applied

sciences
Article
Development of a Novel Variable-Diameter Wheel
Wen Zeng *, Guoyan Xu, Hui Jiang and Feng Gao *
School of Transportation Science and Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China;
xuguoyan@buaa.edu.cn (G.X.); jianghui@buaa.edu.cn (H.J.)
* Correspondence: zengw@buaa.edu.cn (W.Z.); gaof@buaa.edu.cn (F.G.)




Received: 5 September 2019; Accepted: 24 October 2019; Published: 31 October 2019


Featured Application: The new variable-diameter wheel is not only applicable in planet rovers
for rough-terrain planetary explorations but also in earth-based mobile robots for agriculture and
forestry, military applications, rescue operations, and disaster areas.

Abstract: Variable-diameter wheels balance the high mobility and limited volume of a planetary rover.
Moreover, these wheels allow a rover to adjust its body attitude to adapt to rough terrains. These
functions are achieved through the expansion–retraction motion of the variable-diameter mechanisms
in the wheels. Thus, the traditional wheel design focuses on these mechanisms. To further facilitate
its application, we propose a new concept variable-diameter wheel that considers the mechanism
characteristics and wheel performances. This new wheel configuration is presented along with
the corresponding transmission system, design, and analysis methods. Kinematic equations of the
mechanism were established and then applied to synthesize the wheel dimensions. The load–deflection
relationship of the wheels was analytically derived by developing a modified pseudo-rigid-body
model (PRBM). Finite element analysis (FEA) simulations were performed to validate the design and
analysis. In conclusion, the proposed novel wheel is extremely beneficial for rough-terrain locomotion
systems. Furthermore, the design and analysis approaches used in this study are applicable for other
expandable wheels.

Keywords: compliant mechanisms; multi-degree-of-freedom mechanisms; mobile robots; planetary

rover; variable-diameter wheels

1. Introduction
Wheeled rovers are one of the best candidates for planetary surface exploration due to their
power-efficient performance [1]. Wheels are essential in improving the mobility of wheeled rovers,
including trafficability and obstacle-surmounting capability on unstructured environments [2]. On soft
terrain, conventional circular wheels slip and cause poor rover mobility [3]. Therefore, to optimize
mobility on unknown and soft terrain, growing research interest has focused on various unconventional
wheels [4–6]. However, despite the satisfactory trafficability of rovers with unconventional wheels,
their obstacle-surmounting capabilities remain insufficient.
By increasing its diameter, a wheel can enhance the tractive performance and obstacle-surmounting
capability of a vehicle [7,8]. Therefore, expandable wheels were developed. Expandable mechanisms
allow the adjustment of wheel diameter, and different types have been proposed in recent years.
The diagrams of the principles behind these mechanisms are provided in [9]. These mechanisms can
be categorized into rigid-body mechanisms [10–13] and compliant mechanisms [14–16]. Compliant
mechanisms perform movement through their part deflections and usually have reduced weight [17,18].
Moreover, these traditional mechanisms can be classified as expandable in the axial and radial planes
of the wheels. Unlike the former, the ratio of the wheel width to diameter is unconstrained for

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631; doi:10.3390/app9214631 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 2 of 16

the latter. However, several of these mechanisms are only capable of expanding once. By contrast,
repeatedly expandable mechanisms with real-time self-locking can continuously adjust the wheel
diameter according to different terrain conditions.
A repeatedly deployable compliant mechanism in the radial plane is desired for an expandable
wheel. The mechanism in a variable-diameter wheel, which is an expandable wheel, is an
example [9,19,20].
Previous studies had only considered mechanisms in the design of expandable wheels. Despite
the importance of deployable mechanism in such designs, wheel performance cannot be ignored.
At the least, the mechanism should not affect the normal operation of the wheel (e.g., maneuverability).
Wheel performance is crucial for reliability and availability in real situations. Thus, the design of
variable-diameter wheels should consider not only the mechanism but also meet the requirements of
wheel performance.
In the existing variable-diameter wheel [9], the wheel feet may deviate from the initial orientation
position because of the relative rotation between two hubs in the mechanism movement, resulting in a
torque action on each foot. Moreover, because the supporting structure of each wheel foot consists of
two spoke links that are not on the same plane, the support easily causes wheel camber or inclination.
These conditions may influence the maneuverability of a wheeled rover. Every wheel leg has four
flexure pivots on the radial plane of the wheels. Hence, with the compliance of the torsion springs, a
single wheel leg approaches a four-bar mechanism. As a result, the structure of the wheel spoke may
not transmit sufficient torque from the wheel’s hub to its feet.
To address these issues of the existing variable-diameter wheel, we designed a novel
variable-diameter wheel in this study. Wheel performance was considered and improved in the
new design. First, to increase stability of the supporting structure and avoid additional moment, the
novel wheel configuration and its transmission system were considered. Kinematic equations of the
mechanism were then established and applied to synthesize the wheel dimensions. The load–deflection
relationship of the mechanism was analytically obtained by building a modified pseudo-rigid-body
model (PRBM). Finally, finite element analysis (FEA) simulations were performed to validate the
design and analysis.

2. Wheel Configuration and Transmission System

2.1. Wheel Configuration

As mentioned in Section 1, various expandable mechanisms have been invented to facilitate changes
in the diameter of expandable wheels. In the present study, the traditional expandable mechanisms
are classified into diverse types according to their different characteristics before summarizing
their advantages. These characteristics are integrated in the proposed mechanism for the new
variable-diameter wheel.
In compliant mechanisms, flexural pivots or hinges perform the function of pin joints for rigid-body
kinematics [21–23]. Helical torsion springs serve as flexural hinges and can achieve large angular
deformations, as shown in Figure 1. In addition, the springs are used with pins to maintain alignment
and provide buckling resistance when necessary. Therefore, springs that can simplify the assembly are
applied to the new mechanism in the wheel.
The proposed wheel with six circumferentially arranged wheel legs is composed of three hubs
that house a planetary gear train system, helical torsion springs (the spring arms serve as the spokes),
and 12 wheel feet. A single wheel leg consists of two wheel feet and geometrically symmetric helical
torsion springs (Figure 2). These springs (including four spoke links) and the two wheel feet in a
single wheel leg are connected by two concentric pins. One of the two wheel feet is fixed to two
middle spoke bars, whereas the other foot is fixed to the two spoke bars on both sides. This setting
allows the two wheel feet to rotate around each other. The ends of the middle two torsion springs in
the wheel leg are positioned at the middle wheel hub, whereas the ends of the two torsion springs
 65 configuration and its transmission system were considered. Kinematic equations of the mechanism
66 were then established and applied to synthesize the wheel dimensions. The load–deflection
67 relationship of the mechanism was analytically obtained by building a modified pseudo-rigid-body
68 model (PRBM). Finally, finite element analysis (FEA) simulations were performed to validate the
69 Appl. Sci.and
design 9, 4631
2019,analysis. 3 of 16

70 2. Wheel Configuration and Transmission System

on both sides are positioned at the two wheel hubs on both sides. Therefore, when the middle hub
rotates around the side hubs with the same speed, the helical torsion springs experience angular
71 2.1. Wheel Configuration
deflections,
Appl. Sci. 2019, and thePEER
9, x FOR mechanism
REVIEW gains mobility (i.e., changes in wheel diameter). The relative rotation 3 of 17
72 As mentioned
between the three hubs in Section 1, various
can prevent expandable
the movement mechanisms
interferences have the
between beenspoke
invented to facilitate
bars and remove
81
73 angular
changes deformations,
in themoments
the additional diameter asonshown
ofthe in Figure
expandable
wheel 1. In addition,
feet. wheels.
Moreover, In the the springs
thesupporting
present are the
study, usedtraditional
structure ofwith pinswheel
the two to maintain
expandable
feet in
82
74 alignment
mechanisms and areprovide buckling
classified into resistance
diverse when
types necessary.
according Therefore,
to their springs
different that can simplify
characteristics
each wheel leg, which is supported by four spoke links, has greater stability than that of the existing the
before
83
75 assembly
summarizing are applied
variable-diameter to the newThese
theirwheel.
advantages. mechanism in the wheel.
characteristics are integrated in the proposed mechanism for
84
76 Thevariable-diameter
the new proposed wheel with six circumferentially arranged wheel legs is composed of three hubs
wheel.
85 that house a planetary gear train system, helical torsion springs (the spring arms serve as the spokes),
86 and 12 wheel feet. A single wheel leg consists of two wheel feet and geometrically symmetric helical
87 torsion springs (Figure 2). These springs (including four spoke links) and the two wheel feet in a
88 single wheel leg are connected by two concentric pins. One of the two wheel feet is fixed to two
89 middle spoke bars, whereas the other foot is fixed to the two spoke bars on both sides. This setting
90 allows the two wheel feet to rotate around each other. The ends of the middle two torsion springs in
91 the wheel leg are positioned at the middle wheel hub, whereas the ends of the two torsion springs on
92 both sides are positioned at the two wheel hubs on both sides. Therefore, when the middle hub rotates
93 around the side hubs with the same speed, the helical torsion springs experience angular deflections,
94 and the mechanism gains mobility (i.e., changes in wheel diameter). The relative rotation between
95 the three hubs can prevent the movement interferences between the spoke bars and remove the
96
77 additional moments on the wheel feet. Moreover, the supporting structure of the two wheel feet in
97 each wheel leg, which is supported by four spoke links, has greater stability than that of the existing
78 Figure
Figure 1. Two
Two limit working positions of new variable-diameter wheel prototype.
98 variable-diameter wheel.
79 In compliant mechanisms, flexural pivots or hinges perform the function of pin joints for rigid-
80 body kinematics [21–23]. Helical torsion springs serve as flexural hinges and can achieve large

Figure 2. Single wheel leg configuration.

99 Figure 2. Single wheel leg configuration.

Each wheel leg can be treated as a triangular structure with three flexure pivots in the radial
plane of the wheel. Hence, the structural stiffness of the wheel leg increases compared with that of the
100 Each wheel leg can be treated as a triangular structure with three flexure pivots in the radial
conventional variable-diameter wheel. In addition, the structure with the three flexure pivots reduces
101 plane of the wheel. Hence, the structural stiffness of the wheel leg increases compared with that of
the linkages in the movement plane, which simplifies the design and analysis of the wheel.
102 the conventional variable-diameter wheel. In addition, the structure with the three flexure pivots
Note that each wheel foot comprises three spaced metal cleats with segmented circular-arc
103 reduces the linkages in the movement plane, which simplifies the design and analysis of the wheel.
outer edges. For its folded limit position, the wheel is circular with an outer contour that comprises
104 Note that each wheel foot comprises three spaced metal cleats with segmented circular-arc outer
the segmented circular-arc cleats. This condition provides good ride performance on flat and rigid
105 edges. For its folded limit position, the wheel is circular with an outer contour that comprises the
terrains. Moreover, the spacing between these cleats creates a longer shearing surface that extends
106 segmented circular-arc cleats. This condition provides good ride performance on flat and rigid
deep into soft terrains and thus develops more traction than the continuous wheel foot of the existing
107 terrains. Moreover, the spacing between these cleats creates a longer shearing surface that extends
variable-diameter wheel [4]. When the wheel exits the folded limit position, the wheel feet separate
108 deep into soft terrains and thus develops more traction than the continuous wheel foot of the existing
from each other, except for the two wheel feet in the same wheel leg. As the wheel diameter increases,
109 variable-diameter wheel [4]. When the wheel exits the folded limit position, the wheel feet separate
the angle between the two fixed wheel feet on the spoke links in a single wheel leg decreases and
110 from each other, except for the two wheel feet in the same wheel leg. As the wheel diameter increases,
vice versa.
111 the angle between the two fixed wheel feet on the spoke links in a single wheel leg decreases and vice
112 versa.

113 2.2. Transmission System

114 The planetary gear train of a variable-diameter wheel can transmit two power sources that are
115 used to enable the wheel’s rolling and changes in diameter. The three ring gears in the transmission
116 system and the three wheel hubs are assembled under the corresponding interference fits. The three
117 wheel hubs (left, middle, and right) transfer the rotations from the transmission system to the spring
 Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 4 of 16

2.2. Transmission System

The planetary gear train of a variable-diameter wheel can transmit two power sources that are
used to enable the wheel’s rolling and changes in diameter. The three ring gears in the transmission
system and the three wheel hubs are assembled under the corresponding interference fits. The three
wheel hubs (left, middle, and right) transfer the rotations from the transmission system to the spring
Appl. Sci. 2019,
spokes. The 9, x FOR PEER
electric REVIEW
motor M1 adjusts the wheel diameter, whereas the electric motor M2 provides 4 ofthe
17
energy for the wheel rotation. Figure 3 shows that M2 drives the rotation of the three ring gears with
119 energy
the same forspeed
the wheel
whenrotation. Figure(M
M1 is locked 3 shows that M2 drives the rotation of the three ring gears with
1 ’s worm reducer has a self-locking ability). Thus, the wheel
120 the same
with speed when
an invariant M1 isrotates
diameter lockedon(M 1’s worm reducer has a self-locking ability). Thus, the wheel
the terrain. If M2 rotates, then the wheel diameter adjusts.
121 with an invariant diameter rotates on the terrain. If M2 rotates, then the wheel diameter adjusts.

122
123 Figure
Figure 3. Schematic of
3. Schematic of planetary
planetary gear
gear train.
train.

