Our study aims to investigate the effects of grating patterns of perceived roughness on surfaces with ultrasonic friction modulation, and also to examine user performance of identifying different numbers of grating patterns.
Background
In designing grating-based tactile textures, the widths of low- and high-friction zones are a crucial factor for generating grating patterns that convey roughness sensation. However, few studies have explored the design space of efficient grating patterns that users can easily distinguish and identify via roughness perception.
Method
Two experiments were carried out. In the first experiment, we conducted a magnitude estimation of perceived roughness for both low- and high-friction zones, each with widths of 0.13, 0.25, 0.38, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.5, and 5.5 mm. In the second experiment, we required participants to identify 5 pattern groups with 2–6 patterns respectively.
Results
Perceived roughness fitted a linear trend for low- or high-friction zones with widths of 0.38 mm or lower. Perceived roughness followed an inverted U-shaped curve for low- or high-friction zones with widths greater than 0.5 mm but less than 2.0 mm. The peak points occurred at the widths of 0.38 mm for both low- and high-friction zones. The statistical analysis indicates that both low- and high-friction zones had similar effects on human perception of surface roughness. In addition, participants could memorize and identify up to four tactile patterns with identification accuracy rates higher than 90% and average reaction time less than 2.2 s.
Conclusions
The relation between perceived roughness and varying widths of grating patterns follows linear or inverted U-shape trends. Participants could efficiently identify 4 or fewer patterns with high accuracy (>90%) and short reaction time (<2.2 s).
Application
Our findings can contribute to tactile interface design such as tactile alphabets and target-approaching indicators.
BasdoganC.GiraudF.LevesqueV.ChoiS. (2020). A review of surface haptics: Enabling tactile effects on touch surfaces. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 13(3), 450–470. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2020.2990712
2.
BatemanA.ZhaoO. K.BajcsyA. V.JenningsM. C.TothB. N.CohenA. J.HortonE. L.KhattarA.KuoR. S.LeeF. A.LimM. K.MigasiukL. W.RenganathanR.ZhangA.OliveiraM. A. (2018). A user-centered design and analysis of an electrostatic haptic touchscreen system for students with visual impairments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 109(1), 102–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.09.004
3.
BauO.PoupyrevI.IsrarA.HarrisonC. (2010). TeslaTouch: electrovibration for touch surfaces. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 23rd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, New York, NY, 3–6, October 2010, pp. 283–292.
4.
BietM.CasiezG.GiraudF.Lemaire-SemailB. (2008). Discrimination of virtual square gratings by dynamic touch on friction based tactile displays. In Paper presented at the 2008 Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, Reno, Nevada, USA, 13–14March 2008, pp. 41–48.
5.
BietM.GiraudF.Lemaire-SemailB. (2007). Squeeze film effect for the design of an ultrasonic tactile plate. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control, 54(12), 2678–2688. https://doi.org/10.1109/TUFFC.2007.596
6.
BirnholtzJ.GergleD.LiebmanN.SinclairS. (2015). Feeling aware: Investigating the use of a mobile variable-friction tactile display for awareness information. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, Copenhagen, Denmark, 24–27 August 2015, pp. 16–25.
7.
BlakeD. T.HsiaoS. S.JohnsonK. O. (1997). Neural coding mechanisms in tactile pattern recognition: the relative contributions of slowly and rapidly adapting mechanoreceptors to perceived roughness. Journal of Neuroscience, 17(19), 7480–7489. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.17-19-07480.1997
8.
CasiezG.RousselN.VanbelleghemR.GiraudF. (2011). Surfpad: Riding towards targets on a squeeze film effect. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 7–12 May 2011, pp. 2491–2500.
9.
ChenC.ChuaS. H.ChungD.PerraultS. T.ZhaoS.KeiW. (2014). Eyes-free gesture passwords: a comparison of various eyes-free input methods. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Second International Symposium of Chinese CHI, Toronto, ON, Canada, 26–27 April 2014, pp. 89–92.
10.
ConnorC. E.HsiaoS. S.PhillipsJ. R.JohnsonK. O. (1990). Tactile roughness: Neural codes that account for psychophysical magnitude estimates. Journal of Neuroscience, 10(12), 3823–3836. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.10-12-03823.1990
11.
DelhayeB.LefèvreP.ThonnardJ.-L. (2014). Dynamics of fingertip contact during the onset of tangential slip. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 11(100), 20140698. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2014.0698
12.
DerlerS.GerhardtL. C. (2012). Tribology of skin: Review and analysis of experimental results for the friction coefficient of human skin. Tribology Letters, 45(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11249-011-9854-y
13.
DerlerS.GerhardtL. C.LenzA.BertauxE.HadadM. (2009). Friction of human skin against smooth and rough glass as a function of the contact pressure. Tribology International, 42(11), 1565–1574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2008.11.009
14.
GescheiderG. A.HughsonB. A. (1991). Stimulus context and absolute magnitude estimation: A study of individual differences. Perception & Psychophysics, 50(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212204
15.
GordonM. L.ZhaiS. (2019). Touchscreen haptic augmentation effects on tapping, drag and drop, and path following. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow, Scotland UK, 4–9 May 2019. No: 373, pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300603
16.
GueorguievD.VezzoliE.SednaouiT.GrisoniL.Lemaire-SemailB. (2019). The perception of ultrasonic square reductions of friction with variable sharpness and duration. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 12(2), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2019.2894412
17.
HendersonJ.AveryJ.GrisoniL.LankE. (2019). Leveraging distal vibrotactile feedback for target acquisition. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Glasgow, Scotland, 4–9 May 2019, pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300715
18.
