Telelocomotion—Remotely Operated Legged Robots
Source abstract
Abstract
Teleoperated systems enable human control of robotic proxies and are particularly amenable to inaccessible environments unsuitable for autonomy. Examples include emergency response, underwater manipulation, and robot assisted minimally invasive surgery. However, teleoperation architectures have been predominantly employed in manipulation tasks, and are thus only useful when the robot is within reach of the task. This work introduces the idea of extending teleoperation to enable online human remote control of legged robots, or telelocomotion, to traverse challenging terrain. Traversing unpredictable terrain remains a challenge for autonomous legged locomotion, as demonstrated by robots commonly falling in high-profile robotics contests. Telelocomotion can reduce the risk of mission failure by leveraging the high-level understanding of human operators to command in real-time the gaits of legged robots. In this work, a haptic telelocomotion interface was developed. Two within-user studies validate the proof-of-concept interface: (i) The first compared basic interfaces with the haptic interface for control of a simulated hexapedal robot in various levels of traversal complexity; (ii) the second presents a physical implementation and investigated the efficacy of the proposed haptic virtual fixtures. Results are promising to the use of haptic feedback for telelocomotion for complex traversal tasks.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Teleoperation and Haptic Systems · Robotic Locomotion and Control · Hand Gesture Recognition Systems
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Engineering, Trinity College, 300 Summit Street, Hartford, CT 06106, USA
Funding
Connecticut Space Grant Consortium
References (62)
Show source-provided references
1. Bilateral teleoperation of groups of mobile robots with time-varying topology10.1109/TRO.2012.2196304 ↗
2. De Barros, P.G., and Linderman, R.W. (2009). A Survey of User Interfaces for Robot Teleoperation. WPI Digital Commons.
3. Niemeyer, G., Preusche, C., Stramigioli, S., and Lee, D. (2016). Telerobotics. Springer Handbook of Robotics, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-32552-1_43 ↗
4. Mortimer, M., Horan, B., and Seyedmahmoudian, M. (2017). Building a Relationship between Robot Characteristics and Teleoperation User Interfaces. Sensors, 17.10.3390/s17030587 ↗
5. Evaluation of haptic guidance virtual fixtures and 3D visualization methods in telemanipulation—A user study10.1007/s11370-019-00283-w ↗
6. Haptic feedback in robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery10.1097/MOU.0b013e32831a478c ↗
7. Bimbo, J., Pacchierotti, C., Aggravi, M., Tsagarakis, N., and Prattichizzo, D. (2017, January 24–28). Teleoperation in cluttered environments using wearable haptic feedback. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1109/IROS.2017.8206180 ↗
8. Leeper, A., Hsiao, K., Ciocarlie, M., Sucan, I., and Salisbury, K. (2013, January 15–17). Methods for collision-free arm teleoperation in clutter using constraints from 3d sensor data. Proceedings of the 2013 13th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1109/HUMANOIDS.2013.7030023 ↗
9. Haptic feedback and visual servoing of teleoperated unmanned aerial vehicle for obstacle awareness and avoidance10.1177/1729881417716365 ↗
10. Haptic and visual augmented reality interface for programming welding robots10.1007/s40436-017-0184-7 ↗
11. Dexrov: Dexterous undersea inspection and maintenance in presence of communication latencies10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.06.036 ↗
12. Rydén, F., Stewart, A., and Chizeck, H.J. (2013, January 23–27). Advanced telerobotic underwater manipulation using virtual fixtures and haptic rendering. Proceedings of the 2013 OCEANS-San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
13. Okamura, A.M., Verner, L.N., Reiley, C., and Mahvash, M. (2010). Haptics for robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery. Robotics Research, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-14743-2_30 ↗
14. Su, Y.H., Huang, I., Huang, K., and Hannaford, B. (2018, January 1–5). Comparison of 3d surgical tool segmentation procedures with robot kinematics prior. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Madrid, Spain.10.1109/IROS.2018.8594428 ↗
15. Zhang, B., Staab, H., Wang, J., Zhang, G.Q., Boca, R., Choi, S., Fuhlbrigge, T.A., Kock, S., and Chen, H. (2015). Teleoperated Industrial Robots. (9,132,551), U.S. Patent.
