Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-9nwgx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-22T14:07:58.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unification of mathematical descriptions of compliant behavior centers with physical realizations of those behaviors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2025

Shuguang Huang Open the ORCID record for Shuguang Huang [Opens in a new window]  and
Joseph M. Schimmels Open the ORCID record for Joseph M. Schimmels [Opens in a new window]
Shuguang Huang*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Joseph M. Schimmels
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, USA
*
Corresponding author: Shuguang Huang; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A more intuitive appreciation of spatial compliant behavior can be obtained through analysis and description of the behavior in terms of its centers, specifically the center of stiffness, the center of compliance, and the center of elasticity. This paper investigates the properties of each of these centers. Necessary and sufficient conditions for the coincidence of these centers are identified. A physical appreciation of those compliant behaviors that have coincident centers is obtained in terms of restrictions on the geometry of topologically simple mechanisms that realize those behaviors. The results can be used in the design of compliant mechanisms for robotic manipulation, especially when the compliance is characterized by the location of its center.

Keywords

centers of a compliant behaviorspatial stiffness and compliancecompliant mechanisms
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , First View , pp. 1 - 27
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. 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.)

References

Whitney, D. E., “Quasi-static assembly of compliantly supported rigid parts,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 104(1), 65–77 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, M. T., “Compliant Motion,” In: Robot Motion: Planning and Control (Brady, M., ed.) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1983), pp. 305–322.Google Scholar
Loncaric, J., “Normal forms of stiffness and compliance matrices,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 3(6), 567–572 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciblak, N. and Lipkin, H.. “Centers of Stiffness, Compliance and Elasticity in the Modelling of Robotic Systems.” In: Proceedings of the ASME Design Technical Conference, Minneapolis, MN, USA (September 1994) pp. 185–195.Google Scholar
Ball, R. S.. A Treatise on the Theory of Screws (Cambridge University Press, London, U.K, 1900).Google Scholar
Dimentberg, F. M., The Screw Calculus and its Applications in Mechanics (Foreign Technology Division, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, USA, 1965). Document No. FTD-HT-23-1632-67.Google Scholar
Griffis, M. and Duffy, J., “Global stiffness modeling of a class of simple compliant couplings,” Mech. Mach. Theory 28(2), 207–224 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, T. and Lipkin, H., “Structure of robot compliance,” ASME J. Mech. Design 115(3), 576–580 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, T. and Lipkin, H., “A classification of robot compliance,” ASME J. Mech. Design 115(3), 581–584 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fasse, E. D., “On the spatial compliance of robotic manipulators,” J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 119(4), 839–844 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, W. S., Zefran, M. and Kumar, V., “On the $6\times 6$ stiffness matrix for three dimensional motions,” Mech. Mach. Theory 33(4), 389–408 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, S. and Kao, I., “Conservative congruence transformation for joint and cartesian stiffness matrices of robotic hands and fingers,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 19(9), 835–847 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, H.-J., Dorozhin, D. and Vance, J., “A screw theory approach for the conceptual design of flexible joints for compliant mechanisms,” ASME J. Mech. Robot. 1(4), 0410091–8 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, B., Li, P., Yang, C., Hu, X. and Zhao, Y., “Robotica: Decoupled elastostatic stiffness modeling of hybrid robots,” Robotica 42(7), 2309–2327 (2024).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinto, C., Corral, J., Altuzarra, O. and Hernández, A., “A methodology for static stiffness mapping in lower mobility parallel manipulators with decoupled motions,” Robotica 28(5), 719–735 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “Geometric construction-based realization of planar elastic behaviors with parallel and serial manipulators,” ASME J. Mech. Robot. 9(5), 051006 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “Grasp compliance achieved with a planar hand composed of multiple 3-joint fingers,” Robotica 41(2), 587–608 (2023).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wen, K., Shin, C.-B., Seo, T.-W. and Lee, J.-W., “Stiffness synthesis of 3-DOF planar 3RPR parallel mechanisms,” Robotica 34(12), 2776–2787 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “The bounds and realization of spatial stiffnesses achieved with simple springs connected in parallel,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 14(3), 466–475 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “The bounds and realization of spatial compliances achieved with simple serial elastic mechanisms,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 16(1), 99–103 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. G., “Minimal realization of a spatial stiffness matrix with simple springs connected in parallel,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 15(5), 953–958 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciblak, N. and Lipkin, H.. “Synthesis of Cartesian Stiffness for Robotic Applications.” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Detroit, MI, USA (May 1999).Google Scholar
Choi, K., Jiang, S. and Li, Z., “Spatial stiffness realization with parallel springs using geometric parameters,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 18(3), 264–284 (2002).Google Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “The duality in spatial stiffness and compliance as realized in parallel and serial elastic mechanisms,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 124(1), 76–84 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “Achieving an arbitrary spatial stiffness with springs connected in parallel,” ASME J. Mech. Design 120(4), 520–526 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “Geometric construction-based realization of spatial elastic behaviors in parallel and serial manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 34(3), 764–780 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, K., Dong, H., Qiu, C., Chen, I.-M. and Dai, J., “Repelling-screw-based geometrical interpretation of dualities of compliant mechanisms,” Mech. Mach. Theory 169, 104636 (2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitney, D. E. and Nevins, J. L.. “What is the Remote Center Compliance (RCC) and What Can it Do.” In: Proceeding of the 9th International Symposium and Exposition on Industrial Robots, Washington, DC, USA (March 1979) pp. 135–152.Google Scholar
Kang, S., Hwang, Y. K., Kim, M., Lee, C. and Lee, K.-I., “A compliant controller dynamically updating the compliance center by contact localization,” Robotica 16(5), 543–550 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciblak, N. and Lipkin, H., “Design and analysis of remote center of compliance structures,” J. Robot. Syst. 20(8), 425–427 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “Geometry based synthesis of planar compliances with redundant mechanisms having five compliant components,” Mech. Mach. Theory 134, 645–666 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “Minimal realizations of spatial stiffnesses with parallel or serial mechanisms having concurrent axes,” J. Robot. Syst. 18(3), 135–246 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “The relationship between mechanism geometry and the centers of stiffness and compliance,” Mech. Mach. Theory 167, 104565 (2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, P. J., Revzen, S., Thorne, C. E. and Yim, M., “A general stiffness model for programmable matter and modular robotic structures,” Robotica 29(1), 103–121 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hao, G. and Li, H., “Design of 3-legged xyz compliant parallel manipulators with minimised parasitic rotations,” Robotica 33(4), 787–806 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “Requirements on the spatial distribution of elastic components used in compliance realization,” IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 7(4), 12347–12354 (2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipkin, H. and Patterson, T.. “Geometrical Properties of Modelled Robot Elasticity: Part II – Center-of-Elasticity.” In: ASME Design Technical Conference, DE-vol. 45, Scottsdale, AZ, USA (September 1992) pp. 187–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciblak, N., Analysis of Cartesian Stiffness and Compliance with Applications Ph.D thesis (Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA, 1998. Google Scholar
Gallier, J., Schur Complements and Applications (Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, S. and Schimmels, J. M., “The eigenscrew decomposition of spatial stiffness matrices,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 6(2), 146–156 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutkosky, M. R. and Kao, I., “Computing and controlling the compliance of a robotic hand,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 5(2), 617–622 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar