information from the computer in the form of a felt
sensation on some part of the body. This is referred to as a haptic interface. Haptic
devices can be broadly classified into
4. a) Virtual reality/ Telerobotics based devices
i) Exoskeletons and Stationary device
ii) Gloves and wearable devices
iii) Point-sources and Specific task devices
iv) Locomotion Interfaces
4. b) Feedback devices
i) Force feedback devices
ii) Tactile displays
4. a. i) Exoskeletons and Stationary devices
 The term exoskeleton refers to the hard outer shell that exists on many
creatures. In a technical sense, the word refers to a system that covers the user or
the user has to wear. Current haptic devices that are classified as exoskeletons are
large and immobile systems that the user must attach him- or herself to.
4. a. ii) Gloves and wearable devices
These devices are smaller exoskeleton-like devices that are often, but not
always, take the down by a large exoskeleton or other immobile devices. Since the
goal of building a haptic system is to be able to immerse a user in the virtual or
remote environment and it is important to provide a small remainder of the user’s
actual environment as possible. The drawback of the wearable systems is that since
weight and size of the devices are a concern, the systems will have more limited
sets of capabilities.
4. a. iii) Point sources and specific task devices
This is a class of devices that are very specialized for performing a
particular given task. Designing a device to perform a single type of task restricts
the application of that device to a much smaller number of functions. However it
allows the designer to focus the device to perform its task extremely well. These
task devices have two general forms, single point of interface devices and specific
task devices.
4 . a. iv) Locomotion interfaces
An interesting application of haptic feedback is in the form of full body
Force Feedback called locomotion interfaces. Locomotion interfaces are movement
of force restriction devices in a confined space, simulating unrestrained mobility
such as walking and running for virtual reality. These interfaces overcomes the
limitations of using joysticks for maneuvering or whole body motion platforms, in
which the user is seated and does not expend energy, and of room environments,
where only short distances can be traversed.
4. b. i) Force feedback devices
Force feedback input devices are usually, but not exclusively, connected to
computer systems and is designed to apply forces to simulate the sensation of
weight and resistance in order to provide information to the user. As such, the
feedback hardware represents a more sophisticated form of input/output devices,
complementing others such as keyboards, mice or trackers. Input from the user in
the form of hand, or other body segment whereas feedback from the computer or
other device is in the form of hand, or other body segment whereas feedback from
the computer or other device is in the form of force or position. These devices
translate digital information into physical sensations.

4. b. ii) Tactile display devices

 Simulation task involving active exploration or delicate manipulation of
avirtual environment require the addition of feedback data that presents an object’s
surface geometry or texture. Such feedback is provided by tactile feedback systems
or tactile display devices. Tactile systems differ from haptic systems in the scale of
the forces being generated. While haptic interfaces will present the shape, weight
or compliance of an object, tactile interfaces present the surface properties of an
object such as the object’s surface texture. Tactile feedback applies sensation to the
skin

COMMONLY USED HAPTIC

INTERFACING DEVICES

5. a) PHANTOM
It is a haptic interfacing device developed by a company named Sensable
technologies. It is primarily used for providing a 3D touch to the virtual objects.
This is a very high resolution 6 DOF device in which the user holds the end of a
motor controlled jointed arm. It provides a programmable sense of touch that
allows the user to feel the texture and shape of the virtual object with a very high
degree of realism. One of its key features is that it can model free floating 3
dimensional objects.

Figure above shows the contact display design of a Phantom device. Here when the
user puts one of his finger in the thimble connected to the metal arm of the
phantom device and when the user move his finger, then he could really feel the
shape and size of the virtual 3 dimensional object that has been already
programmed inside the computer. The virtual 3 dimensional space in which the
phantom operates is called haptic scene which will be a collection of separate
haptic objects with different behaviors and properties. The dc motor assembly is
mainly used for converting the movement of the finger into a corresponding
virtual movement.

