0
Research Papers

Underactuated Part Alignment System for Industrial Assembly Applications

[+] Author and Article Information
Brian J. Slaboch

e-mail: Brian.Slaboch@Marquette.edu

Philip A. Voglewede

e-mail: Philip.Voglewede@marquette.edu
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Marquette University,
Milwaukee, WI 53233

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Mechanisms and Robotics Committee of ASME for publication in the Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics. Manuscript received October 28. 2011; final manuscript received August 7, 2012; published online October 19, 2012. Assoc. Editor: Sundar Krishnamurty.

J. Mechanisms Robotics 5(1), 011006 (Oct 19, 2012) (11 pages) Paper No: JMR-11-1125; doi: 10.1115/1.4007709 History: Received October 28, 2011; Revised August 07, 2012

This paper introduces the underactuated part alignment system (UPAS) as a cost-effective and flexible approach to aligning parts in the vertical plane prior to an industrial robotic assembly task. The advantage of the UPAS is that it utilizes the degrees of freedom (DOFs) of a SCARA (selective compliant assembly robot arm) type robot in conjunction with an external fixed post to achieve the desired part alignment. Additionally, the UPAS is not constrained to work with rigid, polygonal parts. Three path planning techniques are presented that can be used with the UPAS to achieve the proper part rotation. The results from laboratory testing show that the UPAS can be used to consistently achieve the desired part rotation to within 0.5% of the desired value.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Boothroyd, G., Poli, C., and Murch, L., 1982, Automatic Assembly, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.
Boothroyd, G., Dewhurst, P., and Knight, W., 1994, Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.
Bicchi, A., 2000, “Hands for Dextrous Manipulation and Robust Grasping: A Difficult Road Toward Simplicity,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 16(6), pp. 652–662. [CrossRef]
Grupen, R., Henderson, T., and McCammon, I., 1989, “A Survey of General-Purpose Manipulation,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 8(1), pp. 38–62. [CrossRef]
Murray, R., Li, Z., and Sastry, S., 1994, A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Okamura, A. M., Smaby, N., and Cutkosky, M., 2000, “An Overview of Dextrous Manipulation,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 255–262.
Mason, M., and Salisbury, J., 1985, Robot Hands and the Mechanics of Manipulation, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Jacobsen, S., Wood, J., Bigger, K., and Iverson, E., 1984, “The Utah/MIT Hand: Work in Progress,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 4(3), pp. 21–50. [CrossRef]
Townsend, W. T., 2000, “The Barrett Hand Grasper: Programmably Flexible Part Handling and Assembly,” Ind. Rob.: Int. J., 27(3), pp. 181–188. [CrossRef]
Goldberg, K., “Orienting Polygonal Parts Without Sensors,” Algorithmica, 10(2), pp. 201–225. [CrossRef]
Akella, S., Huang, W., Lynch, K., and Mason, M., 2000, “Parts Feeding on a Conveyor With a One Joint Robot,” Algorithmica, 26, pp. 313–344. [CrossRef]
Lynch, K., Shiroma, N., Arai, H., and Tanie, K., 2000, “Collision-Free Trajectory Planning for a 3-DOF Robot With a Passive Joint,” Int. J. Rob. Res, 19(12), pp. 1171–1184. [CrossRef]
Erdmann, M., 1998, “An Exploration of Nonprehensile Two-Palm Manipulation,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 17(5), pp. 485–503. [CrossRef]
Blind, S., McCullough, C., Akella, S., and Ponce, J., 2000, “A Reconfigurable Parts Feeder With an Array of Pins,” Proceedings of 2000 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 147–153.
Moll, M., and Erdmann, M., 2002, “Manipulation of Pose Distributions,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 21(3), pp. 277–292. [CrossRef]
Carlisle, B., Goldberg, K., Rao, A., and Wiegley, J., 1994, “A Pivoting Gripper for Feeding Industrial Parts,” Proceedings of the 1994 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 2, pp. 1650–1655.
Rao, A., K. D., and Goldberg, K., 1996, “Complete Algorithms for Feeding Polyhedral Parts Using Pivot Grasps,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 12, pp. 331–342. [CrossRef]
Ziesmer, J. A., and Voglewede, P. A., 2009, “Design, Analysis and Testing of a Metamorphic Gripper,” Proceedings of the ASME 2009 International DETC, Paper No. DETC2009-87512.
Zhang, M., Goldberg, K., Smith, G., Berretty, R.-P., and Overmars, M., 2001, “Pin Design for Part Feeding,” Robotica, 19(6), pp. 695– 702. [CrossRef]
Ginsberg, J., 2008, Engineering Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

SCARA robot schematic: The end-effector has three translational DOF and one rotational DOF. Parts must often be aligned in the vertical (xy) plane.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

UPAS: The part is grasped in (a). The force from the fixed post causes the pivot arm to rotate in (b). In (c), the gripper has been rotated by an angle θd.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

UG: A standard binary gripper may be used to grasp the part prior to rotation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

UPAS schematic: As shown the system is in the θ=0 position

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Simplified geometry: The fixed post of radius r can be viewed as a circle of radius R where R=r+t2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Straight line path: The center of the constant torque hinge is moved from an initial point A to a final point B

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Straight line path schematic: The center of the constant torque hinge moves at an angle α with respect to the vertical

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Horizontal line path: The center of the constant torque hinge is moved along a horizontal line

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Horizontal line path schematic: The center of the constant torque hinge moves from point A to point B along a horizontal line

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

45 deg angle path: The center of the constant torque hinge is moved from an initial point A to a final point B along a 45 deg line

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

45 deg angle path: The center of the constant torque hinge moves at a 45 deg angle with respect to the vertical

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Shortest distance path: The center of the constant torque hinge is moved perpendicular to the line of rotation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Shortest distance path schematic

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

αmin: Physical constraints limit the range of α

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Return path schematic

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

SCARA Robot with UG attachment. The center of mass of the UPAS is located at point d.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Free body diagram of the UG. The center of mass of the UPAS is located at point d.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Reference configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

τ versus θ4 during post contact (horizontal line path)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

τ versus θ4 for θ1 rotation (θ3=90 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

τ versus θ4 for θ1 rotation (θ3=0 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

General testing procedure: The center of the constant torque hinge is moved from an initial A(xi,yi) position to a final B(xf,yf) position to achieve the desired rotation θd

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Generalized testing results: Adding a 1 s delay reduced the percent error to approximately 5%

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Accounting for the springback reduces the error to less than 0.5%. This corresponds to an error in displacement of less than 0.5 mm.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In