4.7 Article

Modeling of Soft Fiber-Reinforced Bending Actuators

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS
Volume 31, Issue 3, Pages 778-789

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TRO.2015.2428504

Keywords

Bending; fiber reinforced; fluidic actuator; modeling; soft robot

Categories

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [1317744, IIS-1226075]
  2. DARPA [W911NF-11-1-0094]
  3. Wyss Institute
  4. School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University
  5. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  6. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems [1317744] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Soft fluidic actuators consisting of elastomeric matrices with embedded flexible materials are of particular interest to the robotics community because they are affordable and can be easily customized to a given application. However, the significant potential of such actuators is currently limited as their design has typically been based on intuition. In this paper, the principle of operation of these actuators is comprehensively analyzed and described through experimentally validated quasi-static analytical and finite-element method models for bending in free space and force generation when in contact with an object. This study provides a set of systematic design rules to help the robotics community create soft actuators by understanding how these vary their outputs as a function of input pressure for a number of geometrical parameters. Additionally, the proposed analytical model is implemented in a controller demonstrating its ability to convert pressure information to bending angle in real time. Such an understanding of soft multimaterial actuators will allow future design concepts to be rapidly iterated and their performance predicted, thus enabling new and innovative applications that producemore complex motions to be explored.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available