Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T13:02:38.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Design, modeling, and constraint-compliant control of an autonomous morphing surface for omnidirectional object conveyance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2021

Ioannis A. Raptis Open the ORCID record for Ioannis A. Raptis [Opens in a new window] ,
Christopher Hansen  and
Martin A. Sinclair
Ioannis A. Raptis*
Affiliation:
Autonomous Robotic Systems Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North Carolina A&T State University, Greensboro, North Carolina 27411, USA
Christopher Hansen
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, Massachusetts 01854, USA
Martin A. Sinclair
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, Massachusetts 01854, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we conceptualize, analyze, and assemble a prototype adaptive surface system capable of morphing its geometric configuration using an array of linear actuators to impose omnidirectional movement of objects that lie on the surface. The principal focus and contribution of this paper is the derivation of feedback control protocols–for regulating the actuators’ length in order to accomplish the object conveyance task–that scale with the number of actuators and the nonlinear kinematic constraints of the morphing surface. Simulations and experimental results demonstrate the advantages of distributed manipulation over static-shaped feeders.

Keywords

Distributed manipulationactuator networkslarge-scale spatial actuationcontrol of robotic systemsforce controlnovel applications of robotics
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , February 2022 , pp. 213 - 233
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

This work is the complete version of the synoptic conference proceedings paper [5]. This full paper includes additional sections, clarifying remarks, and results compared to its conference counterpart.

