Roughness of simulated surfaces examined with a haptic tool: effects of spatial period, friction, and resistance amplitude
Tóm tắt
A specifically designed force-feedback device accurately simulated textures consisting of lateral forces opposing motion, simulating friction. The textures were either periodic trapezoidal forces, or sinusoidal forces spaced at various intervals from 1.5 mm to 8.5 mm. In each of two experiments, 10 subjects interacted with the virtual surfaces using the index finger placed on a mobile plate that produced the forces. The subjects selected their own speed and contact force for exploring the test surface. The apparatus returned force fields as a function of both the finger position and the force normal to the skin allowing full control over the tangential interaction force. In Experiment #1, subjects used an integer, numerical scale of their own choosing to rate the roughness of eight identical, varyingly spaced force ramps superimposed on a background resistance. The results indicated that subjective roughness was significantly, but negatively, correlated (mean r = −0.84) with the spatial period of the resistances for all subjects. In a second experiment, subjects evaluated the roughness of 80 different sinusoidal modulated force fields, which included 4 levels of resistance amplitude, 4 levels of baseline friction, and 5 spatial periods. Multiple regression was used to determine the relationship between friction, tangential force amplitude, and spatial period to roughness. Together, friction and tangential force amplitude produced a combined correlation of 0.70 with subjective roughness. The addition of spatial period only increased the multiple regression correlation to 0.71. The correlation between roughness estimates and the rate of change in tangential force was 0.72 in Experiment #1 and 0.57 in Experiment #2. The results suggest that the sensation of roughness is strongly influenced by friction and tangential force amplitude, whereas the spatial period of simulated texture alone makes a negligible contribution to the sensation of roughness.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Bensmaia SJ, Craig JC, Johnson KO (2006) Temporal factors in tactile spatial acuity: evidence for RA interference in fine spatial processing. J Neurophysiol 95:1783–1791
Blake DT, Johnson KO, Hsiao SS (1997) Monkey cutaneous SAI and RA responses to raised and depressed scanned patterns: effects of width, height, orientation, and a raised surround. J Neurophysiol 78:2503–2517
Buchholz B, Frederick LJ, Armstrong TJ (1988) An investigation of palmer skin friction and the effects of materials, pinch force and moisture. Ergonomics 31:317–325
Campion G, Gosline AHC, Hayward V (2008) Does judgement of haptic virtual texture roughness scale monotonically with lateral force modulation? In: Proceedings eurohaptics, lecture notes in computer science. Springer, pp 718–723
Cascio CJ, Sathian K (2001) Temporal cues contribute to tactile perception of roughness. J Neurosci 21:5289–5296
Connor CE, Johnson KO (1992) Neural coding of tactile texture: comparison of spatial and temporal mechanisms for roughness perception. J Neurosci 12:3414–3426
Connor CE, Hsiao SS, Phillips JR, Johnson KO (1990) Tactile roughness: neural codes that account for psychophysical magnitude estimates. J Neurosci 10:3823–3836
Depeault A, Meftah E, Chapman CE (2008) Tactile speed scaling: contributions of time and space. J Neurophysiol 99:1422–1434
Goodwin AW, John KT, Sathian K, Darian-Smith I (1989) Spatial and temporal factors determining afferent fiber responses to a grating moving sinusoidally over the monkey’s fingerpad. J Neurosci 9:1280–1293
Hollins M, Risner SR (1998) The duplex theory of tactile texture perception. In: Grondin S, Lacouture Y (eds) Fechner Day 98. Proceedings of the fourteenth annual meeting of the International Society for Psychophysics. International Society for Psychophysics, pp 115–120
Hollins M, Risner SR (2000) Evidence for the duplex theory of tactile texture perception. Percept Psychophys 62:695–705
Hollins M, Seeger A, Pelli G, Taylor R (2004) Haptic perception of virtual surfaces: scaling subjective qualities and interstimulus differences. Perception 33:1001–1019
Hollins M, Lorenz F, Seeger A, Taylor R (2005) Factors contributing to the integration of textural qualities: evidence from virtual surfaces. Somatosens Motor Res 22:193–206
Hollins M, Lorenz F, Harper D (2006) Somatosensory coding of roughness: the effect of texture adaptation in direct and indirect touch. J Neurosci 26:5582–5588
Klatzky RL, Lederman SJ (1999) Tactile roughness perception with a rigid link interposed between skin and surface. Percept Psychophys 61:591–607
Klatzky RL, Lederman SJ (2006) The perceived roughness of resistive virtual textures. I. Rendering by a force-feedback mouse. ACM Trans Appl Percept 3:1–14
Klatzky RL, Lederman SJ, Swenden RH (2003) Feeling textures through a probe: effects of surface geometry and exploratory factors. Percept Psychophys 65:613–631
Kornbrot D, Penn P, Petrie H, Furner S, Hardwick A (2008) Roughness perception in haptic virtual reality for sighted and blind people. Percept Psychophys 69:502–512
Lederman SJ (1974) Tactile roughness of grooved surfaces: the touching process and effects of macro- and microsurface structure. Percept Psychophys 16:385–395
Lederman SJ, Taylor MM (1972) Fingertip force, surface geometry and the perception of roughness by active touch. Percept Psychophys 12:401–408
Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL, Hamilton CL, Ramsey GI (1999) Perceiving surface roughnessvia a rigid probe: Effects of exploration speed and mode of touch. Electron J Haptics Res 1:1–20
Meftah EM, Belingard L, Chapman CE (2000) Relative effects of the spatial and temporal characteristics of scanned surfaces on human perception of tactile roughness using passive touch. Exp Brain Res 132:351–361
Minsky M, Lederman S (1996) Simulated haptic textures. In: Proceedings of the ASME Dynamic systems and Control Division, DSC vol 58, pp 421–426
Nakazawa N, Ikeura R, Inooka H (2000) Characteristics of human fingertips in the shearing direction. Biol Cybern 82:207–214
Paré M, Smith AM, Rice FL (2002) Distribution and terminal arborizations of cutaneous mechanoreceptors in the glabrous finger pads of the monkey. J Comp Neurol 445:347–359
Paré M, Behets C, Cornu O (2003) Paucity of presumed Ruffini Corpuscles in the index fingerpad of humans. J Comp Neurol 356:260–266
Sathian K, Goodwin AW, John KT, Darian-Smith I (1989) Perceived roughness of a grating: correlation with responses of mechanoreceptive afferents innervating the monkey’s fingerpad. J Neurosci 9:1273–1279
Smith AM, Scott SH (1996) The subjective scaling of smooth surface friction. J Neurophysiol 75:1957–1962
Smith AM, Chapman CE, Deslandes M, Langlais J-S, Thibodeau M-P (2002) Role of friction and tangential forces in the subjective scaling of tactile roughness. Exp Brain Res 144:211–223
Taylor MM, Lederman SJ (1975) Tactile roughness of grooved surfaces: a model and the effect of friction. Percept Psychophys 17:23–36
Wall SA, Harwin WS (2000) Interaction of visual and haptic information in simulated environments: texture perception. In: Proceedings of the 1st workshop on haptic human computer interaction, pp 30–44
Yoshioka T, Gibb B, Dorsch AK, Hsiao SS, Johnson KO (2001) Neural coding mechanisms underlying perceived roughness of finely textured surfaces. J Neurosci 21:6905–6916
Yoshioka T, Bensmaia SJ, Craig JC, Hsiao SS (2007) Texture perception through direct and indirect touch: an analysis of perceptual space for tactile textures in two modes of exploration. Somatosens Motor Res 24:53–70