Research Papers

A Control-Oriented Framework for Direct Impulse-Based Rendering of Haptic Contacts

[+] Author and Article Information
Arash Mohtat

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Centre for Intelligent Machines,
McGill University,
Montreal, QC H3A 0C3, Canada
e-mail: amohtat@cim.mcgill.ca

Colin Gallacher

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Centre for Intelligent Machines,
McGill University,
Montreal, QC H3A 0C3, Canada
e-mail: crgallac@cim.mcgill.ca

József Kövecses

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Centre for Intelligent Machines,
McGill University,
Montreal, QC H3A 0C3, Canada
e-mail: jozsef.kovecses@mcgill.ca

Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received August 15, 2016; final manuscript received August 13, 2017; published online November 8, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Evangelos Papadopoulos.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 140(3), 031002 (Nov 08, 2017) (10 pages) Paper No: DS-16-1398; doi: 10.1115/1.4037733 History: Received August 15, 2016; Revised August 13, 2017

In many haptic applications, producing a sharp feeling of impact is crucial for high-fidelity force feedback rendering of virtual objects (VOs). Although suitable for rendering collision-rich haptic interactions, impulse-based methods are rarely used in a pure form. Instead, they are combined with penalty-based elements in different forms such as virtual couplings (VCs) and hybridization. In this paper, we first propose the direct impulse-based paradigm for rendering haptic contacts using a new sampled-data interpretation of the impact problem. Then, we cast this interpretation into a systematic framework entitled the generalized contact controller (GCC). This enables us to implement different contact rendering methods as controllers and to improve them by appropriating a wide array of analysis and design tools developed in the control field. We specifically show how to apply position and velocity corrections to the purely impulse-based contact controller for enhancing its energy and sustained contact characteristics, and how to add an anti-windup compensator (AWC) for meeting actuation limits. These propositions are validated via simulation and experiments, as well as via human perception studies. Results show the promising aspects of the proposed impulse-based methods for generating a sharper unfiltered feeling of rigid-body contacts even at low sampling rates.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Lötstedt, P. , 1984, “ Numerical Simulation of Time-Dependent Contact and Friction Problems in Rigid Body Mechanics,” SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput., 5(2), pp. 370–393. [CrossRef]
Pfeiffer, F. , and Glocker, C. , 1996, Multibody Dynamics With Unilateral Contacts, Vol. 9, Wiley, Weinheim, Germany. [CrossRef]
Brogliato, B. , 1999, Nonsmooth Mechanics: Models, Dynamics, and Control, Springer-Verlag, London.
Baraff, D. , 1995, “ Interactive Simulation of Solid Rigid Bodies,” IEEE Comput. Graphics Appl., 15(3), pp. 63–75. [CrossRef]
Constantinescu, D. , Salcudean, S. , and Croft, E. , 2005, “ Haptic Rendering of Rigid Contacts Using Impulsive and Penalty Forces,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 21(3), pp. 309–323. [CrossRef]
Mohtat, A. , 2014, “ Fundamental Challenges in Haptics: Energy Consistency and High-Fidelity Contact Rendering,” Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. http://digitool.library.mcgill.ca/R/?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=130537&local_base=GEN01-MCG02
Brach, R. M. , 1991, Mechanical Impact Dynamics: Rigid Body Collisions, Wiley, New York.
Stronge, W. J. , 2000, Impact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. [CrossRef]
Chang, B. , and Colgate, J. E. , 1997, “ Real-Time Impulse-Based Simulation of Rigid Body Systems for Haptic Display,” ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exhibition, Dallas, TX, Nov. 16–21, pp. 145–152. http://ai2-s2-pdfs.s3.amazonaws.com/692d/b87d44ed003439108475102b6dfe27704341.pdf
Colgate, J. , Stanley, M. , and Brown, J. , 1995, “ Issues in the Haptic Display of Tool Use,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots Systems (IROS), Pittsburgh, PA, Aug. 5–9, pp. 140–145.
Brown, J. , and Colgate, J. , 1998, “ Minimum Mass for Haptic Display Simulations,” ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Division, Anaheim, CA, Nov. 15–20, pp. 249–256.
Mirtich, B. , and Canny, J. , 1994, “ Impulse-Based Dynamic Simulation,” Workshop on Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics (WAFR), San Francisco, CA, pp. 407–418. https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~jfc/papers/94/ibds94.pdf
Ellis, R. , Sarkar, N. , and Jenkins, M. , 1997, “ Numerical Methods for the Force Reflection of Contact,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 119(4), pp. 768–774. [CrossRef]
Mohtat, A. , and Kövecses, J. , 2015, “ High-Fidelity Rendering of Contact With Virtual Objects,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 137(7), p. 071009. [CrossRef]
Mohtat, A. , and Kövecses, J. , 2015, “ Direct Impulse-Based Rendering in Force Feedback Haptics,” IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC), Evanston, IL, June 22–26, pp. 313–320.
Gillespie, R. , and Cutkosky, M. , 1996, “ Stable User-Specific Haptic Rendering of the Virtual Wall,” ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exhibition, Atlanta, GA, Nov. 17–22, pp. 397–406. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228775906_Stable_user-specific_haptic_rendering_of_the_virtual_wall
