A systematic analysis of spring symmetry on optimality of antagonistic variable stiffness actuation

We present a systematic co-design optimization framework that enables comparison of antagonist variable stiffness actuators (VSA) with and without spring symmetry constraints. The proposed framework promotes a fair comparative analysis by maintaining design continuity among system-optimal designs of symmetric and asymmetric VSA configurations. Through a case study of a VSA-powered knee prosthesis, we not only demonstrate that co-design of robots driven by VSAs can provide important performance benefits with respect to sub-system level control-optimal designs, but also provide evidence that relaxing symmetry constraints for certain periodic tasks can result in substantial advantages in performance. Our systematic comparative analysis justifies the use of asymmetric stiffness arrangements for antagonistic VSA-powered robotic systems performing periodic tasks.

[1]  Antonio Bicchi,et al.  Design and Control of a Variable Stiffness Actuator for Safe and Fast Physical Human/Robot Interaction , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[2]  Alin Albu-Schäffer,et al.  Optimal control for exploiting the natural dynamics of Variable Stiffness robots , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[3]  Bram Vanderborght,et al.  MACCEPA: the mechanically adjustable compliance and controllable equilibrium position actuator for 'controlled passive walking' , 2006, Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006..

[4]  Volkan Patoglu,et al.  VnSA: Variable negative stiffness actuation based on nonlinear deflection characteristics of buckling beams , 2013, 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[5]  M. Ferrarin,et al.  A multiple-task gait analysis approach: kinematic, kinetic and EMG reference data for healthy young and adult subjects. , 2011, Gait & posture.

[6]  Nikos G. Tsagarakis,et al.  Development and Control of a Compliant Asymmetric Antagonistic Actuator for Energy Efficient Mobility , 2016, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[7]  Antonio Bicchi,et al.  Optimality principles in variable stiffness control: The VSA hammer , 2011, 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[8]  Stefano Stramigioli,et al.  The vsaUT-II: A novel rotational variable stiffness actuator , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[9]  Antonio Bicchi,et al.  Fast and "soft-arm" tactics [robot arm design] , 2004, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

[10]  A. Galip Ulsoy,et al.  Relationship between coupling and the controllability Grammian in co-design problems , 2015 .

[11]  N. G. Tsagarakis,et al.  A Novel Intrinsically Energy Efficient Actuator With Adjustable Stiffness (AwAS) , 2013, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[12]  Antonio Bicchi,et al.  Dealing with the Safety-Performance Tradeoff in Robot Arms Design and Control , 2004 .

[13]  Fumiya Iida,et al.  Improving Energy Efficiency of Hopping Locomotion by Using a Variable Stiffness Actuator , 2016, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[14]  A. Galip Ulsoy,et al.  On the coupling between the plant and controller optimization problems , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 American Control Conference. (Cat. No.01CH37148).

[15]  Werner Friedl,et al.  Analysis and Synthesis of the Bidirectional Antagonistic Variable Stiffness Mechanism , 2015, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[16]  Volkan Patoglu,et al.  Co-Design Strategies for Optimal Variable Stiffness Actuation , 2017, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[17]  Stephen P. DeWeerth,et al.  Biologically Inspired Joint Stiffness Control , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.