Therefore, to match the two power sources, the transmission system has two routes.
124 Therefore, to match the two power sources, the transmission system has two routes.
First, if M1 does not rotate (i.e., the left sun gear a1 is locked), then the three ring gears have the
125 First, if M1 does not rotate (i.e., the left sun gear a1 is locked), then the three ring gears have the
same rotating speed. The route can be elaborated as follows.
126 same rotating speed. The route can be elaborated as follows.
Electric motor (M2 ) → right (H2 ) and left planet carriers (H1 ) → left (c1 ), middle (c2 ), and right
127 Electric motor (M2)  right (H2) and left planet carriers (H1)  left (c1), middle (c2), and right
planet gears (c3 ) → left (b1 ), middle (b2 ), and right ring gears (b3 ).
128 planet gears (c3)  left (b1), middle (b2), and right ring gears (b3).
Second, if M1 rotates, the three ring gears rotate at different speeds. Note that the two ring gears
129 Second, if M1 rotates, the three ring gears rotate at different speeds. Note that the two ring gears
on both sides have the same speed.
130 on both sides have the same speed.
131 (1) M (1)1 →  sun
M1left left sun
geargear
(a1 ) (a  middle
→1)middle planet
planet geargear
(c2 ) (c  middle
→2)middle ringring
geargear
(b2 ).(b2).
132 (2) Electric
(2) Electric motormotor
(M2 )(M )  right
→ 2right planet
planet carrier
carrier (H2 ) (H
and 2) and left planet carrier (H1)  left (c1), middle
left planet carrier (H1 ) → left (c1 ), middle (c2 ),
133 (c 2), and right planet gears (c3)  left (b1), middle (b2), and right ring gears (b3).
and right planet gears (c3 ) → left (b1 ), middle (b2 ), and right ring gears (b3 ).
134 In summary, on the basis of the power-transmitting routes of the transmission system, the three
135 hubsInrotate
summary, on the basis
at different of theConsequently,
speeds. power-transmitting routes of
the relative the transmission
rotations between system,
the hubsthe cause
three
136 hubs rotate of
deflections at different
the helicalspeeds.
torsionConsequently,
springs, fromthe relative
where the rotations
wheel feetbetween the hubs
gain radial cause deflections
mobility.
of the helical torsion springs, from where the wheel feet gain radial mobility.
137 3. Design Methodology
3. Design Methodology
138 The mechanism is the key component of variable-diameter wheels. Once the geometric
139 The mechanism
parameters is the key component
of the mechanism of variable-diameter
are obtained, the wheel dimensions wheels.
canOnce the geometric
be determined. In parameters
this study,
140 of
a kinematic synthesis was performed for the mechanism. The kinematic behavior for the amechanism
the mechanism are obtained, the wheel dimensions can be determined. In this study, kinematic
141 synthesis was performed
must be analyzed for the
before using themechanism. The kinematic
synthesis method [24]. behavior for the mechanism must be
analyzed before using the synthesis method [24].
142 3.1. Kinematic Analysis
3.1. Kinematic Analysis
143 For the kinematic synthesis of a compliant mechanism, the rigid-body replacement method was
For the kinematic synthesis of a compliant mechanism, the rigid-body replacement method was
144 adopted [25], wherein the helical torsion springs were regarded as the pivoted links (Figures 1 and
adopted [25], wherein the helical torsion springs were regarded as the pivoted links (Figures 1 and 4).
145 4). The left and right hubs were treated as the left crank, whereas the middle hub was considered as
The left and right hubs were treated as the left crank, whereas the middle hub was considered as the
146 the right crank. The revolute joints that were placed at the center of the pins connected an imaginary
right crank. The revolute joints that were placed at the center of the pins connected an imaginary spoke
147 spoke link to an imaginary crank or other spoke link (dashed lines in Figure 4) in the same wheel leg.
148 Hence, the lengths of the imaginary spoke links were represented by the in-between distances of the
149 revolute joints, and the length of an imaginary crank was the radius of the corresponding wheel hub.
150 Moreover, because the three hubs had the same diameter, the two imaginary cranks had the same
151 length.
 Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 5 of 16

link to an imaginary crank or other spoke link (dashed lines in Figure 4) in the same wheel leg. Hence,
the lengths of the imaginary spoke links were represented by the in-between distances of the revolute
joints, and the length of an imaginary crank was the radius of the corresponding wheel hub. Moreover,
because the three hubs had the same diameter, the two imaginary cranks had the same length.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 17

(a) Unfolded wheel (b) Folded wheel

(c) Unfolded single wheel leg (d) Folded single wheel leg

152 Figure
Figure4.4.Deformation
Deformationofof
spring spokes
spring spokesinintwo
twolimit
limitpositions.
positions.

153 Figure
Figure44 presents
presents the thedeformations
deformations of the
of the springspring
spokes spokes
in the intwothe two
limit limit positions
positions of the
of the mechanism,
154 mechanism,
and Figure and Figure the
4c displays 4c displays
coordinatethesystem
coordinate
of thesystem
mechanism. In Figure 4, αIn
of the mechanism. 2 and α
Figure 1 4,
are αthe
2 and α1
angles
155 are the angles between two cranks that correspond to the largest and smallest
between two cranks that correspond to the largest and smallest wheel diameters, respectively; l is the wheel diameters,
156 respectively;
length of thel left
is the(orlength
right) of the left
spoke β2right)
link;(or and βspoke
1 are thelink; β2 and
angles β1 are the
between twoangles
spoke between
links thattwo spoke
correspond
157 links that
to the correspond
largest to the wheel
and smallest largestdiameters,
and smallest wheel diameters,
respectively; and Dcq respectively;
is the diameterand ofD cq is the
each hub.diameter
As noted
158 ofineach hub.2,As
Section noted
when theinmiddle
Section 2, when
wheel hubthe middle
rotates wheel
around thehub
tworotates
hubs onaround the two
both sides, the hubs
initialon bothα2
angle
159 sides,
increases to α1 while
the initial angleβα 2 2 increases
increases totoβ 1α. 1Aswhile
a β
result,
2 increases
the wheel to β .
diameter
1 As a result,
decreasestheandwheel
vice diameter
versa.
160 decreases and vice
As shown in versa.
Figure 4c,d, for the two limit positions, there are
161 As shown in Figure 4c,d, for the two limit positions, there are
Dcq α2 β2
  !
Dcq 2 ×sin α 2 = l × sin β 2 (1)
× sin  2  = l × sin  2  (1)
2 2  2 β !
Dcq   α1  1
× sin = l × sin . (2)
Dcq 2  α1  2  β1  2
× sin   = l × sin   . (2)
2  2 2
162 Using the difference between the above two equations, the length of a spoke link is obtained as

  α1   α2 
 sin   − sin  
D cq   2   2   .
l= × (3)
2   β1   β 2 
 sin   − sin  
  2   2  
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 6 of 16

Using the difference between the above two equations, the length of a spoke link is obtained as
h α   α i
sin 21 − sin 22
Dcq
l= × h β   β i . (3)
2 sin 21 − sin 22

3.2. Optimization Design

According to the kinematic analysis, an optimization design approach could be used to gain the
wheel dimensions.

