TY - JOUR
T1 - Augmented reality-based telepresence in a robotic manipulation task
T2 - An experimental evaluation
AU - de Boer, Thomas A.B.
AU - de Winter, Joost C.F.
AU - Eisma, Yke Bauke
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - A spectrum of control methods in human–robot interaction was investigated, ranging from direct control to telepresence with a virtual representation of the robot arm. A total of 24 participants used a setup that included a Franka Emika Panda robot arm, Varjo XR-3 head-mounted display, and Leap Motion Controller. Participants performed a box-and-block task using the bare hand (A), and under five gesture-controlled robotic operation methods: direct sight (B), sight via video-feedthrough (C), in a 3D telepresence environment with (D) and without (E) virtual representation of the robot arm, and using a 2D video feed (F). The number of grabbing attempts did not differ significantly between conditions, but local operation (B & C) yielded more transferred blocks than teleoperation (D–F). Teleoperation using a 3D presentation was advantageous compared to teleoperation using a 2D video feed, as demonstrated by lower peak forces and smaller range in gripper heights in conditions D and E compared to condition F, a finding supported by analyses of the head movement activity. Finally, the bare hand yielded the best performance and subjective ratings. In summary, teleoperation using a 3D presentation provided a smoother interaction than teleoperation with a 2D video feed. However, direct human interaction remains a benchmark yet to surpass.
AB - A spectrum of control methods in human–robot interaction was investigated, ranging from direct control to telepresence with a virtual representation of the robot arm. A total of 24 participants used a setup that included a Franka Emika Panda robot arm, Varjo XR-3 head-mounted display, and Leap Motion Controller. Participants performed a box-and-block task using the bare hand (A), and under five gesture-controlled robotic operation methods: direct sight (B), sight via video-feedthrough (C), in a 3D telepresence environment with (D) and without (E) virtual representation of the robot arm, and using a 2D video feed (F). The number of grabbing attempts did not differ significantly between conditions, but local operation (B & C) yielded more transferred blocks than teleoperation (D–F). Teleoperation using a 3D presentation was advantageous compared to teleoperation using a 2D video feed, as demonstrated by lower peak forces and smaller range in gripper heights in conditions D and E compared to condition F, a finding supported by analyses of the head movement activity. Finally, the bare hand yielded the best performance and subjective ratings. In summary, teleoperation using a 3D presentation provided a smoother interaction than teleoperation with a 2D video feed. However, direct human interaction remains a benchmark yet to surpass.
KW - data analysis
KW - human-robot interaction
KW - robot dynamics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85174600839&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1049/cim2.12085
DO - 10.1049/cim2.12085
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85174600839
SN - 2516-8398
VL - 5
JO - IET Collaborative Intelligent Manufacturing
JF - IET Collaborative Intelligent Manufacturing
IS - 4
M1 - e12085
ER -