5. b) Cyberglove
 The principle of a Cyberglove is simple. It consists of opposing the movement
of the hand in the same way that an object squeezed between the fingers resists the
movement of the latter. The glove must therefore be capable, in the absence of a
real object, of recreating the forces applied by the object onthe human hand with
(1) the same intensity and (2) the same direction. These two conditions can be
simplified by requiring the glove to apply a torque equal to the interphalangian
joint. The solution that we have chosen uses a mechanical structure with three
passive joints which, with the interphalangian joint, make up a flat four-bar closed-
link mechanism. This solution use cables placed at the interior of the four-bar
mechanism and following a trajectory identical to that used by the extensor
tendons which, by nature, oppose the movement of the flexor tendons in order to
harmonize the movement of the fingers. Among the advantages of this structure
one can cite:
Allows 4 dof for each finger
Adapted to different size of the fingers
Located on the back of the hand
Apply different forces on each phalanx (The possibility of applying a
lateral force on the fingertip by motorizing the abduction/adduction joint)
Measure finger angular flexion (The measure of the joint angles are independent
and can have a good resolution given the important paths traveled by the cables
when the finger shut.
5. b. i) Mechanical structure of a Cyberglove
 The glove is made up of five fingers and has 19 degrees of freedom 5 of
which are passive. Each finger is made up of a passive abduction joint which links
it to the base (palm) and to 9 rotoid joints which, with the three interphalangian
joints, make up 3 closed-link mechanism with four-bar and 1 degree of freedom.
The structure of the thumb is composed of only two closed-links, for 3 dof of
which one is passive. The segments of the glove are made of aluminum and can
withstand high charges; their total weight does not surpass 350 grams. The length
of the segments is proportional to the length of the phalanxes. All of the joints are
mounted on miniature ball bearings in order to reduce friction. The mechanical
structure offers two essential advantages: the first is the facility of adapting to
different sizes of the human hand. We have also provided for lateral adjustment in
order to adapt the interval between the fingers at the palm. The second advantage is
the presence of physical stops in the structure which offer complete security to the
operator. The force sensor is placed on the inside of a fixed support on the upper
part of the phalanx. The sensor is made up of a steel strip on which a strain gauge
was glued. The position sensor used to measure the cable displacement is
incremental optical encoders offering an average theoretical resolution equal to 0.1
deg for the finger joints.

5. b. ii) Control of Cyberglove

The glove is controlled by 14 torque motors with continuous current which

can develop a maximal torque equal to 1.4 Nm and a continuous torque equal to
0.12 Nm. On each motor we fix a pulley with an 8.5 mm radius onto which the
cable is wound. The maximal force that the motor can exert on the cable is thus
equal to 14.0 N, a value sufficient to ensure opposition to the movement of the
finger. The electronic interface of the force feedback data glove is made of PC with
several acquisition cards. The global scheme of the control is given in the figure
shown below. One can distinguish two command loops: an internal loop which
corresponds to a classic force control with constant gains and an external loop
which integrates the model of distortion of the virtual object in contact with the
fingers. In this schema the action of man on the position of the fingers joints is
taken into consideration by the two control loops. Man is considered as a
displacement generator while the glove is considered as a force generator

HAPTIC RENDERING
6. a) Principle of haptic interface

As illustrated in Fig. given above, haptic interaction occurs at an interaction tool of

a haptic interface that mechanically couples two controlled dynamical systems: the
haptic interface with a computer and the human user with a central nervous system.
The two systems are exactly symmetrical in structure and information and they
sense the environments, make decisions about control actions, and provide
mechanical energies to the interaction tool through motions.

6. b) Characteristics commonly considered desirable for haptic interface devices

1) Low back-drive inertia and friction;
2) Minimal constraints on motion imposed by the device kinematics so free
motion feels free;
3) Symmetric inertia, friction, stiffness, and resonant frequency properties
(thereby regularizing the device so users don’t have to unconsciously
compensate for parasitic forces);
4) Balanced range, resolution, and bandwidth of position sensing and force
reflection; and
5) Proper ergonomics that let the human operator focus when wearing or
manipulating the haptic interface as pain, or even discomfort, can distract the
user, reducing overall performance.