Wang, Q. , Chen, H. , Wu, W. , Qin, J. , and Heng, P. , 2012, “ Impulse-Based Rendering Methods for Haptic Simulation of Bone-Burring,” IEEE Trans. Haptics, 5(4), pp. 344–354. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jarman, R. , Janko, B. , and Harwin, W. S. , 2015, “ Current Over-Stressing Small DC Motors to Evaluate Performance Limits of Electromechanical Actuators for Haptic Applications,” IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC), Evanston, IL, June 22–26, pp. 171–176.
Vander Poorten, E. B. , and Yokokohji, Y. , 2007, “ Feeling a Rigid Virtual World Through an Impulsive Haptic Display,” Adv. Rob., 21(12), pp. 1411–1440. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1163/156855307781746115
Kim, H. W. , Lee, J. H. , Yi, B.-J. , and Suh, I. H. , 2004, “ Singularity-Free Load Distribution Algorithms for a 6 DOF Parallel Haptic Device,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), New Orleans, LA, Apr. 26-May 1, pp. 298–304.
Saafi, H. , Laribi, M. A. , and Zeghloul, S. , 2015, “ Redundantly Actuated 3-RRR Spherical Parallel Manipulator Used as a Haptic Device: Improving Dexterity and Eliminating Singularity,” Robotica, 33(5), pp. 1113–1130. [CrossRef]
Janabi-Sharifi, F. , Hayward, V. , and Chen, C. , 2000, “ Discrete-Time Adaptive Windowing for Velocity Estimation,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 8(6), pp. 1003–1009. [CrossRef]
Naghshineh, M. , and Keshmiri, M. , 2004, “ Actuator Saturation Avoidance in Overactuated Systems,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Sendai, Japan, Sept. 28-Oct. 2, pp. 3613–3618.
Vermillion, C. , Sun, J. , and Butts, K. , 2007, “ Model Predictive Control Allocation for Overactuated Systems-Stability and Performance,” 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), New Orleans, LA, Dec. 12–14.
Lawrence, D. A. , 1993, “ Stability and Transparency in Bilateral Teleoperation,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 9(5), pp. 624–637. [CrossRef]
Chawda, V. , and O'Malley, M. , 2012, “ On the Performance of Passivity-Based Control of Haptic Displays Employing Levant's Differentiator for Velocity Estimation,” IEEE Haptics Symposium, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Mar. 4–7, pp. 415–419.
Ghaffari-Toiserkan, K. , Kovecses, J. , and Karam, P. , 2011, “ Adaptive Frequency Differentiation: An Approach to Increase the Transparency and Performance of Haptic Devices,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Shanghai, China, May 9–13, pp. 1360–1367.
Cuijpers, P. J. L. , Reniers, M. A. , and Engels, A. G. , 2001, “ Beyond Zeno Behaviour,” Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, Technical Report No. 01/04. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=
Herrmann, G. , Turner, M. C. , and Postlethwaite, I. , 2006, “ Discrete-Time and Sampled-Data Anti-Windup Synthesis: Stability and Performance,” Int. J. Syst. Sci., 37(2), pp. 91–113. [CrossRef]
Leu, M. C. , Yang, S. , and Meyer, A. U. , 1993, “ Anti-Windup Control of Second-Order Plants With Saturation Nonlinearity,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 115(4), pp. 715–720. [CrossRef]
Moreno, J. , Baños, A. , and Berenguel, M. , 2010, “ A QFT Framework for Antiwindup Control Systems Design,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 132(2), p. 021012. [CrossRef]
Hwang, J. D. , Williams, M. D. , and Niemeyer, G. , 2004, “ Toward Event-Based Haptics: Rendering Contact Using Open-Loop Force Pulses,” 12th International Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (HAPTICs), Chicago, IL, Mar. 27–28, pp. 24–31.
Lawrence, D. A. , Pao, L. Y. , Dougherty, A. M. , Salada, M. A. , and Pavlou, Y. , 2000, “ Rate-Hardness: A New Performance Metric for Haptic Interfaces,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 16(4), pp. 357–371. [CrossRef]
Dominjon, L. , Lecuyer, A. , Burkhardt, J.-M. , Andrade-Barroso, G. , and Richir, S. , 2005, “ The ‘Bubble’ Technique: Interacting With Large Virtual Environments Using Haptic Devices With Limited Workspace,” First Joint Eurohaptics Conference and World Haptics Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (WHC), Pisa, Italy, Mar. 18–20, pp. 639–640.
Gallacher, C. , Harrison, J. , and Kövecses, J. , 2015, “ Characterizing Device Dynamics for Haptic Manipulation and Navigation,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Seattle, WA, May 26–30, pp. 3689–3695.
Mohtat, A. , Gallacher, C. , and Kovecses, J. , 2014, “ High-Fidelity Contact Rendering: Feel Realistic Forces From Virtual Objects!,” IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS), Houston, TX, Feb. 23–26, p. 1.
Mohtat, A. , Gallacher, C. , and Kovecses, J. , 2014, “ Developing Immersive Virtual Worlds Through Realistic Contact Rendering and Improved Transparency,” 9th International Conference (EuroHaptics), Versailles, France, June 24–26, pp. 472–474.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Direct versus indirect rendering: (a) The device receives the impulsive force directly when it contacts the VO and (b) the impulse developed between the VO and the virtual tool mass is indirectly fed to the device via the VC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Implementation of the impact problem: (a) for virtual collisions in discrete time and (b) for haptic collisions in sampled-data settings

