Wearable Haptic System with Permission-Based Signal Filtering
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Haptic effects on wearable devices can be uncomfortable, unwanted, or even injurious due to the lack of user control over haptic parameters, and existing technologies do not adequately address the risk of malicious or malfunctioning haptic signals, particularly in virtual reality environments.
Innovation Solution
A user-configurable haptic system that implements permissions settings and filtering to control haptic effects, allowing users to define permissible ranges of haptic parameters and dynamically modify or block incoming signals to prevent undesirable sensations, using a processor-based system with haptic output devices and sensors to ensure safe and controlled haptic interactions.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If haptic effects are provided to enhance virtual reality experience, then user immersion and interaction quality are improved, but user comfort and safety deteriorate due to potential discomfort or injury from uncontrolled haptic parameters
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary actions by obtaining user permission settings before delivering haptic effects. The processor checks whether permission is granted for each haptic effect based on predefined criteria such as effect type, intensity, and duration. This preliminary permission check prevents harmful haptic effects from being delivered while allowing beneficial ones, thus resolving the contradiction between enhancing user experience and ensuring user safety.
2Reliability
If comprehensive haptic control is implemented to ensure safety, then user protection is improved, but system complexity increases due to permission management overhead
Solution Approach 1:
The permission management system is segmented into multiple independent components: permission settings module, permission checking module, and haptic effect delivery module. Each component has a specific function - settings store permission criteria, checking evaluates incoming haptic effects against these criteria, and delivery executes approved effects. This segmentation reduces overall system complexity by creating modular, manageable units with clear interfaces between them.
Solution Approach 2:
The permission checking mechanism acts as an intermediary between haptic effect generation and delivery. Instead of direct control, the system introduces a mediation layer that evaluates permission settings and determines whether to allow or block haptic effects. This intermediary simplifies the control architecture by centralizing decision-making logic and providing a clear separation between effect generation and effect delivery.
3Object-affected harmful factors
If haptic parameters are restricted to ensure safety, then user comfort is improved, but haptic effect effectiveness deteriorates due to limited parameter ranges
Solution Approach 1:
The permission settings are designed to be dynamic rather than static. Users can adjust permission criteria in real-time based on their comfort levels and contextual needs. The system adapts permission parameters such as intensity thresholds and effect type allowances dynamically, allowing the haptic system to provide effective feedback while maintaining user comfort. This dynamic approach resolves the contradiction by enabling both safety and effectiveness through flexible parameter adjustment.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
A system for generating haptic effects receives haptic permissions settings and associates the haptic permissions settings with a range of permitted haptic parameters. The system receives haptic parameters and modifies/filters the haptic parameters based on the range of permitted haptic parameters. The system then generates a haptic signal based on the modified haptic parameters and outputs the haptic signal to a haptic output device to generate the haptic effects.