3.2.1. Design Variables

According to Equation (3), when α1 , α2 , β1 , β2 , and Dcq are known, l can be obtained. Moreover,
based on Equations (4) and (5), the maximum and minimum wheel radii can be calculated. Therefore,
five independent design variables are available:
h i
X = [x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 , x5 ] = α1 , α2 , β1 , β2 , Dcq .

For the two limit positions, the calculated wheel radii can be derived from Figure 4:

β1 Dcq α
!  
rmin = l × cos + × cos 1 (4)
2 2 2

β2 Dcq α2
!  
rmax = l × cos + × cos . (5)
2 2 2

3.2.2. Objective Function

The two limit wheel diameters are the primary focus in the wheel design. For simplicity,
the objective function is defined as the least-square deviation between the calculated and desired wheel
radii for the two limit positions, such as
v
u
t 
Dmin 2

Dmax 2
  
rmin − 2 + rmax − 2
min f (X) = (6)
2

where Dmin and Dmax are the two desired wheel diameters.

3.2.3. Constraint Function

With respect to the practical assembly requirements and the possible movement interferences,
the link lengths and relative positions in the mechanism are constrained.
To prevent the red (or blue) spoke bars on the same hub from contact with each other during
mechanism movement, α1 should be smaller than 180◦ (Figure 4b) [9], and thus
◦ ◦
120 < α1 < 180 . (7)

For a variable-diameter wheel with six wheel legs, if α2 = 60◦ , only the wheel leg contacting the
terrain will suffer the lateral forces because no lateral contact occurs among the spoke links for the
largest wheel diameter position. If α2 > 60◦ , the wheel configuration improves the lateral stiffness
(Figure 4a) [9], where
◦ ◦
60 < α2 < 90 . (8)

Note that an inscribed angle subtended by a diameter in a circle is always 90◦ . In an extreme case,
when the mechanism contracts to the circular wheel, β1 = 90◦ (i.e., α1 = 180◦ ) if the wheel feet lies on
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 7 of 16

the hub circles. Figure 4d suggests that if β1 < 90◦ , the undesired interferences between the spoke links
and the hub can be avoided [9], such as
◦ ◦
40 < β1 < 90 . (9)

From Figure 4d,

Dcq
rmin > . (10)
2
Every wheel leg requires sufficient structural stiffness, and thus β2 should be greater than 30◦ but
less than 60◦ [9]:
◦ ◦
30 < β2 < 60 . (11)

The radial projection of l is approximately equal to the wheel radius in Figure 4d. Hence,

130 < l. (12)

3.2.4. Optimization Results

Optimization was performed in MATLAB using Equations (1)–(12) to solve the problem using the
minimization function fmincon().
The optimization steps were as follows:
Step 1: The two limit wheel diameters (420 and 260 mm) and the initial values (160, 75, 60, 40, 150)
of the design variables were given.
Step 2: According to the initial values in Step 1 or the changed design parameters, the constraint
equations (Equations (7)–(12)) were checked. If one of these equations was unsatisfied, then the values
were adjusted based on the step size (MATLAB default). This step continued until the optimization
objective was achieved.
Step 3: Equations (4)–(6) and the parameters obtained in Step 2 were used to solve the objective
function value. When the value was out of the specific tolerances (MATLAB default), the design
variables were adjusted. Then, Steps 2 and 3 continued until the tolerance was within the allowable
range. Table 1 summarizes the optimization results.

Table 1. Optimization results.

Design Parameters Magnitude

α1 149◦
α2 67◦
β1 84◦
β2 45◦
Dcq 194 mm
l 140 mm

4. Load–Deflection Relationship

4.1. Pseudo-Rigid-Body Model

The PRBM proposed by Howell [26] was used to analyze the compliant mechanism in the proposed
wheel. In the model, the helical torsion springs and hubs are replaced by pivoted links with torsional
springs [27]. When the wheel rolls, only one of its feet touches the ground. Therefore, in this study,
a PRBM that only includes the wheel leg in contact with the ground and the two cranks (Figure 5) was
established. This model was then utilized to analyze the load–deflection relationship of the wheel [28].
 Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x4631
2019, 9, FOR PEER REVIEW 88of
of 17
16

222
Figure 5. Simplified pseudo-rigid-body model (PRBM) for a wheel.
223 Figure 5. Simplified pseudo-rigid-body model (PRBM) for a wheel.
First, the operating speeds of the wheel were assumed to be slow [29], and the model was analyzed
224 on theAsbasis
discussed in equilibrium.
of static Section 2.2, the Forwheel is a system
simplicity, withwas
the wheel twoassumed
degrees of to freedom (DOF).
roll on rigid Applying
terrain during
225 the principle of virtual work, Figure 5 shows the corresponding coordinate
the mechanism movement. The action area of the distributed forces acting on the wheel foot in touch system. θ 1 is the angle

226 between
with the therigidleft crankisand
terrain the x-direction,
small. Therefore, the andconcentrated
θ2 is the angle between
forces replacedthe right crank and forces.
the distributed the x-
227 direction, both of which are selected as the generalized coordinates. In
To facilitate the mechanism analysis, the concentrated forces from the terrain were applied to the hinge addition, θ 3 is the angle

228 between the two

point of the rightwheel
spokefeetlinkinand
the the
wheelx-axis,
leg. θ4 is the angle between the left spoke link and the x-axis,
229 and ZAs isdiscussed
the distance between
in Section 2.2,the
thehinge
wheelpoint of the with
is a system two wheel feet and
two degrees the fixed(DOF).
of freedom hinge Applying
center. M1the is
230 applied to the left crank, whereas M 2 is applied to the right. The forces in the x- and y-directions, Fq
principle of virtual work, Figure 5 shows the corresponding coordinate system. θ1 is the angle between
231 and FN, respectively,
the left crank and theare applied toand
x-direction, the hinge
θ2 is the point of the
angle two wheel
between feet. crank
the right From Figure
and the5,x-direction,
r1 (or r2) is
232 the
bothhub radius,are
of which andselected
r3 (or r4)asis the
equal to l.
generalized coordinates. In addition, θ3 is the angle between the
233 The PRBM describes the changes
right spoke link and the x-axis, θ4 is the in angle
wheelbetween
diameterthe through the rolling
left spoke link and of the
the x-axis,
wheel. and
DuringZ isthis
the
234 process, only one wheel leg is presumed to touch the ground. M 1 and M2 are the inputs. When M2
distance between the hinge point of the two wheel feet and the fixed hinge center. M1 is applied to
235 decelerates
the left crank,(accelerates)
whereas M the ismiddle
appliedhub, tothe
theangle
right.between the two
The forces spoke
in the x- andlinks increases (decreases).
y-directions, Fq and FN ,
2
236 Consequently,
respectively, are applied to the hinge point of the two wheel feet. From Figure 5, r1the
the wheel diameter decreases (increases). When the two cranks have (orsame
r2 ) isrotation,
the hub
237 the angle stays constant, and
radius, and r3 (or r4 ) is equal to l. the wheel diameter does not change.
The PRBM describes the changes in wheel diameter through the rolling of the wheel. During this
238 4.2. Virtual Work of Forces
process, only one wheel leg is presumed to touch the ground. M1 and M2 are the inputs. When M2
239 To gain(accelerates)
decelerates the relationships between
the middle hub, δθthe
1, δθ 2, andbetween
angle δθ3, according
the two tospoke
the reference [30], a loop
links increases closure
(decreases).
240 equation for the
Consequently, thePRBM
wheelisdiameter
established as
decreases (increases). When the two cranks have the same rotation,
the angle stays constant, and the wheel diameter does not change.
r2 cos θ2 + r3 cos θ 3 − r4 cos θ4 − r1 cos θ1 = 0 (13)
4.2. Virtual Work of Forces
241 where θ3 and θ4 are the respective functions of θ1 and θ2. Differentiating Equation (13) with respect
242 to theTotwo generalized
gain coordinates
the relationships between δθ1 , δθ2 , and δθ3 , according to the reference [30], a loop closure
yields
equation for the PRBM is established as
−r2 sin θ 2 δθ2 − r3 sin θ3 δθ3 + r4 sin θ 4 δθ4 + r1 sin θ1δθ1 = 0 (14)

