Haptic interfaces
in [Embedded]
|
From: Martin Riddle on 1 Mar 2010 20:00 "Vladimir Vassilevsky" <nospam(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message news:3oqdnfFLYf3ajBHWnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > > > D Yuniskis wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> What makes a haptic interface "good"? bad? *Exceptional*? >> >> What would you nominate as the "best" haptic interface? >> >> What (electronic) device would you nominate as having the >> best haptic interface? >> >> And, of course, "why", in each case. > > The good interface is a big green square button with inscription: > "I WANT EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW !" > > The best interface is a big green round button without any > inscriptions. > > VLV Reminds me of when we changed the DELETE button to say GOD on the new born christians workstation. Cheers
From: rickman on 1 Mar 2010 20:26 On Mar 1, 2:47 pm, Tim Wescott <t...(a)seemywebsite.now> wrote: > D Yuniskis wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > > Tim Wescott wrote: > >> Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote: > >>> Op Mon, 01 Mar 2010 04:44:29 +0100 schreef D Yuniskis > >>> <not.going.to...(a)seen.com>: > >>>> What makes a haptic interface "good"? > > >>> Dunno. > > >>>> bad? > > >>> When it is painful. ;) > > >> Actually, if it were on the primary controls of a plane, something > >> that gets painful when there's a good chance of damaging your > >> life-preserving airframe 10000 feet above the ground may not be a bad > >> thing. Particularly if there's enough pain to make you think, but not > >> enough to force you to fly into Mt. St. Helens on a particularly bad day. > > > Wow! That's a great idea! I.e., not just "feedback" but > > "particularly unpleasant feedback" that really works to > > dissuade you from doing something that you shouldn't. > > > I've designed "big knobs" with force feedback (to simulate > > the "mechanisms" you are influencing with your "adjustments") > > but those just gave you subtle reinforcement that you are > > "doing what you expect to be doing" (e.g., if the knob > > is supposed to cause something to be elevated, then it > > is harder to turn in the "up" direction than the "down" > > direction). > > > But, that raises the issue of "what happens if you (the > > device) screw up" and your "penalty pain" makes it > > hard for a user to "do what is right"? (think of this > > in the example you cite below; I've heard avionic > > controls are far from "perfect" :> ) > > That's why I was calling out a level of discomfort that could be > overcome with enough adrenalin. To pull an example from real life, if > you're out jogging and you pull a muscle you should slow down and walk > -- but if you're getting chased by a dozen toughs and you pull a muscle, > you should run like hell anyway! > > I wouldn't put the discomfort level up to 'painful' unless it really was > a life-threatening problem. But fly-by-wire systems already have 'stick > shakers' to warn the pilots that they're pushing the envelope of safety. And yet, pilots still fly perfectly good airplanes into the ground for no other reason than they pulled up too hard on that stick as it shook their hands off! Rick
From: Paul Hovnanian P.E. on 1 Mar 2010 21:08 Jack wrote: > > On 1 Mar, 11:23, "Tim Williams" <tmoran...(a)charter.net> wrote: > > Optimal throughput: direct connection to the motor cortex (sensor implanted > > soon after birth, to maximize training time). ;-) > > Like Borg implants :) I guess that makes 7 of 9 the 'best' haptic interface. -- Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul(a)Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl. -- Etaoin Shrdlu
From: Paul Hovnanian P.E. on 1 Mar 2010 21:23 Tim Wescott wrote: > > Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote: > > Op Mon, 01 Mar 2010 04:44:29 +0100 schreef D Yuniskis > > <not.going.to.be(a)seen.com>: > >> What makes a haptic interface "good"? > > > > Dunno. > > > >> bad? > > > > When it is painful. ;) > > Actually, if it were on the primary controls of a plane, something that > gets painful when there's a good chance of damaging your life-preserving > airframe 10000 feet above the ground may not be a bad thing. > Particularly if there's enough pain to make you think, but not enough to > force you to fly into Mt. St. Helens on a particularly bad day. This might not be the best approach. The 'best' haptic interface would have some resemblance to the physical system's behavior. Stick shakers on airplanes are intended to resemble the control surfaces shaking when it approaches stall (which one can feel in small aircraft). I was working on a remote manipulator system for high voltage transmission line maintenance. Perhaps a small shock to the operator when they grabbed the wrong wire might have been appropriate. But they would probably jump and drop a live 500 kV line on the ground. So not a good idea. -- Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul(a)Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Disclaimer - These opiini^H^H damn! ^H^H ^Q ^[ .... :w :q :wq :wq! ^d exit X Q ^C ^? :quitbye CtrlAltDel ~~q :~q logout save/quit :!QUIT ^[zz ^[ZZZZZZ ^H man vi ^@ ^L ^[c ^# ^E ^X ^I ^T ? help helpquit ^D man quit ^C ^c ?Quit ?q CtrlShftDel "Hey, what does this button d..."
From: Tim Williams on 1 Mar 2010 23:21
"Paul Hovnanian P.E." <Paul(a)Hovnanian.com> wrote in message news:4B8C7325.E30E526A(a)Hovnanian.com... >> Like Borg implants :) > > I guess that makes 7 of 9 the 'best' haptic interface. I'd _love_ to interface with her face. Tim -- Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk. Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms |