0
Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics | Volume 10 | Issue 1 | research-article
Research Papers

Design and Modeling of a Compliant Link for Inherently Safe Corobots

[+] Author and Article Information
Yu She

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH 43210
e-mail: she.22@osu.edu

Hai-Jun Su

Fellow ASME
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH 43210
e-mail: su.298@osu.edu

Deshan Meng

Department of Mechanical and Automation,
Shenzhen Graduate School,
Harbin Institute of Technology,
Guangdong, Shenzhen 518055, China
e-mail: dsmeng@hit.edu.cn

Siyang Song

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH 43210
e-mail: song.1252@osu.edu

Junmin Wang

Professor
Fellow ASME
Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH 43210
e-mail: wang.1381@osu.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received April 3, 2017; final manuscript received November 10, 2017; published online December 20, 2017. Assoc. Editor: K. H. Low.

J. Mechanisms Robotics 10(1), 011001 (Dec 20, 2017) (10 pages) Paper No: JMR-17-1087; doi: 10.1115/1.4038530 History: Received April 03, 2017; Revised November 10, 2017
Article
References
Figures
Tables
Citing Articles

In this paper, we propose a variable width compliant link that is designed for optimal trade-off of safety and control performance for inherently safe corobots. Intentionally introducing compliance to mechanical design increases safety of corobots. Traditional approaches mostly focus on the joint compliance, while few of them study the link compliance. Here, we propose a novel method to design compliant robotic links with a safety constraint which is quantified by head injury criterion (HIC). The robotic links are modeled as two-dimensional beams with a variable width. Given a safety threshold, i.e., HIC constraint, the width distribution along the link is optimized to give a uniform distribution of HIC, which guarantees inherent safety for human operators. This solution is validated by a human–robot impact simulation program built in matlab. A static model of the variable width link is derived and verified by finite element simulations. Not only stress in the link is reduced, this new design has a better control and dynamic performance quantified by a larger natural frequency and a larger bandwidth compared with designs made of uniform beams and compliant joints (CJs). The proposed variable width link takes full advantage of the link rigidity while keeps inherent safety during a human–robot impact. This paper demonstrates that the compliant link solution could be a promising alternative approach for addressing safety concerns of human–robot interactions.
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Edward Colgate, J. , Wannasuphoprasit, W. , and Peshkin, M. A. , 1996, “ Cobots: Robots for Collaboration With Human Operators,” International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exhibition, Atlanta, GA, Nov. 17–22, pp. 433–439 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5435/3022659475f2cbdc67f051a61e2fef7f82e9.pdf.
2
Chu, A. , Kazerooni, H. , and Zoss, A. , 2005, “ On the Biomimetic Design of the Berkeley Lower Extremity Exoskeleton (BLEEX),” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Barcelona, Spain, Apr. 18–22, pp. 4345–4352.
3
Frisoli, A. , Rocchi, F. , Marcheschi, S. , Dettori, A. , Salsedo, F. , and Bergamasco, M. , 2005, “ A New Force-Feedback Arm Exoskeleton for Haptic Interaction in Virtual Environments,” First Joint Eurohaptics Conference, Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, World Haptics (WHC), Pisa, Italy, Mar. 18–20, pp. 195–201.
4
Roderick, S. , and Carignan, C. , 2007, “ Designing Safety-Critical Rehabilitation Robots,” Rehabilitation Robotics, S. S. Kommu, ed., InTech, Vienna, Austria.
5
Wolbrecht, E. , Chan, V. , Reinkensmeyer, D. , and Bobrow, J. , 2008, “ Optimizing Compliant, Model-Based Robotic Assistance to Promote Neurorehabilitation,” IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng., 16(3), pp. 286–297. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6
Bicchi, A. , and Tonietti, G. , 2004, “ Fast and ‘Soft-Arm’ Tactics [Robot Arm Design],” IEEE Rob. Autom. Mag., 11(2), pp. 22–33. [CrossRef]
7
Bicchi, A. , Tonietti, G. , and Piaggio, E. , 2002, “ Design, Realization and Control of Soft Robot Arms for Intrinsically Safe Interaction With Humans,” IARP/RAS Workshop on Technical Challenges for Dependable Robots in Human Environments, Toulouse, France, Oct. 7–8, pp. 79–87. http://www.centropiaggio.unipi.it/sites/default/files/anthropic-IARP02.pdf
8
ISO, 1992, “ Robots for Industrial Environments—Safety Requirements. Part I: Robot,” International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 10218:1992. https://infostore.saiglobal.com/store/details.aspx/details.aspx?ProductID=200823
9
ISO, 2006, “Robots for Industrial Environments—Safety Requirements. Part I: Robot,” International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 10218-1:2006. https://www.iso.org/standard/36322.html
10
Versace, J. , 1971, “A Review of the Severity Index,” SAE Paper No. 710881.
11