243 where r2 cos θ2 + r3 cos θ3 − r4 cos θ4 − r1 cos θ1 = 0 (13)

where θ3 and θ4 are the respective functions ofr1θ=1 and

r2 θ2 . Differentiating Equation (13) with respect
(15)
to
the two generalized coordinates yields
r3 = r4 (16)
− r2 sin θ2 δθ2 − r3 sin θ3 δθ3 + r4 sin θ4 δθ4 + r1 sin θ1 δθ1 = 0 (14)
θ 4 = θ1 + θ 2 − θ 3 . (17)
where
244 Differentiating Equation (17) yields
r1 = r2 (15)
δθ 4 = δθ1 + δθ2 − δθ3 . (18)
r3 = r4 (16)
245 Substituting Equations (15) through (18) into Equation (14) yields
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 9 of 16

θ4 = θ1 + θ2 − θ3 . (17)

Differentiating Equation (17) yields

δθ4 = δθ1 + δθ2 − δθ3 . (18)

Substituting Equations (15) through (18) into Equation (14) yields

[r3 sin(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 ) − r1 sin θ2 ]δθ2 + [r1 sin θ1 + r3 sin(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 )]δθ1

δθ3 = . (19)
r3 sin θ3 + r3 sin(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 )

Thus, δθ3 can be expressed as

δθ3 = δ1 δθ1 + δ2 δθ2 (20)

where
r1 sin θ1 + r3 sin(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 )
δ1 = (21)
r3 sin θ3 + r3 sin(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 )
δθ3 = δ1 δθ1 + δ2 δθ2 . (22)

The position vector for the hinge point between the two wheel feet is obtained as

→ θ + θ2 θ + θ2
   
Z = Z cos 1 i − Z sin 1 j (23)
2 2

where
θ − θ2 θ + θ2
   
Z = r2 cos 1 + r3 cos 1 − θ3 . (24)
2 2
Differentiating Equation (23) yields
→ h r r
i
δZ = − 22 sin θ1 + 23 sin(θ3 − θ1 − θ2 ) δθ1 i
+ − r22 sin θ2 − r23 sin(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 ) δθ2 i
h i
 θ +θ   θ +θ 
+r sin 1 2 2 − θ3 cos 1 2 2 δθ3 i
h r3 (25)
+ − 22 cos θ1 − r23 cos(θ3 − θ1 − θ2 ) δθ1 j
i

+ − r22 cos θ2 − r23 cos(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 ) δθ2 j

h i
 θ +θ   θ +θ 
−r3 sin 1 2 2 − θ3 sin 1 2 2 δθ3 j.

The force vector is then expressed as

→
F = Fq i + FN j. (26)

Hence, the virtual work of the forces can be obtained as

→ → hr r
i hr r
i
F · δZ = −Fq sin θ1 − 23 sin(θ3 − θ1 − θ2 ) δθ1 − FN 22 cos θ1 + 23 cos(θ3 − θ1 − θ2 ) δθ1
2
h2
+Fq r3 sin θ1 +2 θ2 − θ3 cos θ1 +2 θ2 δ1 δθ1 − FN r3 sin θ1 +2 θ2 − θ3 sin θ1 +2 θ2 δ1 δθ1
   i h    i
hr r
i h  θ +θ   θ +θ i . (27)
−Fq 22 sin θ2 + 23 sin(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 ) δθ2 + Fq r3 sin 1 2 2 − θ3 cos 1 2 2 δ2 δθ2
r θ +θ θ +θ
hr i h    i
−FN 22 cos θ2 + 23 cos(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 ) δθ2 − FN r3 sin 1 2 2 − θ3 sin 1 2 2 δ2 δθ2

4.3. Virtual Work of Moments

The angular displacement Θi of the ith crank is defined as

Θ1 = θ1 − θ10 (28)

Θ2 = θ2 − θ20 (29)
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 10 of 16

where θi0 is the initial angle.

Differentiating the two equations,
δΘ1 = δθ1 (30)

δΘ2 = δθ2 . (31)

Therefore, the virtual work of the moments can be obtained as

M1 δΘ1 + M2 δΘ2 . (32)

4.4. Virtual Work of Springs

The intersection angle change among links or cranks is defined as

ψ1 = (θ3 − θ30 ) − (θ2 − θ20 ) (33)

ψ2 = (θ1 − θ10 ) + (θ2 − θ20 ) − (2θ3 − 2θ30 ) (34)

ψ3 = −ψ1 . (35)

Differentiating Equations (33)–(35) yields

δψ1 = δθ3 − δθ2 (36)

δψ2 = δθ1 + δθ2 − 2δθ3 (37)

δψ3 = δθ3 − δθ2 (38)

where ψ1 is the difference between the angle (π − θ2 + θ3 ) between links r2 and r3 in any position and
the angle (π − θ20 + θ30 ) in the initial position, whereas ψ2 is the difference between the angle (2π+ θ1
+ θ2 − 2θ3 ) between links r3 and r4 in any position and the initial angle (2π + θ10 + θ20 − 2θ30 ). For the
initial position, the springs do not experience stress. Thus, when the wheel contracts, the following
expressions are obtained:

T1 = −k1 ψ1 = −k1 [(θ3 − θ30 ) − (θ2 − θ20 )] (39)

T2 = −k2 ψ2 = −k2 [(θ1 − θ10 ) + (θ2 − θ20 ) − (2θ3 − 2θ30 )] (40)

where ki is the ith spring constant.

