🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <GERRY.90Dec7094126@onion.frc.ri.cmu.edu> gerry@frc2.frc.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:
>In article <1990Dec6.232210.2638@sctc.com> smith@sctc.com (Rick Smith) writes:
>   Ideally, you want the kinematics of the joystick (well, hand controller) to
>   match that of the robot. 

> ... tests done at JPL and elsewhere
>have shown that to perform meaningful tasks, force reflection is
>required and that time delay from your sensors (cameras, force
>sensors, etc) will seriously degrade performance.

Terms like "seriously degraded" seriously degrade our appreciation of
some problems.  I mention this because I'm convninced that earth-based
remote control of, for example, a space station, would yiled a huge
advantage in performance/cost payoff.  So the question is, what did
"tests done at JPL and elsewhere" really demonstrate?  

Consider that the internal sensor-brain-muscle roudtrip time of a
human is of the order of 1/5 second -- so that when your brain tries
to do anythig in the outer world, you have a delay time of this order.
Now, suppose that the sensory-motor loop time of a remote control
system were, say, 1 second.  Then you could expect the human
performance time to increase six-fold, so that it would be "degraded"
by that much.  My question: has JPL or anyone else shown that
delays cause substantially more degradation than this?