16. Peer, A., Stanczyk, B., Unterhinninghofen, U., and Buss, M. (2006, January 9–15). Tele-assembly in Wide Remote Environments. Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Beijing, China.10.1109/IROS.2006.282207 ↗
17. Haptics in robot-assisted surgery: Challenges and benefits10.1109/RBME.2016.2538080 ↗
18. Ju, Z., Yang, C., Li, Z., Cheng, L., and Ma, H. (2014, January 28–29). Teleoperation of humanoid baxter robot using haptic feedback. Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Multisensor Fusion and Information Integration for Intelligent Systems (MFI), Beijing, China.10.1109/MFI.2014.6997721 ↗
19. Costes, A., Danieau, F., Argelaguet-Sanz, F., Lécuyer, A., and Guillotel, P. (2018). KinesTouch: 3D Force-Feedback Rendering for Tactile Surfaces. International Conference on Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-01790-3_6 ↗
20. Su, Y.H., Huang, K., and Hannaford, B. (2018, January 1–3). Real-time vision-based surgical tool segmentation with robot kinematics prior. Proceedings of the 2018 International Symposium on Medical Robotics (ISMR), Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1109/ISMR.2018.8333305 ↗
21. Huang, K., Su, Y.H., Khalil, M., Melesse, D., and Mitra, R. (2019, January 3–5). Sampling of 3DOF Robot Manipulator Joint-Limits for Haptic Feedback. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 4th International Conference on Advanced Robotics and Mechatronics (ICARM), Toyonaka, Japan.10.1109/ICARM.2019.8834240 ↗
22. Huang, K., Lancaster, P., Smith, J.R., and Chizeck, H.J. (2018, January 12–15). Visionless Tele-Exploration of 3D Moving Objects. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.10.1109/ROBIO.2018.8665228 ↗
23. Huang, K., Jiang, L.T., Smith, J.R., and Chizeck, H.J. (2015, January 26–30). Sensor-aided teleoperated grasping of transparent objects. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Seattle, WA, USA.10.1109/ICRA.2015.7139887 ↗
24. A new constraint-based virtual environment for haptic assembly training10.1016/j.advengsoft.2016.03.004 ↗
25. Diolaiti, N., and Melchiorri, C. (2002, January 17–18). Teleoperation of a mobile robot through haptic feedback. Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop HAVE Haptic Virtual Environments and Their, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
26. Cislo, N. (2000). Telepresence and Intervention Robotics, Laboratoire de Robotique de Paris. Technical report.
27. Miyasato, T. (2000, January 25–26). Tele-nursing system with realistic sensations using virtual locomotion interface. Proceedings of the 6th ERCIM Workshop “User Interfaces for All”, Florence, Italy.
28. Klamt, T., Rodriguez, D., Schwarz, M., Lenz, C., Pavlichenko, D., Droeschel, D., and Behnke, S. (2018, January 1–5). Supervised autonomous locomotion and manipulation for disaster response with a centaur-like robot. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Madrid, Spain.10.1109/IROS.2018.8594509 ↗
29. Advances in real-world applications for legged robots10.1002/rob.21839 ↗
30. Luk, B., Galt, S., Cooke, D., and Hewer, N. (September, January 31). Intelligent walking motions and control for a legged robot. Proceedings of the 1999 European Control Conference (ECC), Karlsruhe, Germany.10.23919/ECC.1999.7100087 ↗
31. Focchi, M., Orsolino, R., Camurri, M., Barasuol, V., Mastalli, C., Caldwell, D.G., and Semini, C. (2020). Heuristic planning for rough terrain locomotion in presence of external disturbances and variable perception quality. Advances in Robotics Research: From Lab to Market, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-22327-4_9 ↗
32. Selecting gaits for economical locomotion of legged robots10.1177/0278364915612572 ↗
33. Multicontact locomotion of legged robots10.1109/TRO.2018.2862902 ↗
34. The hard lessons of DARPA’s robotics challenge [News]10.1109/MSPEC.2015.7164385 ↗
35. Westervelt, E.R., Grizzle, J.W., Chevallereau, C., Choi, J.H., and Morris, B. (2007). Feedback Control of Dynamic Bipedal Robot Locomotion, CRC Press.
36. Multimodal feedback for teleoperation of multiple mobile robots in an outdoor environment10.1007/s12193-016-0230-y ↗
37. Robot Locomotion—A Review
38. Team IHMC’s lessons learned from the DARPA robotics challenge trials10.1002/rob.21571 ↗
39. Analysis of human-robot interaction at the DARPA robotics challenge trials10.1002/rob.21568 ↗
40. Human-in-the-loop control of a humanoid robot for disaster response: A report from the DARPA Robotics Challenge Trials10.1002/rob.21567 ↗
41. Optimization-based full body control for the DARPA robotics challenge10.1002/rob.21559 ↗
42. Atkeson, C.G., Babu, B., Banerjee, N., Berenson, D., Bove, C., Cui, X., DeDonato, M., Du, R., Feng, S., and Franklin, P. (2016). What happened at the DARPA robotics challenge, and why. DRC Final. Spec. Issue J. Field Robot., 1, submitted.
