Design of a versatile connector for reconfigurable robotic manipulators with articulated anatomies and their kinematic analysis
Modular reconfigurable manipulators are the next step into creating extremely adaptable and flexible industrial robotic systems. Two significant problems of these systems are their lack of homogeneity and the significant amount of down time required to perform a physical reconfiguration. In this paper, a new connecting module for modular reconfigurable manipulators in order to limit these problems to a certain degree is presented. The kinematical modeling of the connecting module and a case study showing how it affects the kinematics of a 3 D.O.F. manipulator and its workspace are shown.
I have another few more questions.
It is said that "the versatile connector will be fastened to the active revolving modules mechanically, using bolts and nuts. This is necessary to provide a rigid and robust connection, and it doesn’t actually affect the required time needed for reconfigurating the system, as dismantling is not necessary."
I have the similar concern from the beginning of looking at fig. 6. Have you done any calculation of the maximum self-weight and weight that this can manipulate, if your design will be physically produced?
Thank you again.
Dear Ze,
Actually the concept for the connective module we are describing in the paper aims at adressing the first two limitations which are purely mechanical and have little to do with the manipulator's control software and hardware. However, since the method of deriving the solutions to forward and inverse kinematics of a manipulator composed with the use of the mechanism is quite simple and allows doing this with a single set of equations, this will inevitably prove beneficial for the control of the robot. After all, having the analyical solutions to the forward and inverse kinematic problems is one of the first steps in developing the control of a manipulator.
In terms of simplicity and complexity, the mechanism inavertedly increases the mechanical complexity of the manipulator by adding more moving parts to it, but it also allows the structuring of an articulated robot with the use of only two types of modules, an acive rotating joint and the passive connector.
Initially what we checked was whether the active modules could sustain the load of the whole robot. We are currently working on determining the optimized detailed design of the mechanism in order to build a physical model for experimental use.
Thank you for your answer. It is very clear.
I look forward seeing your final physical model. Do you have any specific project or application for this work to be used on?
Best regards.
Dear authors,
Thank you for your contributing this excellent paper to IPROMS2007.
I have read your paper, and found it very interesting. As mentioned in your paper, the main advantage of this connecting module is the flexibility for reconfiguration (right?). In section 2, three limitations have been spotted. From your following description, I can see the advantage of your new design for the first two. However, regarding the third one, which is:
"The controllers and the control software of the system has to be readjusted to the new anatomy and function, while in some cases it has to be rebuilt from the beginning.",
could you please explain a bit more about how your new design can overcome this weak point?
Also, how much complexity or simplicity will this module introduce?
Thank you. Please correct me if there is any misunderstanding of your paper in the questions.
Ze