VR Training with Electrotactile Haptics: Beyond “Training in VR” to “Training Like Reality” (2)

Hello everyone, this is Wave Company. 😊

In Part 1, we shared what research we conducted and how we carried it out.

Today, we’ll focus on performance validation and results.

Once again, it may sound somewhat technical, but we hope you’ll see this as evidence of our continuous efforts to produce meaningful outcomes!

In this second part, we’ll also highlight how tactile stimulation based on electrical stimulation—together with EMG and ECG measurements—intersects with the application areas of our conductive silicone electrode technology, ElecSil.

How Did We Validate It?

Evaluation Environment and Participants

The evaluation was conducted at the Seoul XR Demonstration Center with 12 healthy adult participants, averaging in their late 20s. Some participants had prior VR experience.Tactile stimulation intensity was individually calibrated to remain within a safe and comfortable range.

Procedure Overview

After a briefing, participants experienced the training content in VR. During the session, we conducted short surveys and interviews at specific intervals.Once the full experience was completed, participants took part in post-session surveys and in-depth interviews to capture changes in perception.

For physiological data, we also collected EMG (electromyography) and ECG (electrocardiography) signals simultaneously in a separate sample group to monitor safety and bodily responses.

Synchronization Check

Any mismatch in timing between vision, sound, and touch can lead to discomfort and a sense of dissonance. Therefore, we carefully checked frame stability for each VR scene and synchronized the start of tactile stimulation with audio cues. This ensured that when an event occurred in the VR environment, the tactile sensation and sound reached participants at the exact same moment.

What Indicators Did We Measure?

Subjective Indicators included changes in immersion, expectations for applying the technology to other content, perceived necessity of haptics, and reports of discomfort or mismatch. These were gathered both during the session and afterward through surveys and interviews, reducing bias.

Objective Indicators involved simultaneous EMG and ECG recordings to observe physiological responses and safety signals under stimulation conditions. These bio-signal measurements focused primarily on the arm region.

From the perspective of stimulation and bio-signal monitoring, this setup directly aligned with the application areas of our ElecSil electrode R&D.

What Did We Discover? – Results Summary

Subjective Results (Surveys & Interviews)

• Immersion Increase: More than half of participants reported noticeable changes in immersion. Many specifically noted that when tactile timing matched the on-screen events, the experience “felt more real.”

• Expectations for Wider Application: Many participants anticipated that this tactile integration could benefit other types of VR training, especially scenarios involving impacts or collisions where momentary sensations are critical.

• Reports of Discomfort: Some participants did report discomfort or mismatch. A common suggestion was that stimulation should be applied closer to the actual anatomical site of action to reduce awkwardness.

  
  

Objective Results (EMG & ECG)

• EMG showed involuntary muscle contractions triggered by stimulation, confirming that tactile cues elicited real muscle-level responses.

• ECG revealed no significant abnormal signals. Under the study conditions (arm region, experiential tasks, individually adjusted comfort levels), safety signals were favorable.

Unlike subjective responses, bio-signals provided numerical evidence—allowing us to interpret both effectiveness and safety simultaneously. Importantly, the EMG/ECG framework used here mirrors what we’ve established in ElecSil electrode research, strengthening consistency in interpretation.

What the Data Told Us

1. Effectiveness Potential The central research question was whether VR could transition from being “just a visual/auditory experience” to “a training perceived as close to reality.” The results indicate that EMS-based tactile elements can indeed support this transition.

   • Over half of participants confirmed higher immersion when visual events and tactile feedback were synchronized.

   • Expectations were especially high for scenarios requiring instantaneous sensations like collisions or impacts.

   • However, signals of discomfort remain, highlighting the need for optimization of stimulation location, waveform, and intensity.

     
     

2. Comfort Optimization Reports of mismatch and discomfort emphasize the importance of fine-tuning stimulation parameters such as location, waveform, intensity and durationto align more closely with anatomical movements and scene characteristics.

   
   

3. Safety Under the current research conditions, safety signals based on EMG and ECG were positive. Still, broader generalization requires testing across larger sample sizes and longer, more complex task scenarios.

   

   
   

   Next Steps: Toward More Realistic Training

   
   

   1. Expand stimulation sites to align more closely with actual anatomical movements.

   2. Build a more detailed waveform library for optimized comfort.

   3. Apply the system across diverse training scenarios to evaluate versatility.

   4. Incorporate additional bio-signals beyond EMG and ECG to gather multi-layered safety data.

   5. Apply ElecSil R&D principles—such as electrode placement consistency and contact stability—to extended stimulation sites and comfort tuning.

   6. Design a dedicated ElecSil-based pilot protocol to stepwise validate alignment with current results.

   
   

   Connecting Back to ElecSil

   
   

   Wave Company’s ElecSil refers to our conductive silicone electrode and the associated smart R&D. Its application areas can be summarized as electrical stimulation (EMS) and bio-signal measurement (ECG, EMG).

   
   

   This study also centered on tactile feedback through electrical stimulation and simultaneous EMG/ECG monitoring—directly intersecting with ElecSil’s technology scope. In other words, the research theme and methodology are inherently aligned with ElecSil, allowing us to share a common axis of application.

   
   

   Moreover, the results on immersion, comfort, and safety provide valuable reference points for parameter design—such as waveform, intensity, duration, and stimulation site. These insights connect seamlessly with ElecSil’s principles of electrode placement consistency, contact stabilization, and signal quality control, offering guidance for future haptic training applications.

   
   

   Conclusion

   
   

   Through this research, we confirmed the essential point we set out to explore: the possibility of transitioning VR from “just training in VR” to “training that feels real.”

   
   

   The findings show that when EMS-based tactile elements are integrated with proper timing and texture, users’ sense of realism can take a step closer to the physical world.

   This concludes our two-part series sharing Wave Company’s research process and outcomes.

   
   

   Thank you for reading through these complex topics to the very end! We promise to keep advancing our work, and we look forward to sharing our next updates with you soon. 🙌

   

   
   
   
   

   References

   • Kim Daejun, Implementation of Virtual Reality Training Contents Using Haptic Devices

   • Wave Company external reports on ElecSil conductive silicone electrodes