Effect of Video Quality and Buffering Delay on Telemanipulation Performance

  • Alexander Owen-Hill
  • Francisco Suárez-Ruiz
  • Manuel Ferre
  • Rafael Aracil
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 253)


There is much current research into telemanipulation which deals with time delays introduced by the communication channel. However, surprisingly little research has been carried out into how varying delay and quality in solely the video stream affects teleoperation task performance. In this paper the parameters of a) buffering delay and b) video quality (encoding bitrate) are tested to examine their effect on time to task completion and accuracy of a mock welding task with an industrial telemanipulator. From these relationships, several key parameter values arise which can aid engineers when designing video streaming systems for telemanipulation.


Teleoperation communication delay video quality video streaming networking 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Brunelli, D., Maggiorotti, M., Benini, L., Bellifemine, F.L.: Analysis of Audio Streaming Capability of Zigbee Networks. In: Verdone, R. (ed.) EWSN 2008. LNCS, vol. 4913, pp. 189–204. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Casals, A.: Robots in surgery. In: de Almeida, A., Khatib, O. (eds.) Autonomous Robotic Systems. LNCIS, pp. 222–234. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Cicco, L., Mascolo, S., Palmisano, V.: Skype Video congestion control: An experimental investigation. Computer Networks 55(3), 558–571 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deshpande, H., Bawa, M., Garcia-Molina, H.: Streaming Live Media over Peers. Tech. rep., Stanford InfoLab (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Draper, J.V.: Human factors in telemanipulation: perspectives from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory experience. In: Kim, W.S. (ed.) Telemanipulator Technology and Space Telerobotics, vol. 2057, pp. 162–174. SPIE (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drascic, D., Milgram, P., Grodski, J.: Learning effects in telemanipulation with monoscopic versus stereoscopic remote viewing. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1244–1249 (1989)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Franken, M., Stramigioli, S., Misra, S., Secchi, C., Macchelli, A.: Bilateral Telemanipulation With Time Delays: A Two-Layer Approach Combining Passivity and Transparency. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 27(4), 741–756 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hirche, S., Buss, M.: Human perceived transparency with time delay. In: Ferre, M., Buss, M., Aracil, R., Melchiorri, C., Balaguer, C. (eds.) Advances in Telerobotics. STAR, vol. 31, pp. 191–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hou, Y., Zhu, W., Zhang, Y.Q., Peha, J.: Streaming Video over the Internet: Approaches and Directions. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology 11(3), 282–300 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thompson, J.M., Ottensmeyer, M.P., Sheridan, T.B.: Human factors in telesurgery: effects of time delay and asynchrony in video and control feedback with local manipulative assistance. Telemedicine 5(2), 129–137 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, Y., Guo, Y., Liang, C.: A survey on peer-to-peer video streaming systems. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications 1(1), 18–28 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ming, H., Huat, Y., Lin, W., Bin, Z.: On teleoperation of an arc welding robotic system. In: Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Minneapolis, MN, vol. 2, pp. 1275–1280 (April 1996)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Niemeyer, G., Slotine, J.-J.E.: Telemanipulation with Time Delays. The International Journal of Robotics Research 23(9), 873–890 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nuño, E., Basañez, L., Ortega, R.: Control of Teleoperators with Time-Delay: A Lyapunov Approach. In: Loiseau, J.J., Michiels, W., Niculescu, S.-I., Sipahi, R. (eds.) Topics in Time Delay Systems. LNCIS, vol. 388, pp. 371–381. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Onozuka, M., Alfile, J.P., Aubert, P., Dagenais, J.F., Grebennikov, D., Ioki, K., Jones, L., Koizumi, K., Krylov, V., Maslakowski, J., Nakahira, M., Nelson, B., Punshon, C., Roy, O., Schreck, G.: Manufacturing and maintenance technologies developed for a thick-wall structure of the ITER vacuum vessel. Fusion Engineering and Design 55(4), 397–410 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Palmer, J., Irving, M., Järvenpää, J., Mäkinen, H., Saarinen, H., Siuko, M., Timperi, A., Verho, S.: The design and development of divertor remote handling equipment for ITER. Fusion Engineering and Design 82(15-24), 1977–1982 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Peer, A., Hirche, S., Weber, C., Krause, I., Buss, M., Miossec, S., Evrard, P., Stasse, O., Neo, E., Kheddar, A.: Others: Intercontinental multimodal tele-cooperation using a humanoid robot. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, IROS 2008, pp. 405–411. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pomplun, M., Matarić, M.: Evaluation Metrics and Results of Human Arm Movement Imitation. In: Proceedings of the 1st IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robotics, pp. 7–8 (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Prokopiou, P.A., Tzafestas, S.G., Harwin, W.S.: Towards Variable-Time Delays-Robust Telemanipulation Through Master State Prediction. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advance Intelligent Mechatronics, pp. 305–310 (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ridao, P., Carreras, M., Hernandez, E., Palomeras, N.: Underwater telerobotics for collaborative research. In: Ferre, M., Buss, M., Aracil, R., Melchiorri, C., Balaguer, C. (eds.) Advances in Telerobotics. STAR, vol. 31, pp. 347–359. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sheridan, T.B.: Teleoperation, telerobotics and telepresence: A progress report. Control Engineering Practice 3(2), 205–214 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Steinfeld, A., Fong, T., Kaber, D., Lewis, M., Scholtz, J., Schultz, A., Goodrich, M.: Common metrics for human-robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI 2006, pp. 33–40. ACM, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang, Z., Banerjee, S., Jamin, S.: Studying Streaming Video Quality: From An Application Point of View. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Multimedia, Berkeley, CA, USA, pp. 327–330 (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yokokohji, Y., Imaida, T., Iida, Y., Doi, T., Oda, M., Yoshikawa, T.: Bilateral Teleoperation: Towards Fine Manipulation with Large Time Delay. In: Rus, D., Singh, S. (eds.) Experimental Robotics VII. LNCS, vol. 271, pp. 11–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhou, L., Zhang, Y., Rodrigues, J., Geller, B., Cui, J., Zheng, B.: Quality-Delay Tradeoff for Video Streaming over Mobile Ad Hoc Networks. In: IEEE Internation Conference on Communications, pp. 228–232 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander Owen-Hill
    • 1
  • Francisco Suárez-Ruiz
    • 1
  • Manuel Ferre
    • 1
  • Rafael Aracil
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Automation and Robotics (UPM-CSIC)MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations