Biomimetic and Soft Robotics

doi:10.1017/9781139058995.014

13 - Biomimetic and Soft Robotics

Materials, Mechanics, and Mechanisms

from Part III - Natural Phenomena

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 August 2020

Wanliang Shan and

Yantao Shen

Edited by

Wole Soboyejo and

Leo Daniel

Show author details

Wole Soboyejo: Affiliation:
Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Massachusetts
Leo Daniel: Affiliation:
Kwara State University, Nigeria

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Since the advent of the first programmable robotic arm in the early 1960s by George C. Devol, the robotics industry has seen fast growth, and nowadays robotic arms are ubiquitous in automobile assembly lines. In addition to those fixed to the ground as in the robotic arm case, autonomous mobile robots have also been designed and manufactured, and have found ample applications in many areas such as space and deep-sea exploration, thanks to synergistic progress in control, actuation, and information technology, among others. These robots are featured with high accuracy for force and position control. They are ideal for repetitive tasks that quickly bore humans. They make many fewer mistakes. Their bodies are made of hard materials, such as metals and hard plastics, while their control and actuation units use metal or semiconductors such as silicon for electronics.

Type: Chapter
Information: Bioinspired Structures and Design , pp. 320 - 342

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139058995.014 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2020

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Hunter, I. W., & Lafontaine, S. (1992). A comparison of muscle with artificial actuators. IEEE Solid-State Sensor and Actuator Workshop, 5, 178–185.Google Scholar

Jung, D. W. G., Blange, T., & De Graaf, H. (1988). Elastic properties of relaxed, activated, and rigor muscle fibers measured with microsecond resolution. Biophysics Journal, 54, 897–908.Google Scholar

Kier, W. M. (2012). The diversity of hydrostatic skeletons. Journal of Experimental Biology, 215, 1247–1257.Google Scholar

Motokawa, T. (1984). Connective tissue catch in echinoderms. Biological Reviews, 59, 255–270.Google Scholar

Trotter, J. A., Tipper, J., Lyons-Levy, G., et al. (2000). Towards a fibrous composite with dynamically controlled stiffness: Lessons from echinoderms. Biochemical Society Transactions, 28, 357–362.Google Scholar

Reed, J. L., Hemmelgarn, C. D., Pelley, B. M., & Havens, E. (2005). Adaptive wing structures, smart structures and materials. In White, E. V. (Ed.) Industrial and commercial applications of smart structures technologies, vol. 5762. SPIE, 132–142.Google Scholar

McKnight, G., & Henry, C. (2005). Variable stiffness materials for reconfigurable surface applications. In Armstrong, W. D. (Ed.), Smart structures and materials 2005: Active materials: Behavior and mechanics, vol. 5761. SPIE, 119–126.Google Scholar

McKnight, G., Doty, R., Keefe, A. Herrera, G., & Henry, C. (2010). Segmented reinforcement variable stiffness materials for reconfigurable surfaces. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 21, 1783–1793.Google Scholar

Kobori, T., Takahashi, M., Nasu, T., Niwa, N., & Ogasawara, N. (1993). Seismic response controlled structure with active variable stiffness system. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 22, 925–941.CrossRef Google Scholar

Takahashi, M., Kobori, T., Nasu, T., Niwa, N., & Kurata, N. (1998). Active response control of buildings for large earthquakes – Seismic response control system with variable structural characteristics. Smart Materials and Structures, 7, 522–529.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gandhi, F., & Kang, S. G. (2007). Beams with controllable flexural stiffness. Smart Materials and Structures, 16, 1179–1184.Google Scholar

Murray, G., Gandhi, F., & Kang, S. G. (2009). Flexural stiffness control of multi-layered beams. AIAA Journal, 47, 757–766.Google Scholar

Bergamini, A., Christen, R., & Motavalli, M. (2007). Electrostatically tunable bending stiffness in a GFRP–CFRP composite beam. Smart Materials and Structures, 16, 575–582.Google Scholar

Henke, M., Sorber, J., & Gerlach, G. (2012). Multi-layer beam with variable stiffness based on electroactive polymers. In Bar-Cohen, Y. (Ed.), Electroactive polymer actuators and devices, vol. 8340. SPIE 83401P.CrossRef Google Scholar

Majidi, C. (2003). Soft robotics: A perspective – Current trends and prospects for the future. Soft Robotics, 1, 5–11.Google Scholar

Shan, W. L., Lu, T., & Majidi, C. (2013). Soft-matter composites with electrically tunable elastic rigidity. Smart Materials and Structures, 22, 085005.CrossRef Google Scholar

Shan, W. L., Lu, T., Wang, Z.H., & Majidi, C. (2013). Thermal analysis and design of a multi-layered rigidity tunable composite. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 66, 271–278.CrossRef Google Scholar

Shan, W. L., Diller, S., Tutcuoglu, A., & Majidi, C. (2015). Rigidity-tuning conductive elastomer. Smart Materials and Structures, 24, 065001.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mohammadi Nasab, A., Sabzehzar, A., Tatari, M., Majidi, C., & Shan, W. L. (2017). A soft gripper with rigidity tunable elastomer strips as ligaments. Soft Robotics, 4(4), 411–420.Google Scholar

Shan, W. L., & Turner, K. Methods for fast and reversible dry adhesion tuning between composite structures and substrates using dynamically tunable stiffness. Full patent filed in January 2018.Google Scholar

Conn, A. T., & Rossiter, J. (2012). Smart radially folding structures. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 17(5), 968–975.Google Scholar

Hoberman, C. (July 24, 1990). Reversibly expandable doubly curved truss structure. US Patent 4,942,700.Google Scholar

Escrig, F., Valcarcel, J. P., & Sanchez, J. (1996). Deployable cover on a swimming pool in Seville. Bulletin of the International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures, 37(1), 39–70.Google Scholar

Dai, J. S., & Wang, D. (2007). Geometric analysis and synthesis of the metamorphic robotic hand. Journal of Mechanical Design, 129(11), 1191–1197.Google Scholar

Kong, X. (2013). Type synthesis of 3-dof parallel manipulators with both a planar operation mode and a spatial translational operation mode. Journal of Mechanisms and Robotics, 5(4), 041015.Google Scholar

Luo, Y., Zhao, N., Shen, Y., & Kim, K. J. (2016). Scissor mechanisms enabled compliant modular earthworm-like robot: Segmental muscle-mimetic design, prototyping and locomotion performance validation. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, 2020–2025.Google Scholar

Edwards, C. A., & Bohlen, P. J. (1996). Biology and ecology of earthworms, vol. 3. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar

McLaughlin, M. (1994). Nature Study, 47, 12–15.Google Scholar

Lawrence, G., Mutchmor, John A., & Dolphin Mitchell, Warren D. (1988). Zoology. Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Company.Google Scholar

Van Leeuwen, J. L., & William, M. K. (1997). Functional design of tentacles in squid: Linking sarcomere ultrastructure to gross morphological dynamics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 352(1353), 551–571.Google Scholar

Fang, H., Li, S., Wang, K.W. & Xu, J. (2015). Phase coordination and phase–velocity relationship in metameric robot locomotion. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 10(6), 066006.Google Scholar

Boxerbaum, A. S., Shaw, K.M., Chiel, H.J. & Quinn, R.D. (2012). Continuous wave peristaltic motion in a robot. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 31(3), 302–318.Google Scholar