Authors:
(1) Jorge Francisco Garcia-Samartin, Centro de automatic Yar Robotica (UPM-CSIC), University of Politecnica de Madrid-Consejo Superior DE Investigaciones Cientıficas, Jose Josier Abiasal 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain (Spain)[email protected]);
(2) Adrian Rieker, Centro De Automatica y Robotica (UPM-CSIC), Universidad Politecnica De Madrid-Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientıficas, Jose Guterres Abiasal 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain;
(3) Antonio Barrientos, Centro De Automatica Y Robotica (Upm-CSIC), Universidad Politecnica de Madrid-Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientıficas, Jose Guterres Abiasal 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain.
Links table
Abstract and 1 introduction
2 relevant business
2.1 Air operation
2.2 Aerobic weapons
2.3 Control of soft robots
3 Paul: Design and Manufacturing
3.1 Robot design
3.2 Choose materials
3.3 Manufacturing
3.4 operating bank
4 Gain data and control the open episode
4.1 Device Preparing
4.2 vision capture system
4.3 Data set generation: table -based models
4.4 Open ring control
5 results
5.1 final version of Paul
5.2 Analysis of the work area
5.3 Perform the models based on the table
5.4 Bending experiments
5.5 Weight experiences
6 conclusions
Finance information
A. Experiments and references
5 results
5.1 final version of Paul
Although the air seat layout allows work with up to 4 slices, it was believed that the use of 3 would allow various problems associated with repetition without increasing the robot weight a lot or required pipes – which pass through the interior of the parts – to get an excessive amount of space .
It is true that the other three tubes can pass through the first unit, however, it was believed that the hardness they would present by pressing it might make it difficult to bend the first part. Since the part that should be more powerful, as it is the one that supports the weight of other parts, the risk of holes can be increased.
Therefore, a robot consisting of three identical units, stands at a total altitude of 390 mm (with each sector of 100 mm, communications between the total 20 mm each, and the TRIHEDRON Vision 30 mm). Under these formations, the estimated weight of the urine arm is about 600 g. The structure that protects the manner is a cube with a 500 mm side. The air line pressure was created in 1.2 bar.
Examples of Paul that reach different sites in Figure 13 were clarified.
5.2 Analysis of the work area
The work area analysis has been conducted experimentally, based on the data taken to create the data set. Figure 14 shows the work space for the part.
We can also see, this is a surface, as the part has two degrees of freedom if at least one case of at least one valve is imposed. The surface can be considered as a union of three surfaces that intersect at the central point, which corresponds to the formation of all excessive bladder. The three surfaces are almost spherical in the shape. If the PCC model is completely suitable for robot, these will be perfect, as the ends of a group of equal arches of equal length with a common origin circle. Since this is not exactly the case, the created surfaces are only similar to the spherical that the fixed bending model predicted.
Adding the second part already generates 4-D working space that is difficult to represent. The generation of this is the result of the fact that from every point on the surface of the work area in the part, another similar surface is created. the
Union of all of these surfaces, which arise from the points on the surface of the first part, lead to a two -section workspace. This is the folder in which each point can reach, in addition, from two different directions, leaving the eclipse of four degrees of freedom that Paul will get with only two units.
