Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:29:46.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Optimal Feet-Forces’ and Torque Distributions of Six-Legged Robot Maneuvering on Various Terrains

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 August 2019

Abhijit Mahapatra ,
Shibendu Shekhar Roy  and
Dilip Kumar Pratihar Open the ORCID record for Dilip Kumar Pratihar [Opens in a new window]
Abhijit Mahapatra
Affiliation:
Advanced Design and Analysis Group, CSIR-Central Mechanical Engineering Research Institute, Durgapur713209, India
Shibendu Shekhar Roy
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur713209, India
Dilip Kumar Pratihar*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur721302, India
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

An analytical model with coupled dynamics for a realistic six-legged robotic system locomoting on various terrains has been developed, and its effectiveness has been proven through computer simulations and validated using virtual prototyping tools and real experiment. The approach is new and has not been attempted before. This study investigated the optimal feet-forces’ distributions under body force and foot–ground interaction considering compliant contact and friction force models for the feet undergoing slip. The kinematic model with 114 implicit constraints in 3D Cartesian space has been transformed in terms of generalized coordinates with a reduced explicit set of 24 constrained equations using kinematic transformations. The nonlinear constrained inverse dynamics model of the system has been formulated as a coupled dynamical problem using Newton–Euler method with realistic environmental conditions (compliant foot–ground contact, impact, and friction) and computed using optimization techniques due to its indeterminate nature. One case study has been carried out to validate the analytical data with the simulated ones executed in MSC.ADAMS® (Automated Dynamic Analysis of Mechanical Systems), while the other case study has been conducted to validate the analytical and simulated data with the experimental ones. In both these cases, results are found to be in close agreement, which proves the efficacy of the model.