Newman, J. A. , Shewchenko, N. , and Welbourne, E. , 2000, “ A Proposed New Biomechanical Head Injury Assessment Function—The Maximum Power Index,” Stapp Car Crash J., 44, pp. 215–247. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17458729 [PubMed]
12
Gadd, C. W. , 1966, “Use of a Weighted-Impulse Criterion for Estimating Injury Hazard,” SAE Paper No. 660793. https://doi.org/10.4271/660793
13
Newman, J. A. , 1980, “Head Injury Criteria in Automotive Crash Testing,” SAE Paper No. 801317.
14
Pervez, A. , and Ryu, J. , 2008, “ Safe Physical Human Robot Interaction-Past, Present and Future,” J. Mech. Sci. Technol., 22(3), pp. 469–483. [CrossRef]
15
Gao, D. , and Wampler, C. W. , 2009, “ Head Injury Criterion,” IEEE Rob. Autom. Mag., 16(4), pp. 71–74. [CrossRef]
16
Haddadin, S. , Albu-Schäffer, A. , and Hirzinger, G. , 2009, “ Requirements for Safe Robots: Measurements, Analysis and New Insights,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 28(11–12), pp. 1507–1527.
17
Zheng, Y.-F. , and Hemami, H. , 1985, “ Mathematical Modeling of a Robot Collision With Its Environment,” J. Rob. Syst., 2(3), pp. 289–307. [CrossRef]
18
Howe, R. D. , and Cutkosky, M. R. , 1993, “ Dynamic Tactile Sensing: Perception of Fine Surface Features With Stress Rate Sensing,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 9(2), pp. 140–151. [CrossRef]
19
Feddema, J. T. , and Novak, J. L. , 1994, “ Whole Arm Obstacle Avoidance for Teleoperated Robots,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), San Diego, CA, May 8–13, pp. 3303–3309.
20
Lumelsky, V. J. , and Cheung, E. , 1993, “ Real-Time Collision Avoidance in Teleoperated Whole-Sensitive Robot Arm Manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man Cybern., 23(1), pp. 194–203. [CrossRef]
21
Heinzmann, J. , and Zelinsky, A. , 2003, “ Quantitative Safety Guarantees for Physical Human-Robot Interaction,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 22(7–8), pp. 479–504. [CrossRef]
22
Kong, K. , Bae, J. , and Tomizuka, M. , 2009, “ Control of Rotary Series Elastic Actuator for Ideal Force-Mode Actuation in Human–Robot Interaction Applications,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, 14(1), pp. 105–118. [CrossRef]
23
Najmaei, N. , and Kermani, M. R. , 2011, “ Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Safe Human–Robot Interactions,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., Part B: Cybern., 41(2), pp. 448–459. [CrossRef]
24
Avanzini, G. B. , Ceriani, N. M. , Zanchettin, A. M. , Rocco, P. , and Bascetta, L. , 2014, “ Safety Control of Industrial Robots Based on a Distributed Distance Sensor,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 22(6), pp. 2127–2140. [CrossRef]
25
Zinn, M. , Khatib, O. , and Roth, B. , 2004, “ A New Actuation Approach for Human Friendly Robot Design,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), New Orleans, LA, Apr. 26–May 1, pp. 249–254.
26
Tonietti, G. , Schiavi, R. , and Bicchi, A. , 2006, “ Optimal Mechanical/Control Design for Safe and Fast Robotics,” Experimental Robotics IX, Springer, Berlin, pp. 311–320. [CrossRef]
27
Bicchi, A. , Bavaro, M. , Boccadamo, G. , De Carli, D. , Filippini, R. , Grioli, G. , Piccigallo, M. , Rosi, A. , Schiavi, R. , Sen, S. , and Tonietti, G. , 2008, “ Physical Human-Robot Interaction: Dependability, Safety, and Performance,” Tenth IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control (AMC), Trento, Italy, Mar. 26–28, pp. 9–14.
28
Chen, L. , Garabini, M. , Laffranchi, M. , Kashiri, N. , Tsagarakis, N. G. , Bicchi, A. , and Caldwell, D. G. , 2013, “ Optimal Control for Maximizing Velocity of the CompAct™ Compliant Actuator,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Karlsruhe, Germany, May 6–10, pp. 516–522.
29
Haddadin, S. , Albu-Schaffer, A. , Eiberger, O. , and Hirzinger, G. , 2010, “ New Insights Concerning Intrinsic Joint Elasticity for Safety,” 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Taipei, Taiwan, Oct. 18–22, pp. 2181–2187.
30
Lim, H.-O. , and Tanie, K. , 2000, “ Human Safety Mechanisms of Human-Friendly Robots: Passive Viscoelastic Trunk and Passively Movable Base,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 19(4), pp. 307–335. [CrossRef]
31
She, Y. , Meng, D. , Cui, J. , and Su, H.-J. , 2017, “ On the Impact Force of Human-Robot Interaction: Joint Compliance vs. Link Compliance,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Singapore, May 29–June 3, pp. 6718–6723.
32
Stilli, A. , Grattarola, L. , Feldmann, H. , Wurdemann, H. A. , and Althoefer, K. , 2017, “ Variable Stiffness Link (Vsl): Toward Inherently Safe Robotic Manipulators,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Singapore, May 29–June 3, pp. 4971–4976.
33
She, Y. , Su, H.-J. , Lai, C. , and Meng, D. , 2016, “Design and Prototype of a Tunable Stiffness Arm for Safe Human-Robot Interaction,” ASME Paper No. IDETC2016-59523.
34
She, Y. , Su, H.-J. , and Hurd, C. J. , 2015, “Shape Optimization of 2D Compliant Links for Design of Inherently Safe Robots,” ASME Paper No. DETC2015-46622.
35
Ham, R. , Sugar, T. , Vanderborght, B. , Hollander, K. , and Lefeber, D. , 2009, “ Compliant Actuator Designs,” IEEE Rob. Autom. Mag., 16(3), pp. 81–94. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Impact between the robot and the human operator occurs anywhere on the robotic links