HightowerB.LovatoS.DavisonJ.WartellaE.PiperA. M. (2019). Haptic explorers: Supporting science journaling through mobile haptic feedback displays. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 122(1), 103–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.09.005
19.
HogganE.BrewsterS. A.JohnstonJ. (2008). Investigating the effectiveness of tactile feedback for mobile touchscreens. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Florence, Italy, 5–10 April 2008, pp. 1573–1582. https://doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357300
20.
HollinsM.BensmaaS. J. (2007). The coding of roughness. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(3), 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1037/cjep2007020
21.
HollinsM.RisnerS. R. (2000). Evidence for the duplex theory of tactile texture perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 62(4), 695–705. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206916
22.
İşleyenA.VardarY.BasdoganC. (2020). Tactile roughness perception of virtual gratings by electrovibration. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 13(3), 562–570. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2019.2959993
23.
JonesL. A.TanH. Z. (2013). Application of Psychophysical Techniques to Haptic Research. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 6(3), 268–284. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2012.74
24.
KatzD. (1989). The World of Touch. KruegerL. E. (Ed.). Taylor & Francis Ltd, Trans. KruegerL. E.
25.
KlatzkyR. L.NayakA.StephenI.DijourD.TanH. Z. (2019). Detection and identification of pattern information on an electrostatic friction display. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 12(4), 665–670. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2019.2940215
26.
LawrenceM. A.KitadaR.KlatzkyR. L.LedermanS. J. J. P. (2007). Haptic roughness perception of linear gratings via bare finger or rigid probe. Perception, 36(4), 547. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5746
27.
LedermanS. J. (1974). Tactile roughness of grooved surfaces: The touching process and effects of macro- and microsurface structure. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 16(2), 385–395. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203958
28.
LiuX.DohlerM. (2020). Vibrotactile alphabets: Time and Frequency patterns to encode information. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 14(1), 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2020.3005093
29.
LukJ.PasqueroJ.LittleS.MacLeanK.LevesqueV.HaywardV. (2006). A role for haptics in mobile interaction: initial design using a handheld tactile display prototype. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montréal, Québec, Canada, 22–27 April 2006, pp. 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124800
30.
MullenbachJ.ShultzC.ColgateJ. E.PiperA. M. (2014). Exploring affective communication through variable-friction surface haptics. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, ON, Canada, April 26–May 1, 2014, pp. 3963–3972.
31.
MullenbachJ.ShultzC.PiperA. M.PeshkinM.ColgateJ. E. (2013). Surface haptic interactions with a TPad tablet. In Paper presented at the UIST '13 Adjunct: Proceedings of the adjunct publication of the 26th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, St. Andrews, Scotland, UK, 8–11 October 2013, pp. 7–8.
32.
PasumartyS.JohnsonS.WatsonS.AdamsM. J. T. L. (2011). Friction of the human finger pad: Influence of moisture, occlusion and velocity. Tribology Letters, 44(2), 117–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11249-011-9828-0
33.
PotierL.PietrzakT.CasiezG.RousselN. (2016). Designing tactile patterns with programmable friction. In Paper presented at the IHM '16, Fribourg, Switzerland, 25–28 October 2016, pp. 1–7.
34.
RantalaJ.RaisamoR.LylykangasJ.SurakkaV.RaisamoJ.SalminenK.PakkanenT.HippulaA. (2009). Methods for presenting braille characters on a mobile device with a touchscreen and tactile feedback. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 2(1), 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2009.3
35.
RekikY.VezzoliE.GrisoniL.GiraudF. (2017). Localized haptic texture: A rendering technique based on taxels for high density tactile feedback. in Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Denver, Colorado, USA, 6–11 May 2017, pp. 5006–5015.
36.
SaketB.PrasojoC.HuangY.ZhaoS. (2013). Designing an effective vibration-based notification interface for mobile phones. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 23–27 February 2013, pp. 1499–1504.
37.
SaleemM. K.YilmazC.BasdoganC. (2020). Tactile perception of virtual edges and gratings displayed by friction modulation via ultrasonic actuation. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 13(2), 368–379. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2019.2949411
38.
TaylorM. M.LedermanS. J. (1975). Tactile roughness of grooved surfaces: A model and the effect of friction. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 17(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203993
39.
UngerB.HollisR.KlatzkyR. (2011). Roughness Perception in Virtual Textures. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 4(2), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2010.61
40.
VardarY.İşleyenA.SaleemM.BasdoganC. (2017). Roughness perception of virtual textures displayed by electrovibration on touch screens. In Paper presented at the 2017 IEEE World Haptics Conference, Munich, Germany, 6–9 June 2017, pp. 263–268.
41.
VerrilloR. T.BolanowskiS. J.McgloneF. P. (1999). Subjective magnitude of tactile roughness. Somatosensory & Motor Research, 16(4), 352–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/08990229970401
42.
VezzoliE.MessaoudW. B.AmbergM.GiraudF.Lemaire-SemailB.BuenoM. (2015). Physical and perceptual independence of ultrasonic vibration and electrovibration for friction modulation. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 8(2), 235–239. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2015.2430353
43.
VezzoliE.SednaouiT.AmbergM.GiraudF.Lemaire-SemailB. (2016). Texture rendering strategies with a high fidelity–Capacitive visual-haptic friction control device. In BelloF.KajimotoH.VisellY. (Eds.), Haptics: Perception, Devices, Control, and Applications: 10th International Conference, EuroHaptics 2016, London, UK, 4–7 July 2016, Proceedings, Part I (pp. 251–260). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
