0
Research Papers

Configuration Robustness Analysis of the Optimal Design of Cable-Driven Manipulators

[+] Author and Article Information
Joshua T. Bryson

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Delaware,
Newark, DE 19716
e-mail: jtbryson@udel.edu

Xin Jin

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Columbia University,
New York, NY 10027
e-mail: x.jin@columbia.edu

Sunil K. Agrawal

Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Columbia University,
New York, NY 10027
e-mail: sunil.agrawal@columbia.edu

Manuscript received November 16, 2015; final manuscript received May 18, 2016; published online September 6, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Satyandra K. Gupta.

J. Mechanisms Robotics 8(6), 061006 (Sep 06, 2016) (9 pages) Paper No: JMR-15-1321; doi: 10.1115/1.4033695 History: Received November 16, 2015; Revised May 18, 2016

Designing an effective cable architecture for a cable-driven robot becomes challenging as the number of cables and degrees of freedom of the robot increase. A methodology has been previously developed to identify the optimal design of a cable-driven robot for a given task using stochastic optimization. This approach is effective in providing an optimal solution for robots with high-dimension design spaces, but does not provide insights into the robustness of the optimal solution to errors in the configuration parameters that arise in the implementation of a design. In this work, a methodology is developed to analyze the robustness of the performance of an optimal design to changes in the configuration parameters. This robustness analysis can be used to inform the implementation of the optimal design into a robot while taking into account the precision and tolerances of the implementation. An optimized cable-driven robot leg is used as a motivating example to illustrate the application of the configuration robustness analysis. Following the methodology, the effect on robot performance due to design variations is analyzed, and a modified design is developed which minimizes the potential performance degradations due to implementation errors in the design parameters. A robot leg is constructed and is used to validate the robustness analysis by demonstrating the predicted effects of variations in the design parameters on the performance of the robot.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Mao, Y. , and Agrawal, S. , 2012, “ Design of a Cable-Driven Arm Exoskeleton (CAREX) for Neural Rehabilitation,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 28(4), pp. 922–931. [CrossRef]
Jin, X. , Cui, X. , and Agrawal, S. , 2015, “ Design of a Cable-Driven Active Leg Exoskeleton (C-ALEX) and Gait Training Experiments With Human Subjects,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Seattle, WA, May 26–30, pp. 5578–5583.
Mao, Y. , Jin, X. , Dutta, G. , Scholz, J. , and Agrawal, S. , 2015, “ Human Movement Training With a Cable Driven Arm Exoskeleton (CAREX),” IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 23(1), pp. 84–92. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Wu, M. , Hornby, T. G. , Landry, J. M. , Roth, H. , and Schmit, B. D. , 2011, “ A Cable-Driven Locomotor Training System for Restoration of Gait in Human SCI,” Gait Posture, 33(2), pp. 256–260. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Alamdari, A. , and Krovi, V. , 2016, “ Design and Analysis of a Cable-Driven Articulated Rehabilitation System for Gait Training,” ASME J. Mech. Rob., 8(5), p. 051018. [CrossRef]
Ming, A. , and Higuchi, T. , 1994, “ Study of Multiple Degree-of-Freedom Positioning Mechanism Using Wires (Part1)—Concept, Design and Control,” Int. J. Jpn. Soc. Precis. Eng., 28(2), pp. 131–138.
Mustafa, S. , and Agrawal, S. , 2012, “ On the Force-Closure Analysis of n-DOF Cable-Driven Open Chains Based on Reciprocal Screw Theory,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 28(1), pp. 22–31. [CrossRef]
Rezazadeh, S. , and Behzadipour, S. , 2007, “ Tensionability Conditions of a Multi-Body System Driven by Cables,” ASME Paper No. IMECE2007-42433.
Yang, G. , Lin, W. , Pham, C. , and Yeo, S. H. , 2005, “ Kinematic Design of a 7-DOF Cable-Driven Humanoid Arm: A Solution-in-Nature Approach,” 2005 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, Monterey, CA, July 24–28, pp. 444–449.
Goldberg, D. E. , 1989, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning, Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston, MA.
Haupt, R. L. , and Haupt, S. E. , 2004, Practical Genetic Algorithms, 2nd ed., Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Fouskakis, D. , and Draper, D. , 2002, “ Stochastic Optimization: A Review,” Int. Stat. Rev., 70(3), pp. 315–349. [CrossRef]
Bahrami, A. , Aghbali, B. , and Bahrami, M. N. , 2012, “ Design Optimization of a 3D Three Cable Driven Manipulator,” ASME Paper No. DETC2012-70195.
Jamwal, P. K. , Xie, S. , and Aw, K. C. , 2009, “ Kinematic Design Optimization of a Parallel Ankle Rehabilitation Robot Using Modified Genetic Algorithm,” Rob. Auton. Syst., 57(10), pp. 1018–1027. [CrossRef]
Kennedy, J. , and Eberhart, R. , 1995, “ Particle Swarm Optimization,” IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks (ICNN), Perth, WA, Nov. 27–Dec. 1, Vol. 4, pp. 1942–1948.
Perez, R. E. , and Behdinan, K. , 2007, “ Particle Swarm Optimization in Structural Design,” Swarm Intelligence, Focus on Ant and Particle Swarm Optimization, F. T. S. Chan and M. K. Tiwari , eds., I-Tech Education and Publishing, Denmark.
Hassan, R. , Cohanim, B. E. , and de Weck, O. L. , 2005, “ Comparison of Particle Swarm Optimization and the Genetic Algorithm,” AIAA Paper No. 2005-1897.
Ma, M. , and Wang, J. , 2011, “ Hydraulic-Actuated Quadruped Robot Mechanism Design Optimization Based on Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm,” 2011 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Electronic Commerce (AIMSEC), Aug. 8–10, pp. 4026–4029.
Bryson, J. T. , Jin, X. , and Agrawal, S. K. , 2016, “ Optimal Design of Cable-Driven Manipulators Using Particle Swarm Optimization,” ASME J. Mech. Rob., 8(4), p. 041003. [CrossRef]
Gouttefarde, M. , and Gosselin, C. M. , 2006, “ Analysis of the Wrench-Closure Workspace of Planar Parallel Cable-Driven Mechanisms,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 22(3), pp. 434–445. [CrossRef]
Bosscher, P. , Riechel, A. T. , and Ebert-Uphoff, I. , 2006, “ Wrench-Feasible Workspace Generation for Cable-Driven Robots,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 22(5), pp. 890–902. [CrossRef]
Fattah, A. , and Agrawal, S. K. , 2005, “ On the Design of Cable-Suspended Planar Parallel Robots,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 127(5), pp. 1021–1028. [CrossRef]
Diao, X. , and Ma, O. , 2009, “ Force-Closure Analysis of 6-DOF Cable Manipulators With Seven or More Cables,” Robotica, 27(3), pp. 209–215. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Example 2D objective function surface, ψ(x1, x2), with the optimal point  ox=(ox1,ox2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Example objective function performance along x1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Example objective function performance along x2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Illustrations of the cable-driven robot leg. The waist, thigh, and shank cuffs are used to route the cables, with cables 1, 2 attached between the waist cuff and the thigh cuff, while cables 3, 4 are routed between the waist cuff and shank cuff via the thigh cuff. The attachment angle of cable m on cuff i is given by  iθcm, and at pose (q1, q2, q3) = (0, 0, 0) the leg is fully extended and vertical.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The walking gait joint angle trajectory for the robot

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Objective function slices surrounding the optimal point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Objective function slice along x6 showing the −4.5 deg adjustment to the optimal value

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Objective function slice along x7 showing the −4.5 deg adjustment to the optimal value

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Objective function slice along x10 showing the −2.5 deg adjustment to the optimal value

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

The cable-driven robot leg with the cables in the optimal configuration,  ox

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Controller cable tensions and robot response for the 50%, 80%, and full-scale trajectories

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of modeled configuration robustness to experimental robot performance for varying cable 1 attachment angles, (x1 and x2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of modeled configuration robustness to experimental robot performance for varying cable 3 attachment angles, (x6 and x7)

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