17.01.2013 Views

Chapter 2. Prehension

Chapter 2. Prehension

Chapter 2. Prehension

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

300 THE PHASES OF PREHENSION<br />

are seen in the object and drive the Planning process, given the task<br />

requirements and object properties. The Setting Up Phase seems to<br />

demonstrate two different subphases. The first gets the hand posture<br />

‘in the ballpark’. During preshaping, the hand is driving the arm<br />

using anticipatory mechanisms and the hand is shaping according to<br />

the opposition space chosen. At the same time, the palm is being<br />

oriented. Then, after maximum aperture the hand encloses, a guarded<br />

movement involving feedback control anticipates tactile contact. The<br />

goal of setting up an opposition space is the alignment of the grasping<br />

surface patches of the hand with the seen opposition vector, given the<br />

opposition space parameterization appropriate for the task. The Using<br />

Phase is complex, involving rich interactions between vision, haptics<br />

and proprioception for controlling the hand, arm, and object.<br />

Movement seems to be driven strongly by sensory information and<br />

sensory consequences. Contact triggers a controller which uses active<br />

touch and controlled slipping to capture the object into the hand.<br />

Subgoals caused by the environmental goal can dominate in this<br />

phase, determining the influence of sensory information on the motor<br />

task; e.g., to hold a glass, a subgoal would be to squeeze fingers if the<br />

object is slipping, whereas to twirl a baton, a subgoal would be to<br />

reposition fingers if the object is slipping. The Releasing Phase is<br />

another example where feedforward anticipatory mechanisms seem to<br />

dominate, although it is unclear if the arm is driving the hand, the hand<br />

is driving the arm, or they are totally uncoupled.<br />

There is a distinction between free motion and compliant motion.<br />

This distinction permeates the planning and selection of opposition<br />

space parameters through to the motoneuron recruitment patterns and<br />

muscle contractions for the application of functionally effective forces<br />

to grasp and manipulate objects. Once an object is grasped stably, the<br />

transport of the object can be viewed as a free motion with a ‘loaded’<br />

limb. When the grasped object is being placed, the compliance of the<br />

supporting surface comes into play. Replacing the object on a support<br />

surface constitutes another guarded motion.<br />

Opposition space analysis has vector description of motions and<br />

forces. During free motion (trajectory related planning), the vectors<br />

are concerned with directions and distances within a polar coordinate<br />

system. Direction and distance appear to be parallel dimensions. In<br />

contrast, during compliant motion (force related planning), the vectors<br />

specify directions and magnitudes of forces to be applied, in a palm<br />

centered coordinate frame. Here direction and magnitude of forces<br />

may be different dimensions as well. In setting up an opposition<br />

space, the opposition vector determines the directional planning for the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!