356
Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 19 J.D. Westwood et al. (Eds.) IOS Press, 2012 © 2012 The authors and IOS Press. All rights reserved. doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-022-2-356
A Simple Master-Slave Control Mapping Setup to Learn Robot-Assisted Surgery Manipulation Sukitti PUNAKa,1 and Sergei KURENOV a a Roswell Park Cancer Institute (RPCI)
Abstract. A simple, but yet effective application for learning and testing instrument manipulation of available (and future) master-slave control robotassisted surgical systems has been created. As an example, the paper describes a simple mapping of da Vinci surgical system master-slave control with two haptic devices acts as the master control. Keywords. Robot-assisted surgery, master-slave control, mapping
Introduction For the last decade more conventional laparoscopic surgery procedures have been performed with robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, and the numbers continue to grow [1]. There are number of robot-assisted surgery systems available [2]. Here we list three interesting ones: Intuitive Surgical’s da Vinci surgical system [3], the University of Washington’s Raven surgical system [4], and Titan Medical’s Amadeus robotic surgical system [5]. In this paper, we show how to create a simple mapping of masterslave control for any robot-assisted surgery system by giving an example to the mapping for the da Vinci surgical system.
1. Methods & Materials The movement of the master control basically has six degrees of freedom (DOFs), XYZ positions and XYZ rotations – here called alpha (), beta (), gamma ( ) (Fig. 1). We use two PHANTOM Omni haptic devices as master controllers for left and right instruments, but any input device with at least 6 DOFs can be used.
1
[email protected]
S. Punak and S. Kurenov / A Simple Master-Slave Control Mapping Setup
357
Figure 1. The mapping dialog for da Vinci robotic master-slave control.
For da Vinci surgical system, each (slave) surgical instrument typically has 6 DOFs freedom, not include the open/close of the jaws. These DOFs are the shaft insertion, shaft pitch, shaft yaw, shaft roll, head rotation, and jaws rotation of the instrument. An application has been created for testing the mapping (Fig. 2). The position and orientation of each haptic device can be obtained from its current transformation matrix Trx (1). The XYZ positions are obtained directly from the matrix components, while , , and rotations are obtained from converting the 3x3 sub-matrix of Trx, which is the rotation matrix to the Euler angles (2).
Figure 2. The application setup (left) and the zoom-in screen (right).
r11 r Trx = 21 r31 0
r13 r23 r33 0
x y z 1
r11 α β = ToEulerAngles r 21 γ r31
r12 r22 r32
r12 r22 r32 0
(1)
r13 r23 r33
(2)
358
S. Punak and S. Kurenov / A Simple Master-Slave Control Mapping Setup
The current XYZ positions and rotations of the left and right master controls have to be mapped to the 6 DOFs of the left and right slave instruments with adjustable scales and offsets (Fig. 1), since the master reference frames and the slave reference frames are different [6]. Also the offset of the rotation pivot point at the trocar site has to be included in the mapping calculation.
2. Results The simple, adjustable mapping rules for master-slave control implemented in the application allows us to experiment with different mappings for different robot-assisted surgical system. The mappings are tested by manipulating the left and right instruments to touch and grab the spheres placed in a virtual world (Fig. 2).
3. Conclusion & Discussion The method is simple, yet allows us to explore the mappings of master-slaved controls of available and future robot-assisted surgical systems. It can also be used to test the manipulations of new master-slave control design, for example, da Vinci with haptic feedback. However, its major flaw is the conversion of the master tool orientation to Euler angles, which can create the gimbal lock.
References [1] Chandra V, Nehra D, Parent R, Woo R, Reyes R, Hernandez-Boussard T, and Dutta S, “A Comparison of Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Suturing Performance by Experts and Novices”, Surgery, Vol. 147, Issue 6, pp. 830-839, 2010. [2] SurgRob, surgrob.blogspot.com, accessed October 31, 2011. [3] Intuitive Surgical’s da Vinci surgical system, www.intuitivesurgical.com/products, accessed October 31, 2011. [4] The University of Washington’s Raven surgical system, brl.ee.washington.edu/laboratory/node/26, accessed October 31, 2011. [5] Titan Medical’s Amadeus robotic surgical system, www.titanmedicalinc.com/product_en_190.htm, accessed October 31, 2011. [6] Ma J and Berkelman P, “Control Software Design of A Compact Laparoscopic Surgical Robot System”, IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 2345-2350, 2006.