Moreover, a spring torque direction in the wheel expansion is opposite to that of the contraction.
Thus, when the wheel unfolds, the above expressions become

T1 = k1 ψ1 = k1 [(θ3 − θ30 ) − (θ2 − θ20 )] (41)

T2 = k2 ψ2 = k2 [(θ1 − θ10 ) + (θ2 − θ20 ) − (2θ3 − 2θ30 )] (42)

where,
T3 = −T1 . (43)

Combining Equations (36)–(43) with Equations (18)–(20), the virtual work of springs for a wheel
with n wheel legs can be expressed as

nT1 δψ1 + nT2 δψ2 + nT3 δψ3

= 2nT1 δψ1 + nT2 δψ2 . (44)
= [nT2 + (2nT1 − 2nT2 )δ1 ]δθ1 + [(2nT1 − 2nT2 )δ2 + (nT2 − 2nT1 )]δθ2
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 11 of 16

According to Section 3, θ3 can be derived from the equation below, as

θ1 − θ2 θ + θ2
   
r2 × sin = r3 × sin θ3 − 1 . (45)
2 2

Hence, the total virtual work for the wheel can be obtained as
→ → → → → → → → → → → →
δW = F · δ Z + M1 · δΘ1 + M2 · δΘ2 + n T 1 · δ ψ 1 + n T 2 · δ ψ 2 + n T 3 · δ ψ 3 . (46)

In summary, the total virtual work of springs can be derived from Equations (27), (32), and (44).

4.5. Load–Deflection Behavior

For a wheel with two DOFs,
δW = Q1 δθ1 + Q2 δθ2 (47)

where Qi is the ith generalized force.

When Qi becomes zero, static equilibrium for the wheel is achieved [31]. Therefore, the
load–deflection relationship can be expressed as

r
hr i
M1 = −nT2 + Fq 22 sin θ1 − 23 sin(θ3 − θ1 − θ2 )
+FN 22 cos θ1 + r23 cos(θ3 − θ1 − θ2 )
hr i
h  θ +θ   θ +θ i (48)
−Fq r3 sin 1 2 2 − θ3 cos 1 2 2 δ1
+FN r3 sin θ1 +2 θ2 − θ3 sin θ1 +2 θ2 δ1 − (2nT1 − 2nT2 )δ1
h    i

r3
hr i
M2 = −(2nT1 − 2nT2 )δ2 − (nT2 − 2nT1 ) + Fq 2
2
sin θ2 + 2 sin(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 )
h  θ +θ   θ +θ i
−Fq r3 sin 1 2 2 − θ3 cos 1 2 2 δ2
. (49)
+FN r22 cos θ2 + r23 cos(θ1 + θ2 − θ3 )
h i

+FN r3 sin θ1 +2 θ2 − θ3 sin θ1 +2 θ2 δ2

h    i

Equations (13)–(49) can be utilized to obtain θ1 of the left crank (left and right hubs) and θ2 of the
right crank (middle hub) caused by M1 and M2 . The two rotations result in variations of the wheel
diameter, as suggested by Equations (24) and (45).

5. Modified PRBM and Validation

5.1. Modified PRBM

The suitability of a PRBM in modeling a compliant mechanism depends on the torsional spring
constants. Thus, to better clarify the load–deflection behavior of the wheel, the torsional spring
constants of the PRBM need to adjust. Generally, the spring constant of a helical coil torsion can be
obtained from the following equation [32]:

Eπd4
ki =   (50)
3670 πni D + 3l

where E is Young’s modulus, l represents the length of a spring arm, ni represents the number of active
coils in the ith spring, d represents the steel-wire diameter, and D represents the spring pitch diameter.
This formula is similarly derived as the classic beam theory, which is also known as the
Bernoulli–Euler beam theory. However, the equation is limited to a single torsion spring (i.e.,
without long spring arms) subjected to a pure bending moment.
For a single torsion spring with long arms, the spring constant must be adjusted to account for
deflection when the arm length approaches the wire length. The end of the free spring arm connects a
force F at a distance l from the coil axis to apply a moment (i.e., M = Fl). In this case, the working force
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 12 of 16

causes additional bending to the arm. Thus, the long arm is treated as a cantilever subjected to a force.
For small deflections, the transverse deflection (y) of the free end is expressed as

Fl3
y= . (51)
3EI
When viewed from the built-in end, the additional angle θa of the end deflection in the cantilever
can be expressed as
y Fl2
θa = = . (52)
l 3EI
The angular deflection of the wire in the spring body is defined as

ML MπDn
θ= = . (53)
EI EI
The total angle can be obtained as

Ml + 3MπDn
θs = θ + θa = . (54)
3EI
Finally, the torsion spring constant can be calculated as

M EI
k= = . (55)
θs πDn + 3l

However, for wheels, the torsion springs with the long spring arms in a single wheel leg possess
a compliant structure. The main transmission is caused by the bending moments in the long spring
arms, which should thus be treated as a cantilever with a bending moment rather than with a force.
Then, the θa of the end deflection in the cantilever becomes

y Fl2
θa = = . (56)
l 2EI
The ith torsion spring constant ki in Section 4 can be obtained as

M EI
ki = = (57)
θs πDn + l
2

where l represents the length of a spoke link (Figure 4).

5.2. Validation
To validate the effectiveness of the modified PRBM, an application example is presented, in which
only the contraction process was analyzed. This example clarifies the contraction process using seven
loading cases. Figure 6 shows the initial position (i.e., the first case) of a variable-diameter wheel.
The right wheel leg is presumed to touch the terrain and the angle between its Z and x-axis near the
terrain is 60◦ . Based on Section 3, the initial angle between the two cranks in the example is α2 (67◦ ).
Therefore, when the mechanism exits the initial position, θ10 = 93.5◦ and θ20 = 26.5◦ .
According to Equation (45), θ30 can be obtained as

θ − θ20 θ + θ20 r
   
r2 × sin 10 = r3 × sin θ30 − 10 + 4. (58)
2 2 2

The springs are made of steel (60Si2MnA). Poisson’s ratio is 0.3, and Young’s modulus is 206 GPa.
Table 2 presents the geometric parameters of helical torsion springs [9]. Based on Equation (57) and
the parameters in Table 2, the ith torsion spring constant ki can be obtained. The concentrated forces
334 After departing from the initial position, M1 increased the rotation (θ1) of the left crank in a
335 clockwise direction, whereas M2 decreased the rotation (θ2) of the right crank in the opposite
336 direction. As a result, the difference between θ1 and θ2 gradually increased in the latter five cases
337 (Figure 6), while the angle between the two spoke links gradually increased. Consequently, the wheel
338 diameter
Appl. decreased.
Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 Finally, the wheel was folded into a circular wheel. 13 of 16
339 For the six load conditions (Table 3), the moments acting on the left and right cranks during the
340 mechanism motion were calculated using Equations (13)–(49) and compared with the corresponding
are hypothesized to be FN = 57.17 N and Fq = 40.02 N [9,33]. On the basis of these parameters, the
341 FEA results in Table 3. However, the modified PRBM was not suitable for the first case, which is a
deflections in the wheel caused by M1 and M2 can be calculated using Equations (13)–(49).
342 structural analysis and is not included in Table 3.

343
344 Figure6.6.Contraction
Figure Contractionprocess
processofofwheel.
wheel.
Table 2. Parameters used in modified PRBM.