6. c) Creation of an AVATAR

An avatar is the virtual representation of the haptic through which the

user physically interacts with the virtual environment. Clearly the choice of avatar
depends on what’s being simulated and on the haptic device’s capabilities. The
operator controls the avatar’s position inside the virtual environment. Contact
between the interface avatar and the virtual environment sets off action and
reaction forces. The avatar’s geometry and the type of contact it supports regulate
these forces. Within a given application the user might choose among different
avatars.For example, a surgical tool can be treated as a volumetric object
exchanging forces and positions with the user in a 6D space or as a pure point
representing the tool’s tip, exchanging forces and positions in a 3D space.

6. d) System architecture for haptic rendering

Haptic-rendering algorithms compute the correct interaction forces between the
haptic interface representation inside the virtual environment and the virtual
objects populating the environment. Moreover, haptic rendering algorithms ensure
that the haptic device correctly renders such forces on the human operator. Several
components compose typical haptic renderingalgorithms. We identify three main
blocks, illustrated in Figure shown above.
Collision-detection algorithms detect collisions between objects and avatars in
the virtual environment and yield information about where, when, and ideally to
what extent collisions (penetrations, indentations, contact area, and so on) have
occurred.
Force-response algorithms compute the interaction force between avatars and
virtual objects when a collision is detected. This force approximates as closely as
possible the contact forces that would normally arise during contact between real
objects. Force-response algorithms typically operate on the avatars’ positions, the
positions of all objects in the virtual environment, and the collision state between
avatars and virtual objects. Their return values are normally force and torque
vectors that are applied at the device-body interface. Hardware limitations prevent
haptic devices from applying the exact force computed by the force-response
algorithms to the user. Control algorithms command the haptic device in such a
way that minimizes the error between ideal and applicable forces. The discrete-
time nature of the haptic-rendering algorithms often makes this difficult; as we
explain further later in the article. Desired force and torque vectors computed by
force response algorithms feed the control algorithms. The algorithms’ return
values are the actual force and torque vectors that will be commanded to the haptic
device.

A typical haptic loop consists of the following sequence of events:

1) Low-level control algorithms sample the position sensor sat the haptic
interface device joints.
2) These control algorithms combine the information collected from each sensor
to obtain the position of the device-body interface in Cartesian space—that is, the
avatar’s position inside the virtual environment.
3) The collision-detection algorithm uses position information to find collisions
between objects and avatars and report the resulting degree of penetration.
4) The force-response algorithm computes interaction forces between avatars
and virtual objects involved in a collision.
5) The force-response algorithm sends interaction forces to the control
algorithms, which apply them on the operator through the haptic device while
maintaining a stable overall behavior.
The simulation engine then uses the same interaction forces to compute their effect
on objects in the virtual environment. Although there are no firm rules about how
frequently the algorithms must repeat these computations, a 1-KHz servo rate is
common. This rate seems to be a subjectively acceptable compromise permitting
presentation of reasonably complex objects with reasonable stiffness. Higher servo
rates can provide crisper contact and texture sensations, but only at the expense of
reduced scene complexity (or morecapable computers).

6. e) Computing contact-response forces

Humans perceive contact with real objects through sensors (mechanoreceptors)

located in their skin, joints, tendons, and muscles. We make a simple distinction
between the information these two types of sensors can acquire. I.e. Tactile
information and kinesthetic information. A tool-based interaction paradigm
provides a convenient simplification because the system need only render forces
resulting from contact between the tool’s avatar and objects in the environment.
Thus, haptic interfaces frequently utilize a tool handle physical interface for the
user. To provide a haptic simulation experience, we’ve designed our systems to
recreate the contact forces a user would perceive when touching a real object.The
haptic interfaces measure the user’s position to recognize if and when contacts
occur and to collect information needed to determine the correct interaction force.
Although determining user motion is easy, determining appropriate display forces
is a complex process and a subject of much research. Current haptic technology
effectively simulates interaction forces for simple cases, but is limited when tactile
feedback is involved. Compliant object response modeling adds a dimension of
complexity because of non negligible deformations, the potential for self-collision,
and the general complexity of modeling potentially large and varying areas of
contact.We distinguish between two types of forces: forces due to object geometry
and forces due to object surface properties, such as texture and friction.

