Hostname: page-component-669899f699-rg895 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-01T15:55:31.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A multiple working mode approach to robotic hammering: Analysis and experiments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2021

Vladyslav Romanyuk ,
Sina Soleymanpour  and
Guangjun Liu Open the ORCID record for Guangjun Liu [Opens in a new window]
Vladyslav Romanyuk
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Sina Soleymanpour
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Guangjun Liu*
Affiliation:
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
*
*Corresponding author. Email: gjliu@ryerson.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A robot arm may be in need for performing various operations, especially for service robots and space robots. This paper presents a strategy that allows a modular and reconfigurable robot to safely perform nail hammering without hardware enhancements. The purpose is to equip a versatile robot arm with hammering capability that can be used if needed. To do this, a multiple working mode approach is applied to switch the selected joint(s) to passive mode with friction compensation to allow free rotation during impact. Analytic impulse models are used to predict joint impulses and serve as criteria for mode switching. Advantages of the proposed approach include savings on space, weight, costs, and complexity for a limited range of nail/board environments. An experimental study has validated analytic models of hammering and demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

Keywords

Robotic hammeringMultiple working mode controlModular reconfigurable robotImpulse model
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , March 2022 , pp. 570 - 582
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Izumi, T. and Hitaka, Y., “Control of a Flexible Link Hammer in a Gravitational Field and its Application to a Home Robot Tapping Human Shoulders,” Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, vol. 2 (1993) pp. 1188–1193.Google Scholar
Izumi, T. and Hitaka, Y., “Hitting from any direction in 3-D space by a robot with a flexible link hammer,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom. 13(2), 296–301 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, T., Konno, A., Gou, L. and Uchiyama, M., “A Humanoid Robot that Breaks Wooden Boards Applying Impulsive Force,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (2006) pp. 5919–5924.Google Scholar
Tsujita, T., Konno, A., Komizunai, S., Nomura, Y., Owa, T., Myojin, T., Ayaz, Y. and Uchiyama, M., “Humanoid Robot Motion Generation for Nailing Task,” IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (2008) pp. 1024–1029.Google Scholar
Kobayashi, A., Suzuki, H., Hirogaki, T. and Aoyama, E., “Investigation of Impact Task Performed by Humanoid Robot Using Input Shaping Control Method,” 14th International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision (2016) pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
Mori, S., Tanaka, K., Nishikawa, S., Niiyama, R. and Kuniyoshi, Y., “High-speed and lightweight humanoid robot arm for a skillful badminton robot,” IEEE Rob. Autom. Lett. 3(3), 1727–1734 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garabini, M., Passaglia, A., Belo, F., Salaris, P. and Bicchi, A., “Optimality Principles in Variable Stiffness Control: The VSA Hammer,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (2011) pp. 3770–3775.Google Scholar
Grebenstein, M., Albu-Schaffer, A., Bahls, T., Chalon, M., Eiberger, O., Friedl, W., Gruber, R., Haddadin, S., Hagn, U., Haslinger, R., Hoppner, H., Jorg, S., Nickl, M., Nothhelfer, A., Petit, F., Reill, J., Seitz, N., Wimbock, T., Wolf, S., Wusthoff, T. and Hirzinger, G., “The DLR Hand Arm System,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (2011) pp. 3175–3182.Google Scholar
Wolf, S., Grioli, G., Eiberger, O., Friedl, W., Grebenstein, M., Hoppner, H., Burdet, E., Caldwell, D. G., Carloni, R., Catalano, M. G., Lefeber, D., Stramigioli, S., Tsagarakis, N., Van Damme, M., Van Ham, R., Vanderborght, B., Visser, L. C., Bicchi, A. and Albu-Schaffer, A., “Variable stiffness actuators: Review on design and components,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech. 21(5), 2418–2430 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jimenez-Fabian, R., Weckx, M., Rodriguez-Cianca, D., Lefeber, D. and Vanderborght, B., “Online reconfiguration of a variable-stiffness actuator,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech. 23(4), 1866–1876 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, H., Kim, S. J. and Kim, J., “Feedforward motion control with a variablestiffness actuator inspired by musclecross-bridge kinematics,” IEEE Trans. Rob. 35(3), 747–760 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, Y.-F. and Henami, H., “Mathematical modeling of a robot collision with its environment,” J. Rob. Syst. 2(3), 289–307 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, I. D., “Impact configurations and measures for kinematically redundant and multiple armed robot systems,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom. 10(5), 670–683 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. H., Kim, S. H. and Kwak, Y. K., “Modeling and Analysis of Internal Impact for General Classes of Robotic Mechanisms,” Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (2000) pp. 1955–1962.Google Scholar
Lee, J. H., Yi, B.-J., Oh, S.-R. and Suh, I. H., “Performance analysis of sawing based on impulse measure and geometry - Dublahal arm approach,” IEEE Trans. Rob. 21(6), 1230–1240 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z., Wu, H., Yang, J., Wang, M. and Ye, J., “A Position and torque switching control method for robot collision safety,” Int. J. Autom. Comput. 15(3), 156–168 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ton, C., Z.Kan and S. S. Mehta, “Obstacle avoidance control of a human-in-the-loopmobile robot system using harmonic potential fields,” Robotica 36(4), 463–483 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imran, A. and Yi, B.-J., “Impulse Modeling and Analysis of Dual Arm Hammering Task: Human-like Manipulator,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (2016) pp. 362–367.Google Scholar
Frémond, M., “Collisions in mechanics,” Ann. Solids Struct. Mech. 9(15), 29–56 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, G., He, X., Yuan, J., Abdul, S. and Goldenberg, A. A., “Development of Modular and Reconfigurable Robot with Multiple Working Modes,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (2008) pp. 3502–3507.Google Scholar
Ahmad, S., Zhang, H. and Liu, G., “Multiple working mode control of door-opening with a mobile modular and reconfigurable robot,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech. 18(3), 833–844 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, G., Abdul, S. and Goldenberg, A. A., “Distributed control of modular and reconfigurable robot with torque sensing,” Robotica 26(1), 75–84 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittenberg, J., Dynamics of Systems of Rigid Bodies (B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imran, A. and Yi, B.-J., “Impulse modeling and new impulse measure for human-like closed-chain manipulator,” IEEE Rob. Autom. Lett. 1(2), 868–875 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harmonic Drive, LLC, “About Harmonic Drive CSD and SHD,” [Online]. Available: http://www.harmonicdrive.net/_hd/content/catalogs/pdf/csd-shd-catalog.pdf. [Accessed 1, Sept. 2018].Google Scholar