+Impact between the robot and the human operator occurs anywhere on the robotic links
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Impact between the robot and the human operator occurs anywhere on the robotic links
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

A typical robotic link (a) and its mass–spring–mass impact model (b)

+A typical robotic link (a) and its mass–spring–mass impact model (b)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
A typical robotic link (a) and its mass–spring–mass impact model (b)
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The mechanical model of the robot impact system

+The mechanical model of the robot impact system
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The mechanical model of the robot impact system
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Distribution of HIC versus impact position for several link designs: (a) a RL gives HIC∝r2.5, (b) a rigid link with a CJ gives HIC∝r, (c) a flexible link with a uniform bending stiffness (U) results in HIC∝r0.25, and (d) a flexible link with variable bending stiffness (V) results in a constant HIC. (e) Comparison of HIC/HICmax for the four compliance designs.

+Distribution of HIC versus impact position for several link designs: (a) a RL gives HIC∝r2.5, (b) a rigid link with a CJ gives HIC∝r, (c) a flexible link with a uniform bending stiffness (U) results in HIC∝r0.25, and (d) a flexible link with variable bending stiffness (V) results in a constant HIC. (e) Comparison of HIC/HICmax for the four compliance designs.
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Distribution of HIC versus impact position for several link designs: (a) a RL gives HIC∝r2.5, (b) a rigid link with a CJ gives HIC∝r, (c) a flexible link with a uniform bending stiffness (U) results in HIC∝r0.25, and (d) a flexible link with variable bending stiffness (V) results in a constant HIC. (e) Comparison of HIC/HICmax for the four compliance designs.
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The plot width w versus radius r for four representative width distribution function

+The plot width w versus radius r for four representative width distribution function
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The plot width w versus radius r for four representative width distribution function
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The plot HIC as a function of radius r for the four width distribution functions given in Fig. 4

+The plot HIC as a function of radius r for the four width distribution functions given in Fig. 4
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The plot HIC as a function of radius r for the four width distribution functions given in Fig. 4
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

The continuous link model versus the discrete rigid segment model

+The continuous link model versus the discrete rigid segment model
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The continuous link model versus the discrete rigid segment model
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

The optimized width distribution of the link

+The optimized width distribution of the link
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The optimized width distribution of the link
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

The optimized bending stiffness EI

+The optimized bending stiffness EI
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The optimized bending stiffness EI
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

The optimized HIC distribution along the link direction

+The optimized HIC distribution along the link direction
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The optimized HIC distribution along the link direction
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

The Simmechanics model for impact simulation

+The Simmechanics model for impact simulation
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The Simmechanics model for impact simulation
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

The static model of the variable width link

+The static model of the variable width link
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The static model of the variable width link
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Trajectory of the deflected tip point according to the FEA simulation and static model

+Trajectory of the deflected tip point according to the FEA simulation and static model
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Trajectory of the deflected tip point according to the FEA simulation and static model
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Normalized displacement at the tip of the link given sinusoidal input signal at the joint angle

+Normalized displacement at the tip of the link given sinusoidal input signal at the joint angle
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Normalized displacement at the tip of the link given sinusoidal input signal at the joint angle
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Compare the bandwidth of the four systems

+Compare the bandwidth of the four systems
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Compare the bandwidth of the four systems
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Stress evaluation

+Stress evaluation
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Stress evaluation
Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Safety evaluation

+Safety evaluation
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Safety evaluation

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
Introduction and Definitions
Handbook on Stiffness & Damping in Mechanical Design> Chapter 1
Digital Human in Engineering and Bioengineering Applications
Advances in Computers and Information in Engineering Research, Volume 1> Chapter 11
Time-Varying Coefficient Aided MM Scheme
Robot Manipulator Redundancy Resolution
QRAS Approach to Phased Mission Analysis (PSAM-0444)
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment & Management (PSAM)
Using SPARC to Extract Risk Insights from Performance Assessments for HLW Repositories (PSAM-0283)
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment & Management (PSAM)
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
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. | Accept
Sign In