Keywords

Six-legged robotCoupled multibody dynamicsFoot–terrain interactionsOptimal feet-forcesQuadratic programming
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 38 , Issue 6 , June 2020 , pp. 1041 - 1063
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Wang, H, Sang, L, Hu, X, Zhang, D and Yu, H, “Kinematics and dynamics analysis of a quadruped walking robot with parallel leg mechanism,” Chinese J. Mech. Eng. 26(5), 881–891 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandoval-Castro, X. Y., Garcia-Murillo, M, Perez-Resendiz, L. A. and Castillo-Castañeda, E, “Kinematics of Hex-Piderix - A six-legged robot - Using screw theory,” Int. J. Adv. Robot. Sys. 10(19), 1–8 (2013).Google Scholar
Roy, S. S., Singh, A. K. and Pratihar, D. K., “Estimation of optimal feet forces and joint torques for on-line control of six-legged robot,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 27(5), 910–917 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jin, B, Chen, C and Li, W, “Power consumption optimization for a hexapod walking robot,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 71(2), 195–209 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Santos, P. G., Garcia, E, Ponticelli, R and Armada, M, “Minimizing energy consumption in hexapod robots,” Adv. Robot. 23(6), 681–704 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erden, M. S. and Leblebicioglu, K, “Torque distribution in a six-legged robot,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 23(1), 179–186 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, S. S. and Pratihar, D. K., “Effects of turning gait parameters on energy consumption and stability of a six-legged walking robot,” Robot. Auto. Sys. 60(1), 72–82 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saranli, U and Buehler, M, “Modeling and analysis of a spatial compliant hexapod,” Technical papers, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, McGill University, Montreal, Canada (1999) pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
Yigit, A. S., Christoforou, A. P. and Majeed, M. A., “A nonlinear visco-elastoplastic impact model and the coefficient of restitution,” Nonlin. Dynam. 66(4), 509–521 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, I and Gilmore, B. J., “Multi-body impact motion with friction- analysis, simulation and experimental validation,” ASME J. Mech. Des. 115(3), 412–422 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergés, P and Bowling, A, “Rebound, slip, and compliance in the modeling and analysis of discrete impacts in legged,” J. Vib. Control 12(12), 1407–1430 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmiedeler, J. P. and Waldron, K. J., “Impact analysis as a design tool for the legs of mobile robots,” In: Advances in Robot Kinematics (Lenarcic, J and Stanisic, M. M. eds.) (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, 2000) pp. 129–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jingtao, L, Feng, W, Huangying, Y, Tianmiao, W and Peijiang, Y, “Energy efficiency analysis of quadruped robot with trot gait and combined cycloid foot trajectory,” Chinese J. Mech. Eng. 27(1), 138–145 (2014).Google Scholar
Gorinevsky, D. M. and Shneider, A. Y., “Force control in locomotion of legged vehicles over rigid and soft surfaces,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 9(2), 4–23 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, J.-S., Cheng, F.-T., Yang, K.-T., Kung, F.-C. and York-Yih, S, “Optimal force distribution in multilegged vehicles,” Robotica 17(2), 159–172 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, S. S. and Pratihar, D. K., “Kinematics, dynamics and power consumption analyses for turning motion of a six-legged robot,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 74(3–4), 663–688 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machado, M, Moreira, P, Flores, P and Lankarani, H. M., “Compliant contact force models in multibody dynamics: Evolution of the Hertz contact theory,” Mech. Mach. Theory 53, 99–121 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
C. Ambrósio, J. A., “Impact of Rigid and Flexible Multibody Systems: Deformation Description and Contact Models,” In: Virtual Nonlinear Multibody Systems, NATO ASI Series (Schiehlen, W and Valasek, M eds.) (Springer Science and Business Media, Dordrecht, 2003) pp. 57–81. doi: 10.1007/978-94-010-0203-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bi, S.-S., Zhou, X.-D. and Marghitu, D. B., “Impact modelling and analysis of the compliant legged robots,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part K J. Multi-body Dyn. 226(2), 85–94 (2012).Google Scholar
Gor, M. M., Pathak, P. M., Samantaray, A. K., Yang, J.-M. and Kwak, S. W., “Control oriented model-based simulation and experimental studies on a compliant legged quadruped robot,” Robot. Auto. Syst. 72, 217–234 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamner, S. R., Seth, A, Steele, K. M. and Delp, S. L., “A rolling constraint reproduces ground reaction forces and moments in dynamic simulations of walking, running, and crouch gait,” J. Biomech. 46(10), 1772–1776 (2013).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilardi, G and Sharf, I, “Literature survey of contact dynamics modeling,” Mech. Mach. Theory 37(10), 1213–1239 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brach, R, Mechanical Impact Dynamics: Rigid Body Collisions (Brach Engineering, LLC, Naperville, IL, 2007).Google Scholar
Hunt, K and Crossley, F, “Coefficient of restitution interpreted as damping in vibroimpact,” Trans. ASME J. Appl. Mech. 42, 440–445 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marhefka, D. W. and Orin, D. E., “A compliant contact model with nonlinear damping for simulation of robotic systems,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A Syst. Hum. 29, 566–572 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ding, L, Gao, H, Deng, Z, Song, J, Liu, Y, Liu, G and Iagnemma, K, “Foot–terrain interaction mechanics for legged robots: Modeling and experimental validation,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 32(13), 1585–1606 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasilopoulos, V, Paraskevas, I. S. and Papadopoulos, E. G., “Compliant Terrain Legged Locomotion Using a Viscoplastic Approach,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS’14), Chicago, Illinois, USA (2014) pp. 4849–4854.Google Scholar
Lee, T. W. and Wang, A. C., “On the dynamics of intermittent-motion mechanisms—Part 1: Dynamic model and response,” J. Mech. Trans. Auto. Des. 105(3), 534–540 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bombled, Q and Verlinden, O, “Dynamic simulation of six-legged robots with a focus on joint friction,” Multibody Syst. Dyn. 28(4), 395–417 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azad, M and Featherstone, R, “A new nonlinear model of contact normal force,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 30(3), 736–739 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kikuuwe, R, Takesue, N, Sano, A, Mochiyama, H and Fujimoto, H, “Fixed-Step Friction Simulation: From Classical Coulomb Model to Modern Continuous Models,” Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Edmonton, Canada (2005) pp. 3910–3917.Google Scholar
Rajaei, M and Ahmadian, H, “Development of generalized Iwan model to simulate frictional contacts with variable normal loads,” Appl. Math. Model. 38(15–16), 4006–4018 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orin, D. E. and Oh, Y, “Control of force distribution in robotic mechanisms containing closed kinematic chains,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 102, 134–141 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, J and Roth, A, “Analysis of multifingered hands,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 4(4), 3–17 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, F.-T. and Orin, D. E., “Efficient algorithm for optimal force distribution—the compact-dual LP method,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Auto. 6(2), 178–187 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kar, D. C., Issac, K. K. and Jayarajan, K, “Minimum energy force distribution for a walking robot,” J. Robot. Syst. 18(2), 47–54 (2001).3.0.CO;2-S>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z, Ge, S. S. and Liu, S, “Contact-force distribution optimization and control for quadruped robots using both gradient and adaptive neural networks,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 25(8), 1460–1473 (2014).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, A, Liu, M and Howard, D, “Optimization of legged robot locomotion by control of foot-force distribution,” Trans. Inst. W.Y. Meas. Control 26(4), 311–323 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowling, A, “Dynamic performance, mobility, and agility of multilegged robots,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 128(4), 765–777 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, V and Waldron, K. J., “Force distribution in walking vehicles,” ASME J. Mech. Des. 112(1), 90–99 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouezdou, F. B., Bruneau, O and Guinot, J. C., “Dynamic analysis tool for legged robots,” Multibody Syst. Dyn. 2(4), 369–391 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahapatra, A, Roy, S. S. and Pratihar, D. K., “Study on feet forces’ distributions, energy consumption and dynamic stability measure of hexapod robot during crab walking,” Appl. Math. Model. 65, 717–744 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ding, X and Yang, F, “Study on hexapod robot manipulation using legs,” Robotica 34(2), 468–481 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, H, Rigid Body Dynamics of Mechanisms 1- Theoretical Basis, 1st edn. (Springer, Berlin, 2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahapatra, A, Roy, S. S. and Pratihar, D. K., “Computer aided modeling and analysis of turning motion of hexapod robot on varying terrains,” Int. J. Mech. Mater Des. 11(3), 309–336 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumlu, A and Erenturk, K, “Modeling and trajectory tracking control of 6-DOF RSS type parallel manipulator,” Robotica 32(4), 643–657 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daud, Y, Mamun, A. A. and Xu, Jian-Xin, “Dynamic modeling and characteristics analysis of lateral-pendulum unicycle robot,” Robotica 35(3), 537–568 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, P, Xiong, H and Kong, J, “Dynamic analysis of 6-SPS parallel mechanism,” Int. J. Mech. Mater. Des. 8(2), 121–128 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukushima, E. F and Hirose, S, “Attitude and Steering Control of the Long Articulated Body Mobile Robot KORYU,” In: Climbing and Walking Robots, Towards New Applications (Zhang, H ed.) (Itech Education and Publishing, Vienna, Austria, 2007) pp. 23–48.Google Scholar