Human-Friendly Robot Design

1 2

Torque Control : a basic capability

• dynamic performance
• compliance, force control
• safety, interactivity
• manipulation
• cooperation

Retrofitting the PUMA with Torque Sensors

3 4

ARTISAN ARTISAN
(1990-95) (1990-95)

5 6

1
 intelligence
for
mechanisms

Safety

7 8

Human-Friendly Robots Human-Friendly Robots

Requirements • Dependable & Safe

• Soft Actuators
 Safety
• Light Structures
 Performance • Impact-Reduction Skin
• Low Reflected Inertia
Competing? • Distributed Sensing
• Good Performance

9 10

Technology Effective Joint Inertia

Puma
Conventional
Puma
Geared Drive:
• Lighter structure
• Large reflected
actuator inertia

Effective Inertia
(Jlink + N2Jmotor)
Jlink

Heavy structure
Jmotor
Ngear A  Arigid body  diag ( N i2 J motor i )

11 12

2
 Safety Metric Safety Metric

Normalized Effective Mass Normalized Effective Mass

PUMA560 (Payload 20N)
1.16
Human (Payload 60N)
0.04

13 14

Safety Metric Safety Metric

Normalized Effective Mass Normalized Effective Mass

PUMA560 (Payload 22N) PUMA560 (Payload 22N)
1.16 1.16
Human (Payload 62N) Human (Payload 62N)
0.04 0.04
DM2 (Payload 60N) DM2 (Payload 60N)
0.06 0.06
s 2  (Payload 33N)
0.02

15 16

Inertia Property Acceleration Capacity

Effective Inertia/mass E : Torque to Acceleration Transmission

perceived in a direction u u
1
 u () 
u  1u
T

17 18

3
 Why Are Robotic Arms Unsafe?
Acceleration Capacity
Optimized Design
Robot Collision
Initial Design Optimized Design

Head Injury Criteria (HIC)

19 20

Actuation Requirements Distributed Macro Mini (DM2) Approach

Assumed Torque Requirements
Torque Vs Frequency: Square Parallel Actuation
Torque Magnitude

Wave
Small Joint
Actuator

Frequency

Actual Torque Requirements

Torque Magnitude

+ Elastic
Coupling Large Base
Actuator

Frequency

21 22

Robot Characteristics
Effective Inertia at Contact
Robot Collision

• Effective Inertia
• Effective Stiffness
• Impact Velocity
Equivalent Mass-Spring Model

1
Ia   1  J v A1 J vT
u  v1u
T

23 24

4
 Effective Stiffness Impact Velocity

1 1 1
K e  K cos2  with  
k ka kh

25 26

Manipulator Safety Index (MSI) Manipulator Safety Index (MSI)

Variation with contact point – Interface Stiffness

constant at 20KN/m

27 28

Manipulator Safety Index (MSI) DM2 - Human-Friendly Robot

Variation with Configuration – Interface Stiffness “the high capacity of a large robot with the
constant at 20KN/m fast dynamics and safety of a small one”

29 30

5
 DM2 New Testbed DM2 vs. PUMA 560: Effective Mass Comparison
Base actuator Joint actuator
(low frequency) (high frequency)
90
30

+ 120 60

20
Torque Magnitude

150 30

10

180 0
Macro actuator
Brushed DC motor

210 330

Maximum effective mass:

240 300

270 PUMA 560: 24.37 kg

PUMA 560 (link 2 and link 3) HFR (Macro actuation): 12.71 kg

Elastic Coupler
HFR (conventional actuation) HFR (DM2 actuation): 2.81 kg
Mini actuator (Torsional Spring)
HFR (DM2 actuation)
Brushless motor

31 32

DM2 Performance

Distributed
Macro-Mini DM2  10x reduction in
Actuation effective inertia
 3x increase in Safety
position control AND
bandwidth Performance
 10x decrease in
trajectory tracking
error

33 34

35 36

6
 DM2 - Hybrid Actuation DM2 - Hybrid Actuation

artificial muscles with compact pressure regulators pneumatic artificial muscles

37 38

DM2 - Hybrid Actuation DM2 - Hybrid Actuation

pneumatic artificial muscles pneumatic artificial muscles

39 40

DM2 - Hybrid Actuation DM2 - Hybrid Actuation

pneumatic artificial muscles pneumatic artificial muscles

41 42

7
 DM2 - Hybrid Actuation Human-Friendly Robot Design – DM2

artificial muscles with compact pressure regulators

43 44

s 2  : Stanford Human-Safe Robot S 2. : Stanford Human-Safe Robot

muscle 300N @ 4bar

S 2. upper arm 34cm
lower arm 29cm
total mass 1.5kg
torque (7.5,5.0)Nm
mini (1.0,0.3)Nm
force@effector 14N

45 46

Stanford Human-Safe Robot

0 .14 4

0 .12 3 .5

0.1 3
Position [ deg ]
Torque [ Nm ]

0 .08 2 .5

0 .06 2

0 .04 1 .5

0 .02 1

D es ired T orque D es ired P os it ion

0 0 .5
M acro M acro
2 2
DM DM
-0 .02 0
0 0 .05 0.1 0.15 0 .2 0.2 5 0 .3 0. 35 0.4 0. 4 0 .6 0.8 1 1 .2 1.4 1.6
Time [ sec ]
U1 Time [ sec ]
Pressure
Regulator

P1 F1

Ps
Tj,θ
Macro……………0.5Hz
Load Cells
Macro/Tension 7.0Hz
P2 F2 Macro/Mini……. 35Hz
Pressure
Regulator
U2

47 48

8
 Virtual Wall (macro only/macro-mini)
49 50

s 2  1.5 : New Design s 2  1.5 : New Design

51 52

Safety Comparison s 2  : Stanford Human-Safe Robot

s2
Effective Mass: 1.2Kg
DM2
Effective Mass: 3.5Kg
Human
Effective Mass: 2.1Kg
PUMA560
Effective Mass: 25Kg

53 54

9
 s 2  : Stanford Human-Safe Robot 𝑆2𝜌 : Stanford Safety Robot

Impact-reducing
proximity and
pressure sensing
Skin using SDM

55 56

𝑆2𝜌 2.0 : New Design 𝑆2𝜌 Testbed

Pneumatic Muscle Electrical Motor
(low frequency) (high frequency)

57 58

𝑆2𝜌 Experimental Results Safety Comparison

Macro Macro + Mini

Position

Force
6Hz 26Hz

59 60

10
 Safety Comparison
𝑆2𝜌: Motion Range(sine wave)

61 62

𝑆2𝜌 : Contact Force Control

63 64

11