The Journal of Engineering

20th International Conference of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Control

Engineering (ICFPMCE 2019)

Research on compliant configuration of eISSN 2051-3305

Received on 05th February 2020

hydraulic manipulator with passive following

Accepted on 21st May 2020
E-First on 23rd October 2020
doi: 10.1049/joe.2020.0044
characteristic www.ietdl.org

Lin Jiang1,2 , Lisheng Ren1, Xiaoyue Pan1, Jianyang Zhu1,2, Hui Zhao1,2
1Key Laboratory of Metallurgical Equipment and Control Technology, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic

of China
2Institute of Robotics and Intelligent Systems, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, People's Republic of China

E-mail: jianglin76@wust.edu.cn

Abstract: To decrease the injury caused by an accidental collision between the hydraulic manipulator and human, a hydraulic
rotating angle self-servo compliant robot driver joint is designed. Based on this joint, a variable stiffness passive servo-hydraulic
rotary joint is improved. The passive follow-up characteristics of the improved servo-hydraulic rotary joint enable it to enter the
low stiffness mode by itself when it encounters collisions beyond the force limit. Combining this characteristic, the research
method of the hydraulic mechanical arm flexible configuration is proposed. Firstly, the joint motion mode is defined by the Euler
angle, and a variety of configurations conforming to the motion characteristics of the manipulator are determined. Then, the
virtual prototype and collision environment are built, and the dynamic characteristics of the end effector of the arm under high
and low stiffness are measured. The results show that the flexible configurations with passive follow-up characteristics can
significantly suppress the collision force. Finally, the visual method is employed to solve, draw, and compare the workspace of
the selected compliant configuration, to obtain the optimal compliant configuration with both flexibility and motion, which
provides theoretical guidance for the subsequent design of the compliant manipulator.