6. f) Geometry-dependant force-rendering algorithms

The first type of force-rendering algorithms aspires to recreate the

force interaction a user would feel when touching a frictionless and texture
fewerobjects. Such interaction forces depend on the geometry of the object being
touched, its compliance, and the geometry of the avatar representing the haptic
interface inside the virtual environment.Although exceptions exist, 5 of the
necessary DOF to describe the interaction forces between an avatar and a virtual
object typically matches the actuated DOF of the haptic device being used. Thus
for simpler devices, such as a 1-DOF force-reflecting gripper, the avatar consists of
a couple of points thatcan only move and exchange forces along the line
connecting them. For thisdevice type, the force-rendering algorithm computes a
simple 1-DOF squeeze force between the index finger and the thumb, similar to the
force you would feel when cutting an object with scissors. When using a 6-DOF
haptic device,the avatar can be an object of any shape. In this case, the force-
rendering algorithm computes all the interaction forces between the object and the
virtual environment and applies the resultant force and torque vectors to the user
through the haptic device. We group current force-rendering algorithms by the
number of DOF necessary to describe the interaction force being rendered.

6. g) Surface property-dependent force-rendering algorithms

All real surfaces contain tiny irregularities or indentations. Obviously,

it’s impossible to distinguish each irregularity when sliding a finger over an object.
However, tactile sensors in the human skin can feel their combined effects when
rubbed against a real surface. Micro-irregularities act as obstructions when two
surfaces slide against each other and generate forces tangential to the surface and
opposite to motion.Friction, when viewed at the microscopic level, is acomplicated
phenomenon. Nevertheless, simple empirical models exist, such as the one
Leonardo Da Vinci proposed and Charles Augustin de Coulomb later developed in
1785. Such models served as a basis for the simpler frictional models in 3 DOF
Researchers outside the haptic community have developed many models to render
friction with higher accuracy, for example, the Karnopp model for modeling stick-
slip friction, the Bristle model, and the reset integrator model. Higher accuracy,
however, sacrifices speed, a critical factor in real-time applications. Any choice of
modeling technique must consider this trade off.

Keeping this trade off in mind, researchers have developed more accurate
haptic-rendering algorithms for friction. A texture or pattern generally covers real
surfaces. Researchers have proposed various techniques for rendering the forces
that touching such textures generates.

6. f) Haptic interaction techniques

Many of these techniques are inspired by analogous techniques in

modern computer graphics. In computer graphics, texture mapping adds realism to
computer generated scenes by projecting a bitmap image onto surfaces being
rendered. The same can be done haptically. Minsky first proposed haptic texture
mapping for 2D and later extended his work to 3D scenes. Existing haptic
rendering techniques are currently based upon two main principles:
"pointinteraction"or "ray-based rendering". In point interactions, a single point,
usually the distal point of a probe, thimble or stylus employed for direct interaction
with the user, is employed in the simulation of collisions. The point penetrates the
virtual objects, and the depth of indentation is calculated between the current point
and a point on the surface of the object. Forces are then generated according to
physical models, such as spring stiffness or a spring-damper model. In ray-based
rendering, the user interface mechanism, for example, a probe is modeled in the
virtual environment as a finite ray. Orientation is thus taken into account, and
collisions are determined between the simulated probe and virtual objects.Collision
detection algorithms return the intersection point between the ray and the surface
of the simulated object.

APPLICATIONS
The following are the major applications of haptic systems.

7. a) Graphical user interfaces.

Video game makers have been early adopters of passive haptics, which takes
advantage of vibrating joysticks, controllers and steering wheels to
reinforce on-screen activity. But future video games will enable players to feel
and manipulate virtual solids, fluids, tools and avatars. The Novint Falcon haptics
controller is already making this promise a reality. The 3-D force feedback
controller allows you to tell the difference between a pistol report and a shotgun
blast, or to feel the resistance of a longbow's string as you pull back
an arrow.

