4.6 Article

Characterization and Study of the Primitive Dynamic Movements Required to Bi-Manipulate a Box

Journal

ELECTRONICS
Volume 10, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/electronics10111354

Keywords

dual-arm manipulation; object transportation; humanoid manipulation; primitive dynamic trajectories

Funding

  1. SHARON project [SHARON-CM-UC3M]
  2. Carlos III University of Madrid
  3. RoboCity2030-DIH-CM Madrid Robotics Digital Innovation Hub (Robotica aplicada a la mejora de la calidad de vida de los ciudadanos, Fase IV) [S2018/NMT-4331]
  4. Programas de Actividades I+D en la Comunidad de Madrid
  5. Structural Funds of the EU

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines three different movement strategies for bi-manipulating a box, studies the dynamics involved, conducts experiments, and creates primitive movements based on force and position information in the end effectors.
Automating the action of finding the opening side of a box is not possible if the robot is not capable of reaching and evaluating all of its sides. To achieve this goal, in this paper, three different movement strategies to bi-manipulate a box are studied: overturning, lifting, and spinning it over a surface. First of all, the dynamics involved in each of the three movement strategies are studied using physics equations. Then, a set of experiments are conducted to determine if the real response of the humanoid robot, TEO, to a box is consistent with the expected answer based on theoretical calculus. After the dynamics validation, the information on the forces and the position in the end effectors is used to characterize these movements and create its primitives. These primitive movements will be used in the future to design a hybrid position-force control in order to adapt the movements to different kinds of boxes. The structure of this control is also presented in this paper.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available