1 Introduction design of modular redundant drive units. Compliant mechanisms

Nowadays, the demand for production efficiency is getting higher
and higher, and the mode of working with robots and people has
been widely used in people's production activities. As the distance
between human and robot approaches, there is a potential risk of
injury caused by a robot in a collision. Before designing a robot
arm, this kind of accident should be evaluated [1] Therefore, a
large number of research works have been carried out to reduce the
risk of collision between humans and robots. The human–machine
cooperation robot should have the response performance that is
mainly based on the collision crisis, i.e. the flexibility of the robot
arm. Flexibility is an important indicator to evaluate the
operational performance of robots, including the number of states,
operability, and operability direction [2].
To improve the flexibility of the arm, it is usually to reduce the
impact force by adding a compliant joint to the robot. Zhang et al.
[3] designed a soft arm based on a series of elastic actuators
(SEAs), Soft Arm IIY, to deal with the dynamic changes of the
working environment and the safety of human–computer
interaction. To improve the head collision safety of the flexible
joint manipulator, Meng et al.[4] proposed a flexible joint
manipulator configuration optimisation method based on the
mechanical arm safety index and gradient projection method and
gave the safe collision direction and the method of determining the
safety configuration. Zhao and Zhang [5] presented a three-degrees
of freedom (3-DOF) lightweight compliant mechanical arm that
used carbon fiber material to achieve lightweight and designed a
SEA to achieve the flexibility of the mechanical arm structure. Shi
et al. [6] designed a composite flexible joint with both primary and
passive variable stiffness characteristics. Choi et al.[7] proposed a
robot manipulator variable stiffness joint (VSJ), and a control
scheme to control the stiffness and position of the VSJ. Leaf spring
generates flexibility, and two actuators control the position and
stiffness of the joint through a four-bar mechanism. Hyun et al. [8]
presented a variable stiffness mechanism (VSM) for human-
friendly robots to simultaneously meet safety and performance
needs. The VSM has high stiffness in normal operation mode and
has low stiffness in collision mode when the load applied to the
joint exceeds a critical load. Mathijssen et al. [9] designed a new
J. Eng., 2020, Vol. 2020 Iss. 14, pp. 920-927
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
called designer muscles can be created by connecting these units in
series and parallel. The strain rate is 21.1% and the maximum
stress is 1.55 Pa. Yoo et al. [10] designed a manipulator VSJ with
terminal support of 1 kg payload. On this basis, a model of a three-
ring permanent magnet mechanism was proposed to meet the
requirements of rotational stiffness after optimisation. In [11], a
cable-driven manipulator, which can significantly adjust the
stiffness of the manipulator through the tension resolution, is
proposed. The stiffness matrix with high accuracy and isotropy is
obtained by the tension decomposition method. Xiang et al. [12]
proposed a method to quickly switch between pneumatic and
hydraulic working modes without removing all the hydraulic fluid
from the actuator. A compatible and potentially safe pneumatic
mode is demonstrated and compared with the more rigorous
hydraulic mode. Fu et al. [13] proposed a new joint actuator with
variable stiffness based on the plate spring as an elastic element
and the spiral disc as a stiffness regulating mechanism, and
discussed the stiffness regulating characteristics of the joint
actuator, providing a theoretical basis for improving the dynamic
characteristics of the interaction between robots and humans.
Ryusuke et al. [14] proposed a new rotational flexibility
mechanism that allows strong forces and flexibility to coexist, with
flexibility in both active rotation directions and orthogonal
directions. To do this, they developed a hydraulic artificial muscle
that is very light and can produce great power.
At present, most of the research studies on the compliant
mechanical arm is focused on the flexible joint. Integrating the
configuration of the flexible joint with the mechanical arm to study
its passive compliance is not considered, especially in the field of
outputting a large torque hydraulic mechanical arm. Aiming at this
problem, a hydraulic angle self-servo compliant drive joint was
designed, and a variable stiffness passive follower hydraulic swivel
joint was improved based on the compliant drive mechanism.
Combining the characteristics of the two, the 5-DOF series
hydraulic manipulator is taken as the research object. Many
common configurations and compliant configurations of the
manipulator are derived and the corresponding three-dimensional
(3D) models are established and imported into ADAMS for
920
Fig. 1 Hydraulic angle self-servo compliant drive joint section view
Fig. 2 Working principle diagram of hydraulic angle self-serving
compliant driving joint in the clockwise state
(a) Distributing flow 1, (b) Distributing flow 2
collision simulation experiments. A standard D–H parameter table
for the compliant configuration was created, and the workspace
cloud map was drawn using the MATLAB robot toolbox. After a
comparative analysis, the compliant configuration with both
compliant performance and athletic performance is obtained, which
provides important theoretical guidance for the subsequent
structural design and optimisation of the compliant mechanical
arm.
2 Description of the hydraulic joint structure
2.1 Design of hydraulic rotating angle self-servo compliant
robot driver joint
The joint is shown in Figs. 1 and 2. It mainly includes low-pressure
nozzle 1, left end cover 2, cylinder 3, low-pressure oil passage 4,