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Virtual versus physical contacts for the elastic bouncing balls simulation: the virtual collisions exhibit a steady behavior with a constant error in kinetic energy and penetration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Haptic versus physical contacts for the elastic racket-ball simulation: the haptic collisions exhibit a dissipative behavior with a decaying total kinetic energy and a growing penetration drift

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Sequence of forces rendered due to the haptic collisions for the elastic racket-ball simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The interconnection of the EICC with the human-device system and the VE integrator wE

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Simulation of the racket-ball (εdes = 1 at 100 Hz) using a position-enhanced (10) versus a position and velocity-EICC (11)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Simulation of the racket-ball (εdes = 0.5 at 100 Hz) using the EICC (11) versus a BICC (8): (a) rendered force and (b) penetration coordinate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Simulation of the racket-ball (εdes = 1 and fmax = 5 N at 100 Hz) using the BICC (8) + the AWC (12) with k1 = 1 and the EICC (11) + the AWC (12) with k1 = 1 and k1 = 1.11, i.e., with simple and modified impulse distribution. (a) Rendered force and (b) penetration coordinate p = xD − xE. Note that a negative p means the ball and racket are apart, while a positive p shows interpenetration. Hence, “EICC + AWC (k1 = 1)” settles to resting contact with microcollisions, which should not be reached at εdes = 1, while “EICC + AWC(k1 = 1.11)” increases slightly the interpenetration but preserves a steady amount of the ball bouncing on the racket.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

(a) Generic structure of an AWC [29] and (b) our proposed AWC for impulse distribution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

(a) The two degrees-of-freedom (2DOF) haptic device and (b) the racket-ball experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Experimental results for a sequence of elastic collisions rendered via the EICC (11) versus an ε-tuned impulse controller [15] at 50 Hz

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Experimental results for a sequence of inelastic collisions settling to sustained contact rendered via the EICC (11) versus the HCC [15] at 50 Hz

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Screenshot of the GUI for the experimental study, showing the animation on the left, and the controls and questionnaire on the right

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Experimental data and predicted trends for the perception quality ratings (1-“poor” to 7-“excellent”) given by the participants to the PCC and the EICC across different sampling rates



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In