Parameters Values
θ10 93.5◦
Dcq 182 mm
θ20 26.5◦
r1 97 mm
r2 97 mm
r3 140 mm
r4 140 mm
d 4 mm
n1 10
n2 6
D 14 mm
l 140mm

To validate the modified PRBM, the finite-element software ABAQUS was used. The angles (θ1
and θ2 ) were given, and the other five DOFs at the wheel center were fixed. Furthermore, FN and Fq
acted on the hinge points of the two wheel feet in the wheel leg in contact with the ground. Linear
Timoshenko beam elements were applied to the springs. The three hubs and the 12 wheel feet in the
wheel were treated as the rigid bodies.
The contraction process of the wheel with six loading cases is described in Figure 6. For the first
case, deflections existed only in the wheel leg in contact with the terrain. The wheel did not generate
any mechanism movement. However, each wheel leg almost had the same deflections in the other
loading cases, and the wheel was gradually contracting with the hub rotations.
After departing from the initial position, M1 increased the rotation (θ1 ) of the left crank in a
clockwise direction, whereas M2 decreased the rotation (θ2 ) of the right crank in the opposite direction.
As a result, the difference between θ1 and θ2 gradually increased in the latter five cases (Figure 6),
while the angle between the two spoke links gradually increased. Consequently, the wheel diameter
decreased. Finally, the wheel was folded into a circular wheel.
For the six load conditions (Table 3), the moments acting on the left and right cranks during the
mechanism motion were calculated using Equations (13)–(49) and compared with the corresponding
FEA results in Table 3. However, the modified PRBM was not suitable for the first case, which is a
structural analysis and is not included in Table 3.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 14 of 16

Table 3. Comparison of results between modified PRBM and finite element analysis (FEA).

M 1 (N·mm) M 2 (N·mm)
θ1 θ2
PRBM FEA %Diff PRBM FEA %Diff
103.5◦ 22.5◦ −31,572.65 −31,880.05 0.96% 19,340.47 19,575.3 1.2%
113.5◦ 18.5◦ −54,471.28 −54,622.25 0.28% 43,365.75 43,428.14 0.14%
123.5◦ 14.5◦ −73,162.13 −73,031.2 0.18% 63,226.63 62,952.67 0.44%
133.5◦ 10.5◦ −86,752.77 −86,267.8 0.56% 77,993 77,375.2 0.80%
143.5◦ 6.5◦ −94,515.47 −93,952.3 0.60% 86,900.66 86,182.82 0.83%
151.5◦ 2.5◦ −96,336.40 −96,104.2 0.24% 89,592.73 89,190.67 0.45%

The results in Table 3 indicate that the absolute values of the moments increased when the wheel
folded. The elastic potential energy of these springs always increases due to wheel contraction, which
can be attributed to the work of M1 and M2 . Hence, the input moments during the mechanism
movement should increase. In the cases presented in Table 3, the different hub rotations caused the
direction of M1 to be opposite to that of M2 , which corresponded to the changes in wheel diameter.
When the wheel with a constant diameter rotated, both moments acted on the same direction (first
case in Figure 6). The stresses in the springs did not exceed the material yield strength (1372 MPa) in
the wheel contraction. Starting from the first case, with the wheel rotation, the wheel feet contracted
along the radial direction until the last case. This phenomenon shows that changes in wheel diameter
and wheel rolling occur simultaneously. In all cases, the absolute value of M1 was higher than that
of M2 because parts of the former needed to overcome ground resistance to carry out wheel rolling,
whereas the rest was used to change the wheel diameter. The wheel diameter varied from an unfolded
wheel to a folded circular wheel without any movement interferences and additional moments on the
wheel feet.
Table 3 suggests that the FEA and PRBM results achieved good agreement. Both analyses
had relative errors less than 1.2%. Therefore, the modified PRBM is reliable for analysis of the
variable-diameter wheel. On the one hand, the clearance between the torsional spring and the pin
prevents the actual rotation center of the spring from always overlapping with the original center [34].
On the other hand, the modified torsional spring constant is just an approximation for the spring
deflections. As previously mentioned in Section 5.1, helical torsion springs are compliant structures.
Thus, the torsion springs are subject not only to the bending moments but also to the axial and
transverse forces transferred by the arms during mechanism movement.

6. Conclusions
In this study, the influence of mechanisms on wheel performance was considered for wheel
design. The mechanism characteristics are achieved without weakening the wheel’s performance.
This design guideline has significance for future design and development of deployable wheels.
To improve the performance of the existing variable-diameter wheels, we have developed a novel
variable-diameter wheel with an innovative compliant mechanism. The proposed wheel uses the
same mechanism characteristics as the conventional variable-diameter mechanism but includes more
advantages. The wheel’s spoke structure eliminates the additional moments acting on the wheel
feet during mechanism motion and improves the support stability for the wheel feet. In addition,
the wheel leg structure that has three flexure pivots reduces the number of links in the mechanism
movement plane, thereby simplifying the kinematic equations for the design and the PRBM for
analysis. This structure enables a more compact and reliable mechanism compared with conventional
variable-diameter wheels. The presented planetary gear train helps the wheels to continuously adjust
in diameter so that the rover can adapt to rough terrains. This feature can improve the rover’s
obstacle-surmounting capability and stability. In conclusion, the proposed wheel enhances the wheel
performance and practicability in real applications. Thus, the new variable-diameter wheel can be
utilized not only in planet rovers for rough-terrain planetary explorations but also in earth-based
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 15 of 16

mobile robots for agriculture and forestry, military applications, rescue operations, and disaster
areas. Moreover, the novel wheel is applicable in locomotion systems, especially on unstructured and
soft terrains.
Practical design and analysis approaches for the proposed wheel were also considered. The
established kinematic equations were applied to the motion control of the wheel mechanism. The
load–deflection relationship was derived from the modified PRBM. The results in Table 3 indicate that
the proposed design and analysis tools are suitable for the proposed wheel. The modified PRBM can
help operators control changes in the wheel diameter on rigid terrains. Furthermore, the design and
analysis methods used in this study are applicable to other deployable wheels.