43. Human-robot teaming for rescue missions: Team ViGIR’s approach to the 2013 DARPA Robotics Challenge Trials10.1002/rob.21558 ↗
44. Hopkins, M.A., Griffin, R.J., Leonessa, A., Lattimer, B.Y., and Furukawa, T. (2015, January 3–5). Design of a compliant bipedal walking controller for the DARPA Robotics Challenge. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE-RAS 15th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), Seoul, Korea.10.1109/HUMANOIDS.2015.7363450 ↗
45. Survey and introduction to the focused section on bio-inspired mechatronics10.1109/TMECH.2012.2233492 ↗
46. Righetti, L., and Ijspeert, A.J. (2006, January 15–19). Programmable central pattern generators: An application to biped locomotion control. Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA 2006, Orlando, FL, USA.
47. Lachat, D., Crespi, A., and Ijspeert, A.J. (2006, January 20–22). Boxybot: A swimming and crawling fish robot controlled by a central pattern generator. Proceedings of the The First IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, BioRob 2006, Pisa, Italy.
48. Bigdog, the rough-terrain quadruped robot10.3182/20080706-5-KR-1001.01833 ↗
49. RHex: A simple and highly mobile hexapod robot10.1177/02783640122067570 ↗
50. Boxerbaum, A.S., Oro, J., and Quinn, R.D. (2008, January 19–23). Introducing DAGSI Whegs™: The latest generation of Whegs™ robots, featuring a passive-compliant body joint. Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Pasadena, CA, USA.10.1109/IROS.2008.4650997 ↗
51. iSprawl: Design and tuning for high-speed autonomous open-loop running10.1177/0278364906069150 ↗
52. Optimization and learning for rough terrain legged locomotion10.1177/0278364910392608 ↗
53. Hoover, A.M., Burden, S., Fu, X.Y., Sastry, S.S., and Fearing, R.S. (2010, January 26–29). Bio-inspired design and dynamic maneuverability of a minimally actuated six-legged robot. Proceedings of the 2010 3rd IEEE RAS & EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, Tokyo, Japan.10.1109/BIOROB.2010.5626034 ↗
54. Ramos, J., and Kim, S. (2019). Dynamic locomotion synchronization of bipedal robot and human operator via bilateral feedback teleoperation. Sci. Robot., 4.10.1126/scirobotics.aav4282 ↗
55. Ramos, J., Wang, A., Ubellacker, W., Mayo, J., and Kim, S. (2015, January 3–5). A balance feedback interface for whole-body teleoperation of a humanoid robot and implementation in the HERMES system. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE-RAS 15th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), Seoul, Korea.10.1109/HUMANOIDS.2015.7363460 ↗
56. Humanoid dynamic synchronization through whole-body bilateral feedback teleoperation10.1109/TRO.2018.2830387 ↗
57. Wilde, G.A., and Murphy, R.R. (2018, January 6–8). User Interface for Unmanned Surface Vehicles Used to Rescue Drowning Victims. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR), Philadelphia, PA, USA.10.1109/SSRR.2018.8468608 ↗
58. Robotic Bronchoscopy10.1080/10463356.2019.1573071 ↗
59. Atkeson, C.G., Babu, B.P.W., Banerjee, N., Berenson, D., Bove, C.P., Cui, X., DeDonato, M., Du, R., Feng, S., and Franklin, P. (2015, January 3–5). No falls, no resets: Reliable humanoid behavior in the DARPA robotics challenge. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE-RAS 15th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), Seoul, Korea.10.1109/HUMANOIDS.2015.7363436 ↗
60. Rescue-robot show-down10.1109/MSPEC.2014.6701433 ↗
61. Dupeyroux, J., Passault, G., Ruffier, F., Viollet, S., and Serres, J. (2017, January 9–14). Hexabot: A Small 3D-Printed Six-Legged Walking Robot Designed for Desert Ant-Like Navigation Tasks. Proceedings of the 20th World Congress of the International Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC), Toulouse, France.
62. Chitrakar, D., Mitra, R., and Huang, K. (2020, January 9–11). Haptic Interface for Hexapod Gait Execution. Proceedings of the 2020 Fourth IEEE International Conference on Robotic Computing (IRC), Taichung, Taiwan.10.1109/IRC.2020.00073 ↗