Graphical user interfaces, like those that define Windows and Mac operating
environments, will also benefit greatly from haptic interactions.Imagine being able
to feel graphic buttons and receive force feedback as you depress a button. Some
touchscreen manufacturers are already experimenting with this technology. Nokia
phone designers have perfected a tactile touchscreen that makes on-screen buttons
behave as if they were real buttons. When a user presses the button, he or she feels
movement in and movement out. He also hears an audible click. Nokia engineers
accomplished this by placing two small piezoelectric sensor pads under the screen
and designing the screen so it could move slightly when pressed. Everything,
movement and sound is synchronized perectly to simulate real button
manipulation.

7. b) Surgical Simulation and Medical Training.

 Various haptic interfaces for medical simulation may prove especially
useful for training of minimally invasive procedures (laparoscopy/interventional
radiology) and remote surgery using teleoperators. In the future, expert surgeons
may work from a central workstation, performing operations in various
locations, with machine setup and patient preparation performed by local
nursing staff. Rather than traveling to an operating room, the surgeon instead
becomes a telepresence. A particular advantage of this type of work is that the
surgeon can perform many more operations of a similar type, and with less
fatigue. It is well documented that a surgeon who performs more procedures of a
given kind will have statistically better outcomes for his patients. Haptic
interfaces are also used in rehabilitation robotics.
In ophthalmology, "haptic" refers to a supporting spring, two of which
hold an artificial lens within the lens capsule (after surgical removal of
cataracts).
A 'Virtual Haptic Back' (VHB) is being successfully integrated in the
curriculum of students at the Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine.
Research indicates that VHB is a significant teaching aid in palpatory diagnosis
(detection of medical problems via touch). The VHB simulates the contour and
compliance (reciprocal of stiffness) properties of human backs, which are
palpated with two haptic interfaces (Sensable Technologies, Phantom 3.0).
Reality-based modeling for surgical simulation consists of a continuous
cycle. In the figure given above, the surgeon receives visual and haptic (force
and tactile) feedback and interacts with the haptic interface to control the
surgical robot and instrument. The robot with instrument then operates on the
patient at the surgical site per the commands given by the surgeon. Visual and
force feedback is then obtained through endoscopic cameras and force sensors
that are located on the surgical tools and are displayed back to the surgeon.
7. c) Military Training in virtual environment.
From the earliest moments in the history of virtual reality (VR), the
United States military forces have been a driving factor in developing and
applying new VR technologies. Along with the entertainment industry, the
military is responsible for the most dramatic evolutionary leaps in the VR field.
Virtual environments work well in military applications. When well
designed, they provide the user with an accurate simulation of real events in a
safe, controlled environment. Specialized military training can be very
expensive, particularly for vehicle pilots. Some training procedures have an
element of danger when using real situations. While the initial development of
VR gear and software is expensive, in the long run it's much more cost effective
than putting soldiers into real vehicles or physically simulated situations. VR
technology also has other potential applications that can make military activities
safer.
Today, the military uses VR techniques not

only for training and safety enhancement, but also to

analyze military maneuvers and battlefield positions.
In the next section, we'll look at the various
simulators commonly used in military training. Out
of all the earliest VR technology applications,
military vehicle simulations have probably been the most successful. Simulators
use sophisticated computer models to replicate a vehicle's capabilities and
limitations within a stationary -- and safe -- computer station.
Possibly the most well-known of all the simulators in the military are the
flight simulators. The Air Force, Army and Navy all use flight simulators to
train pilots. Training missions may include how to fly in battle, how to recover
in an emergency, or how to coordinate air support with ground operations.
Although flight simulators may vary from one model to another, most of
them have a similar basic setup. The simulator sits on top of either an electronic
motion base or a hydraulic lift system that reacts to user input and events within
the simulation. As the pilot steers the aircraft, the module he sits in twists and
tilts, giving the user haptic feedback. The word "haptic" refers to the sense of
touch, so a haptic system is one that gives the user feedback he can feel. A
joystick with force-feedback is an example of a haptic device.
Some flight simulators include a completely enclosed module, while
others just have a series of computer monitors arranged to cover the pilot's field
of view. Ideally, the flight simulator will be designed so that when the pilot
looks around, he sees the same controls and layout as he would in a real aircraft.
Because one aircraft can have a very different cockpit layout than another, there
isn't a perfect simulator choice that can accurately represent every vehicle. Some
training centers invest in multiple simulators, while others sacrifice accuracy for
convenience and cost by sticking to one simulator model.
Ground Vehicle Simulators -Although not as high profile as flight
simulators, VR simulators for ground vehicles is an important part of the
military’s strategy. In fact, simulators are a key part of the Future Combat
System (FCS) -- the foundation of the armed forces' future. The FCS consists of
a networked battle command system and advanced vehicles and weapons
platforms. Computer scientists designed FCS simulators to link together in a
network, facilitating complex training missions involving multiple participants
acting in various roles.
The FCS simulators include three computer monitors and a pair of
joystick controllers attached to a console. The modules can simulate several
different ground vehicles, including non-line-of-sight mortar vehicles,
reconnaissance vehicles or an infantry carrier vehicle