References

Savia, M. and Koivo, H.N., “Contact micromanipulationSurvey of strategies,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 14(4), 504–514 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banerjee, A.G. and Gupta, S.K., “Research in automated planning and control for micromanipulation,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Sci. Eng. 10(3), 485–495 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kortschack, A., Shirinov, A., Trper, T. and Fatikow, S., “Development of mobile versatile nanohandling microrobots: Design, driving principles, haptic control,” Robotica 23(4), 419–434 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oh, K., Liu, X., Kang, D. and Kim, J., “Optimal design of a micro parallel positioning platform. Part I: Kinematic analysis,” Robotica 22(6), 599–609 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, M. and Raptis, I.A., “Object Conveyance Control Algorithms with Spatially Changeable End Target Location Using Large-Scale Actuator Networks,” 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE, 2015), pp. 6052–6057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reznik, D. and Canny, J., “A Flat Rigid Plate is a Universal Planar Manipulator,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 1998, vol. 2 (IEEE, 1998) pp. 1471–1477.Google Scholar
Reznik, D., Moshkovich, E. and Canny, J., Building a Universal Planar Manipulator (Springer, 2000) pp. 147–171.Google Scholar
Böhringer, K.-F., Donald, B.R. and MacDonald, N.C., “Upper and Lower Bounds for Programmable Vector Fields with Applications to Mems and Vibratory Plate Parts Feeders,” International Workshop on Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics (WAFR) (Citeseer, 1996).Google Scholar
Quaid, A.E. and Hollis, R.L., Design and Simulation of a Miniature Mobile Parts Feeder (Springer, 2000) pp. 127–146.Google Scholar
Beal, J. and Bachrach, J., “Infrastructure for engineered emergence on sensor/actuator networks,” Intell. Syst. 21(2), 10–19 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhringer, K.-F., Donald, B.R. and MacDonald, N.C., “Programmable force fields for distributed manipulation, with applications to mems actuator arrays and vibratory parts feeders,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 18(2), 168–200 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhringer, K.-F., Donald, B.R., Kavraki, L.E. and Lamiraux, F., A Distributed, Universal Device For Planar Parts Feeding: Unique Part Orientation in Programmable Force Fields (Springer, 2000).Google Scholar
Konishi, S., Mita, Y. and Fujita, H., Autonomous Distributed System for Cooperative Micromanipulation (Springer, 2000) pp. 87–102.Google Scholar
Donald, B.R., Levey, C.G. and Paprotny, I., “Planar microassembly by parallel actuation of mems microrobots,” IEEE Microelectromech. Syst. 17(4), 789–808 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yim, M., Reich, J. and Berlin, A.A., “Two Approaches to Distributed Manipulation,” In: Distributed Manipulation (Springer, 2000) pp. 237–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saab, W., Racioppo, P. and Ben-Tzvi, P., “A review of coupling mechanism designs for modular reconfigurable robots.” Robotica 37(2), 378–403 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikou, A., Gavridis, G.C. and Kyriakopoulos, K.J., “Mechanical Design, Modelling and Control of a Novel Aerial Manipulator,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (2015) pp. 4698–4703.Google Scholar
Mohiuddin, A., Tarek, T., Zweiri, Y. and Gan, D., “A survey of single and multi-UAV aerial manipulation,” Unmanned Syst. 8(2), 119–147 (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z., Nakano, E. and Matsukawa, T., “Cooperating Multiple Behavior-Based Robots for Object Manipulation,” In: Distributed Autonomous Robotic Systems (1994) pp. 371–382.Google Scholar
Brown, R.G. and Jennings, J.S., “A Pusher/Steerer Model for Strongly Cooperative Mobile Robot Manipulation,” Proceedings 1995 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, vol. 3 (1995) pp. 562–568.Google Scholar
Johnson, P.J. and Bay, J.S., “Distributed control of simulated autonomous mobile robot collectives in payload transportation,” Autonom. Robots 3(1), 43–63 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grob, R. and Dorigo, M., “Cooperative Transport of Objects of Different Shapes and sizes,” International Workshop on Ant Colony Optimization and Swarm Intelligence (2004) pp. 106–117.Google Scholar
Yao, S., Ceccarelli, M., Carbone, G. and Dong, Z., “Grasp configuration planning for a low-cost and easy-operation underactuated three-fingered robot hand,” Mech. Mach. Theory 129, 51–69 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimoga, K.B., “Robot grasp synthesis algorithms: A survey,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 15(3), 230–266 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yan, Z., Jouandeau, N. and Cherif, A.A., “A survey and analysis of multi-robot coordination,” Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 10(12), 399 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuci, E., Alkilabi, M. and Akanyeti, O., “Cooperative object transport in multi-robot systems: A review of the state-of-the-art,” Front. Robot. AI 5(59) (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, D., “A platform with six degrees of freedom,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. 180(2), 371–386 (1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsai, K.Y., Lin, P.J. and Yu, H.Y., “Developing contour surfaces of manipulators with specified dexterities,” Robotica 29(7), 371–386 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, H. and Luntz, J., “Distributed manipulation of flat objects with two airflow sinks,” IEEE Trans. Robot 22(6), 1025 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varsos, K., Moon, H. and Luntz, J., “Generation of Quadratic Force Fields from Potential Flow Fields for Distributed Manipulation,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA 2005 (IEEE, 2005) pp. 1021–1027.Google Scholar
Varsos, K., Moon, H. and Luntz, J., “Generation of quadratic potential force fields from flow fields for distributed manipulation,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 22(1), 108–118 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varsos, K., “Minimalist Approaches for Distributed Manipulation Force Fields in Flexible Part Handling,” PhD thesis, University of Michigan (2006).Google Scholar
Laurent, G.J., Delettre, A. and Le Fort-Piat, N., “A new aerodynamic-traction principle for handling products on an air cushion,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 27(2), 379–384 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delettre, A., Laurent, G.J. and Le Fort-Piat, N., “2-Dof Contactless Distributed Manipulation Using Superposition of Induced Air Flows,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (2011) pp. 5121–5126.Google Scholar
Delettre, A., Laurent, G.J. and Le Fort-Piat, N., “A New Contactless Conveyor System for Handling Clean and Delicate Products Using Induced Air Flows,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (2010) pp. 2351–2356.Google Scholar
Akella, S., Huang, W., Lynch, K.M. and Mason, M.T., “Sensorless Parts Feeding with a One Joint Robot,” Algorithms for Robotic Motion and Manipulation (1996), pp. 229–237.Google Scholar
Luntz, J.E., Messner, W. and Choset, H., “Distributed manipulation using discrete actuator arrays,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 20(7), 553–583 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tadokoro, S., Fuji, S., Takamori, T. and Oguro, K., “Distributed Actuation Devices Using Soft Gel Actuators,” In: Distributed Manipulation (Springer, 2000) pp. 217–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, P., Kumar, V. and Pang, J.-S., “A Two-Point Boundary-Value Approach for Planning Manipulation Tasks,” In: Robotics: Science and Systems (2005) pp. 121–128.Google Scholar
Yu, C.-H. and Adviser-Nagpal, R., Biologically-Inspired Control for Self-Adaptive Multiagent Systems (Harvard University, 2010).Google Scholar
Yu, C.-H., Haller, K., Ingber, D. and Nagpal, R., “Morpho: A Self-Deformable Modular Robot Inspired by Cellular Structure,” IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (2008) pp. 3571–3578.Google Scholar
Leithinger, D. and Ishii, H., “Relief: A Scalable Actuated Shape Display,” Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (ACM, 2010) pp. 221–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laschi, C., Mazzolai, B. and Cianchetti, M., “Soft Robotics: Technologies and Systems Pushing the Boundaries of Robot Abilities,” Sci. Robot. 1(1), eaah3690 (2016).Google Scholar
Trivedi, D., Lotfi, A. and Rahn, C.D., “Geometrically exact models for soft robotic manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 24(4), 773–780 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, G. and Davies, J.B.C., “Continuum Robots-A State of the Art,” Proceedings 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No. 99CH36288C), vol. 4 (IEEE, 1999) pp. 2849–2854.Google Scholar
Björnson, E., Özdogan, Ö. and Larsson, E.G., “Sensorless parts feeding with a one joint robot,” IEEE Commun. Mag. 58(12), 90–96 (2020).Google Scholar