A silicon-based tactile sensor for finger-mounted applications

Beebe, David J.; Denton, Denice D.; Radwin, Robert G.; Webster, John G.

doi:10.1109/10.661263

Cited by 86 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The amount of improvement observed in this simulated task may or may not provide sufficient motivation to develop sensory feedback sensors and systems for clinically deployed neuroprostheses (JENSEN et al, 1991;CASTRO and CLIQUET, 1997;BEEBE et al, 1998; for uses of neural sensors, see also HOFFER et al, 1996). However, there are plausible circumstances that might increase the utility of such feedback.…”

Section: Plots Of Failure Identification Rates (Firs) As a Function mentioning

confidence: 96%

Effectiveness of supplemental grasp-force feedback in the presence of vision

Zafar

Doren

2000

Med. Biol. Eng. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have shown that supplemental grasp-force feedback can improve control for users of a hand prosthesis or neuroprosthesis under conditions where vision provides little force information. Visual cues of force are widely available in everyday use, however, and may obviate the utility of supplemental force information. The purpose of the present study was to use a video-based hand neuroprosthesis simulator to determine whether grasp-force feedback can improve control in the presence of realistic visual information. Seven able-bodied subjects used the simulator to complete a simple grasp-and-hold task while controlling and viewing pre-recorded, digitised video clips of a neuroprosthesis user's hand squeezing a compliant object. The task was performed with and without supplemental force feedback presented via electrocutaneous stimulation. Subjects had to achieve and maintain the (simulated) grasp force within a target window of variable size (+/- 10-40% of full scale). Force feedback improved the success rate significantly for all target window sizes (8-16%, on average), and improved the success rate at all window sizes for six of the seven subjects. Overall, the improvement was equivalent functionally to a 35% increase in the window size. Feedback also allowed subjects to identify the direction of grasp errors more accurately, on average by 10-15%. In some cases, feedback improved the failure identification rate even if success rates were unchanged. It is thus concluded that supplemental grasp-force feedback can improve grasp control even with access to rich visual information from the hand and object.

show abstract

Section: Plots Of Failure Identification Rates (Firs) As a Function mentioning

confidence: 96%

Effectiveness of supplemental grasp-force feedback in the presence of vision

Zafar

Doren

2000

Med. Biol. Eng. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, there is a minimum thickness of the diaphragm (relevant to the diaphragm area) required by the maximum load. Some diaphragm protection technique such as bottom-up protection was used in previous work [5]. All these geometric sizes and relevant positions, if going down very small, like in the scale of submicrometer, will be limited by the fabrication tolerances.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of a silicon-based shear-force sensor on human subjects

Wang¹,

Beebe

2002

IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-A silicon sensor is developed and its ability to measure both compressive and shear forces at the skin-object interface is characterized. The sensor is designed based on the piezoresistive effect and fabricated using integrated circuit and microelectromechanical systems technologies. The sensor utilizes a mesa structure that leads to asymmetric diaphragm deformations in response to nonnormal loading. Four independent ion-implanted piezoresistors are used to detect the stresses induced in diaphragm and resolve both the compressive-and shear-force components. The sensor is calibrated on human subjects over a range of applied force (5-to 40-N shear force at increments of 1.25 N; 0-to 30-N compressive force). Force measurement via a tracking experiment is evaluated at four shear (9, 18, 25, and 35 N) and three compressive (7, 15, and 26 N) force levels. The sensor has good repeatability (SD = 1.7 N) with an average error of 12.1%.

show abstract

“…A haptic feedback system consists of several components. First, the prosthetic fingers can be fitted with sensors to provide tactile information to amputees (Beebe et al, 1998;Tanaka et al, 2007). The sensors' signals are then converted to voltage levels and input to the haptic device, which applies feedback to a healthy area of the user's skin (e.g., back of the neck, upper arm).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Exteroceptive Feedback of Normal Stress, Skin Stretch, and Vibrotactile Stimulation for Restitution of Static Events

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the effectiveness of three types of haptic feedback: normal stress, tangential force, and vibrotactile stimulation. Modern prosthetic limbs currently available on the market do not provide a wide range of sensory information to amputees, forcing amputees to mainly rely on visual attention when manipulating objects. We aim to develop a haptic system that can convey information to the central nervous system (CNS) through haptic feedback. To this end, we aim to find out which type of feedback performs best under static conditions, so that it can be used to restore a sense of grasping force to amputees. We tested the three main stimulation methods by inputting a series of five force magnitudes to each haptic device, so that the device applied the corresponding feedback to the participants' finger pads. The participants then pressed on a force sensor, with the goal of applying the same level of force to a force sensor as they believed the haptic device had initially conveyed to them via their finger pads. While the subjects pressed on the force sensor, the haptic device applied a level of feedback to their forearms that corresponded to the pressure they were applying to the sensor. These tests provided fifteen numerical data per subject and a total of 180 trials for all twelve subjects. The end results indicate that even though all the stimulation methods provided a sufficient level of feedback, normal stress seems more effective than either tangential force or vibrotactile stimulation, at conveying the sense of pressure to the finger pad.

show abstract

A silicon-based tactile sensor for finger-mounted applications

Cited by 86 publications

References 27 publications

Effectiveness of supplemental grasp-force feedback in the presence of vision

Effectiveness of supplemental grasp-force feedback in the presence of vision

Characterization of a silicon-based shear-force sensor on human subjects

Comparing the Exteroceptive Feedback of Normal Stress, Skin Stretch, and Vibrotactile Stimulation for Restitution of Static Events

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About