The Army uses several specific devices to train soldiers to drive

specialized vehicles like tanks or the heavily-armored Stryker vehicle. Some of
these look like long-lost twins to flight simulators. They not only accurately
recreate the handling and feel of the vehicle they represent, but also can
replicate just about any environment you can imagine. Trainees can learn how
the real vehicle handles in treacherous weather conditions or difficult terrain.
Networked simulators allow users to participate in complex war games.
7. d) Telerobotics
In a telerobotic system, a human operator controls the movements of a
robot that is located some distance away. Some teleoperated robots are limited
to very simple tasks, such as aiming a camera and sending back visual images.
In a more sophisticated form of teleoperation known as telepresence, the human
operator has a sense of being located in the robot's environment. Haptics now
makes it possible to include touch cues in addition to audio and visual cues in
telepresence models. It won't be long before astronomers and planet scientists
actually hold and manipulate a Martian rock through an advanced hapticsenabled
telerobot, a high-touch version of the Mars Exploration Rover.
LIMITATIONS OF HAPTIC SYSTEMS
Limitations of haptic device systems have sometimes made applying the
force’s exact value as computed by force-rendering algorithms impossible.
Various issues contribute to limiting a haptic device’s capability to render a
desired force or, more often, desired impedance are given below.
1) Haptic interfaces can only exert forces with limited magnitude and not
equally well in all directions, thus rendering algorithms must ensure that no
output components saturate, as this would lead to erroneous or discontinuous
application of forces to the user. In addition, haptic devices aren’t ideal force
transducers.
2) An ideal haptic device would render zero impedance when simulating
movement in free space, and any finite impedance when simulating contact with
an object featuring such impedance characteristics. The friction, inertia, and
backlash present in most haptic devices prevent them from meeting this ideal.
3) A third issue is that haptic-rendering algorithms operate in discrete time
whereas users operate in continuous time, as Figure shown below illustrates.
While moving into and out of a virtual object, the sampled avatar position will
always lag behind the avatar’s actual continuous-time position. Thus, when
pressing on a virtual object, a user needs to perform less work than in reality.
And when the user releases, however, the virtual object returns more work than
its real-world counterpart would have returned. In other terms, touching a virtual
object extracts energy from it. This extra energy can cause an unstable response
from haptic devices.

4) Finally, haptic device position sensors have finite resolution. Consequently,

attempting to determine where and when contact occurs always results in a
quantization error. Although users might not easily perceive this error, it can
create stability problems.
All of these issues, well known to practitioners in the field, can limit a
haptic application’s realism. The first two issues usually depend more on the
device mechanics; the latter two depend on the digital nature of VR applications.

FUTURE VISION
As haptics moves beyond the buzzes and thumps of today’s video games,
technology will enable increasingly believable and complex physical interaction
with virtual or remote objects. Already haptically enabled commercial products
let designers sculpt digital clay figures to rapidly produce new product
geometry, museum goers feel previously inaccessible artifacts, and doctors train
for simple procedures without endangering patients.
Past technological advances that permitted recording, encoding, storage,
transmission, editing, and ultimately synthesis of images and sound profoundly
affected society. A wide range of human activities, including communication,
education, art, entertainment, commerce, and science, were forever changed
when we learned to capture, manipulate, and create sensory stimuli nearly
indistinguishable from reality. It’s not unreasonable to expect that future
advancements in haptics will have equally deep effects. Though the field is still
in its infancy, hints of vast, unexplored intellectual and commercial territory add
excitement and energy to a growing number of conferences, courses, product
releases, and invention efforts.
For the field to move beyond today’s state of the art, researchers must
surmount a number of commercial and technological barriers. Device and
software tool-oriented corporate efforts have provided the tools we need to step
out of the laboratory, yet we need new business models. For example, can we
create haptic content and authoring tools that will make the technology broadly
attractive?
Can the interface devices be made practical and inexpensive enough to
make them widely accessible? Once we move beyond single-point force-only
interactions with rigid objects, we should explore several technical and scientific
avenues. Multipoint, multi-hand, and multi-person interaction scenarios all offer
enticingly rich interactivity. Adding sub-modality stimulation such as tactile
(pressure distribution) display and vibration could add subtle and important
richness to the experience. Modeling compliant objects, such as for surgical
simulation and training, presents many challenging problems to enable realistic
deformations, arbitrary collisions, and topological changes caused by cutting
and joining actions.
Improved accuracy and richness in object modeling and haptic rendering
will require advances in our understanding of how to represent and render
psychophysically and cognitively germane attributes of objects, as well as
algorithms and perhaps specialty hardware (such as haptic or physics engines) to
perform real-time computations.
Development of multimodal workstations that provide haptic, visual, and
auditory engagement will offer opportunities for more integrated interactions.
We’re only beginning to understand the psychophysical and cognitive details
needed to enable successful multimodality interactions. For example, how do we
encode and render an object so there is a seamless consistency and congruence
across sensory modalities—that is, does it look like it feels? Are the object’s
densities, compliance, motion, and appearance familiar and unconsciously
consistent with context? Are sensory events predictable enough that we consider
objects to be persistent, and can we make correct inference about properties?
Hopefully we could get bright solutions for all the queries in the near future
itself.
CONCLUSION
Finally we shouldn’t forget that touch and physical interaction are among
the fundamental ways in which we come to understand our world and to effect
changes in it. This is true on a developmental as well as an evolutionary level.
For early primates to survive in a physical world, as Frank Wilson suggested, “a
new physics would eventually have to come into this their brain, a new way of
registering and representing the behavior of objects moving and changing under
the control of the hand. It is precisely such a representational system—a syntax
of cause and effect, of stories, and of experiments, each having a beginning, a
middle, and an end— that one finds at the deepest levels of the organization of
human language.”
Our efforts to communicate information by rendering how objects feel
through haptic technology, and the excitement in our pursuit, might reflect a
deeper desire to speak with an inner, physically based language that has yet to
be given a true voice.
BIBILIOGRAPHY
Haptic Rendering: Introductory Concepts-Kenneth Salisbury and
Francois Conti Stanford University. Federico Barbagli Stanford
University and University of Siena, Italy
Laboratory for Human and Machine Haptics: The Touch Lab-Dr.
Mandayam A. Srinivasan, Dr. S James Biggs, Dr. Manivannan
Muniyandi, Dr. David W. Schloerb, Dr. Lihua Zhou
https://haptics.lcsr.jhu.edu/Research/Tissue_Modeling_and_Simulati
on
http://74.125.153.132/search?
q=cache:7bpkVLHv4UcJ:science.howstuffworks.com/virtualmilitary.
htm/printable+haptics+in+virtual+military+training&cd=9&hl=en&
ct=clnk&gl=in&client=firefox-a
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1231041#abstract
http://www.psqh.com/julaug08/haptics.html
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/gadgets/other-gadgets/haptic
technology.html
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=29226&seq
www.technologyreview.com
www.wikipedia.org
www.4shared.com
www.blurtit.com
www.sesnable.com
www.immersion.com
www.informit.com
www.pdf-search-engine.com
www.google.com