Author Contributions: G.X. and F.G. conducted this study and proofread the manuscript together; W.Z. conceived
the idea, designed and analyzed the wheel, and wrote this manuscript; H.J. contributed to the FEA for the wheel
and proofread the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under
grant number 51675027 and in part by the National Key Technology R&D Program of China under grant
number 2016YFD0700503-1
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Alamdari, A.; Krovi, V.N. Design of articulated leg–wheel subsystem by kinetostatic optimization. Mech.
Mach. Theory 2016, 100, 222–234. [CrossRef]
2. Ghotbi, B.; González, F.; Kövecses, J.; Angeles, J. Mobility evaluation of wheeled robots on soft terrain: Effect
of internal force distribution. Mech. Mach. Theory 2016, 100, 259–282. [CrossRef]
3. Xie, X.; Gao, F.; Huang, C.; Zeng, W. Design and development of a new transformable wheel used in
amphibious all-terrain vehicles (A-ATV). J. Terramech. 2017, 69, 45–61. [CrossRef]
4. Asnani, V.; Delap, D.; Creager, C. The development of wheels for the lunar roving vehicle. J. Terramech. 2009,
46, 89–103. [CrossRef]
5. Zakrajsek, J.; McKissock, D.; Woytach, J.; Zakrajsek, J.; Oswald, F.; McEntire, K.; Goodnight, T. Exploration
Rover Concepts and Development Challenges. In Proceedings of the 1st Space Exploration Conference:
Continuing the Voyage of Discovery, Orlando, FL, USA, 30 January–1 February 2005; pp. 1–23.
6. Bekker, M.G. Introduction to Terrain-Vehicle Systems, 1st ed.; University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI,
USA, 1969; pp. 1–20, ISBN 0472041444.
7. Bekker, M.G. Off-The-Road Locomotion: Research and Development in Terramechanics, 1st ed.; University of
Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1960; pp. 1–30, ISBN 0472041428.
8. Siddiqi, A.; Weck, O.L. Reconfigurability in planetary surface vehicles. Acta Astronaut. 2009, 64, 589–601.
[CrossRef]
9. Zeng, W.; Gao, F.; Jiang, H.; Huang, C.; Liu, J.; Li, H. Design and analysis of a compliant variable-diameter
mechanism used in variable-diameter wheels for lunar rover. Mech. Mach. Theory 2018, 125, 240–258.
[CrossRef]
10. Abad-Manterola, P.; Burdick, J.W.; Nesnas, I.A.; Chinchali, S.; Fuller, C.; Zhou, X. Axel Rover Paddle Wheel
Design, Efficiency, and Sinkage on Deformable Terrain. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference
on Robotics and Automation(ICRA), Anchorage, AK, USA, 3–7 May 2010; pp. 2821–2827.
11. Ming, H.; Bao-Long, S.; Wen-Hua, C.; Dan-Min, H.; De-Bei, L.; Ya-Di, H. Structure Synthesis & Configuration
Transformation of Variable Topology Repeated Foldable Wheel. In Proceedings of the IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), ShenZhen, China, 12–14 December 2013; pp. 85–90.
12. Bidaud, P.; Benamar, F.; Poirier, S. An Expandable Mechanism for Deployment and Contact Surface Adaptation
of Rover Wheels. In Climbing and Walking Robots; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2006; pp. 1053–1060.
13. Grand, C.; Bidaud, P.; Jarrassé, N. Innovative Concept of Unfoldable Wheel with an Active Contact Adaptation
Mechanism. In Proceedings of the 12th IFToMM World Congress, Besancon, France, 17–21 June 2007.
14. Hirose, S.; Kuwabara, H. Design of three-wheeled planetary rover Tri-star II. J. Robot. Mechatron. 2000, 12,
446–452. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4631 16 of 16

15. Aoki, T.; Murayama, Y.; Hirose, S. Development of a transformable three-wheeled lunar rover: Tri-star IV.
J. Field Robot. 2014, 31, 206–223. [CrossRef]
16. Sun, G.; Gao, F.; Sun, P. Design and mobility performance study of spring wheel for lunar rover. China Mech.
Eng. 2009, 20, 134–137.
17. Midha, A.; Norton, T.W.; Howell, L.L. On the nomenclature, classification, and abstractions of compliant
mechanisms. ASME J. Mech. Des. 1994, 116, 270–279. [CrossRef]
18. Howell, L.L.; Magleby, S.P.; Olsen, B.M. Handbook of Compliant Mechanisms, 1st ed.; Wiley: New York, NY,
USA, 2013; pp. 1–2, ISBN 1119953456.
19. Sun, P.; Gao, F.; Li, W.; Sun, G. Analysis of traction trafficability of diameter-variable wheel for planetary
rover. J. Beijing Univ. Aeronaut. Astronaut. 2007, 33, 1404–1407.
20. Cui, Y.; Gao, F. Kinematic modeling and analysis of variable diameter wheeled lunar rover. J. Beijing. Univ.
Aeronaut. Astronaut. 2008, 34, 348–352.
21. Machekposhti, D.F.; Tolou, N.; Herder, J.L. A review on compliant joints and rigid-body constant velocity
universal joints toward the design of compliant homokinetic couplings. ASME J. Mech. Des. 2015, 137, 032301.
[CrossRef]
22. Valentini, P.P.; Pennestrì, E. Second-order approximation pseudo-rigid model of leaf flexure hinge. Mech.
Mach. Theory 2017, 116, 352–359. [CrossRef]
23. Hongzhe, Z.; Dong, H.; Shusheng, B. Modeling and analysis of a precise multibeam flexural pivot. ASME J.
Mech. Des. 2017, 139, 081402. [CrossRef]
24. Norton, R.L. Design of Machinery: An Introduction to the Synthesis and Analysis of Mechanisms and Machines;
McGraw-Hill Higher Education: Boston, MA, USA, 2004; pp. 188–232, ISBN 0-07-247076-1.
25. Sanò, P.; Verotti, M.; Bosetti, P.; Belfiore, N.P. Kinematic synthesis of a D-Drive MEMS Device with rigid-body
replacement method. ASME J. Mech. Des. 2018, 140, 075001. [CrossRef]
26. Howell, L.L. Compliant Mechanisms; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2001; pp. 162–168,
ISBN 0-471-38478-X.
27. Venkiteswaran, V.K.; Su, H.J. Pseudo-rigid-body models for circular beams under combined tip loads. Mech.
Mach. Theory 2016, 106, 80–93. [CrossRef]
28. Venkiteswaran, V.K.; Su, H.J. A versatile 3R pseudo-rigid-body model for initially curved and straight
compliant beams of uniform cross section. ASME J. Mech. Des. 2018, 140, 092305. [CrossRef]
29. Tanık, E.; Parlaktaş, V. Compliant cardan universal joint. ASME J. Mech. Des. 2012, 134, 021011–021015.
[CrossRef]
30. Tanık, E.; Söylemez, E. Analysis and design of a compliant variable stroke mechanism. Mech. Mach. Theory
2010, 45, 1385–1394. [CrossRef]
31. Tanık, E. Analysis and design of an underactuated compliant five-bar mechanism. Mech. Mach. Theory 2016,
102, 123–134. [CrossRef]
32. Beitz, W.; Kuttner, K.H. Dubbel-Handbook of Mechanical Engineering; Springer: London, UK, 1994; pp. 50–63,
ISBN 3-540-19868-7.
33. Xiao, W.; Zhang, Y. Design of manned lunar rover wheels and improvement in soil mechanics formulas for
elastic wheels in consideration of deformation. J. Terramech. 2016, 65, 61–71. [CrossRef]
34. Jouaneh, M.; Yang, R. Modeling of flexure-hinge type lever mechanisms. Precis. Eng. 2003, 27, 407–418.
[CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).