valve sleeve 5, valve core 6, valve body 7, right end cover 8,
bearing of valve body 9, high-pressure oil passage 10, vane seal 11,
valve body vane 12, spool bearing 13, high-pressure grease nipple
14, cover 15, steering gear 16, and fixed block 17.
Working principle: High-pressure oil enters high-pressure oil
passage through the high-pressure oil nozzle, and return oil nozzle
enters low-pressure oil. When the actuator stops, the spool is in the
middle, i.e. the rectangular groove on the spool is closed with the
convex platform on the valve sleeve, and the high- and low-
pressure oil cannot enter the A and B working chambers through
the valve spool and the valve sleeve. When the steering gear rotates
in a certain opening clockwise, the high-pressure oil flows from the
radial direction of the valve blade to the P port through the high-
pressure channel, and into the A cavity through the distributor port
and the rectangular hole A of the valve body. Then, under the
pressure difference between the two working chambers, the valve
blade rotates clockwise, as shown in Fig. 2a, and outputs the torque
through the output shaft of the valve body. At this point, the
volume of the B cavity begins to compress, and the low-pressure
oil in the B cavity enters the low-pressure oil passage through the
rectangular hole B of the valve body, as shown in Fig. 2b. When
the spool rotates counter-clockwise, its working condition is
contrary to that of the spool, and the principle is the same. The
hydraulic angle self-servo compliant driving joint has the
advantages of small size, smooth movement, and large output
moment when the working pressure is above 3 MPa, and its output
moment is not <50 N m and diameter is <130 mm.
J. Eng., 2020, Vol. 2020 Iss. 14, pp. 920-927
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Fig. 3 Structural diagram of passive servo rotary joint with variable
stiffness
Fig. 4 Sectional view of variable stiffness passive servo rotary join
2.2 Structural design of hydraulic passive follower joints with
variable stiffness
The joint is composed of hydraulic rotating self-servo compliant
following mechanism and torque transfer mechanism and spring
mechanism, as shown in Fig. 3. Among them, the first part is
improved from the hydraulic rotating angle self-servo compliant
robot driver joint, which is shown in the left half of Fig. 4. The
difference is that the spool 21 is fixed through the valve body 20
and the load plate 23 of the torque transmitting mechanism, and the
valve body 20 and the separating disc 24 fixed. The corner from
the servo principle is the same as the previous improvement, and
will not be described again. The torque transmitting mechanism is
composed of a load plate 23, a spring actuator 22, a separation disc
24, and a sweep arm disc 25. The joint is multi-staged by the load
plate, the separation disc, and the sweep arm.
Working principle: The load disc in the passive servo rotary
joint is connected by a spring mechanism and a sweeping arm disc,
the sweeping arm disc is fixed with the valve core, and the
separation disc is fixed with the valve body. When the force at the
end of the passive servo rotary joint is transmitted to the separation
disc and exceeds the safety value, the sweeping arm disc
connecting the valve core is separated from the output shaft
connecting the valve body. The disc mechanism is separated and
the sweeping arm disc drives the spool to rotate. Since the output
shaft of the valve body is also driven to follow the motion of the
self-servo mechanism, the mechanism moves in the direction of
reducing the contact force and improving collision safety. When
the impact force disappears, the mechanism restores to a relatively
stable state.
2.3 Derivation of general configuration
Generally, the higher the degree of freedom of the manipulator is,
the better the flexibility is. However, in the actual design and
manufacture of the manipulator, every additional degree of
freedom will multiply the complexity and cost of the mechanism
[15]. At present, industrial robots with three axes, four axes, five
axes, and six axes are mostly used in industrial applications. The
choice of axle number usually depends on the specific application.
This paper takes the series 5-DOF hydraulic manipulator as the
research object.
To clearly express the motion state of each joint of the
manipulator, the joint motion can be defined by referring to the
Euler angle (RPY angle) [16]: the motion properties can be
expressed in capital letters, such as R for rotation, P for movement,
921
Fig. 5 Schematic diagram of Euler angle (RPY angle)
Fig. 6 Simplified figure of joint
(a) Rotate around the x-axis, (b) Rotate around the y-axis, (c) Rotate around the z-axis
Fig. 7 Schematic diagram of the combination of adjacent joints
(a)RY–RY, (b) RY–RP, (c) RY–RP, (d) RP–RY, (e) RP–RP, (f) RP–RR, (g) RR–RY,
(h) RR–RP, (i) RR–RP
Fig. 8 Reasonable derivation diagram of general configuration
(a) RR-RP-RY-RP-RP, (b) RR-RP-RY-RP-RP, (c) RR-RP-RP-RY-RP, (d) RR-RP-RP-
RP-RP, (e) RR-RP-RP-RP-RY
H for spiral motion, S for spherical motion. The letters R, P, and Y
are used as subscripts to indicate orientation, such as RR, RP, and
RY to indicate the rotation of roll, pitch, and yaw, respectively, and
‘−’ and ‘+’ to indicate the serial and parallel relationship between
pairs of motion.
The configuration of the tandem hydraulic mechanical arm is
determined by the joints that provide power through different
combinations. A joint can be represented by a motion pair.
According to the Euler angle (RPY angle) shown in Fig. 5, there
are three kinds of motion states of the revolute joints, namely RY,
RP, and RR, respectively, as shown in Fig. 6.
With the straight bar as the connecting rod and considering the
connecting sequence, there are altogether nine combinations of two
adjacent joints, as shown in Fig. 7. Considering the actual working
conditions, it can be found that combination b rotates 90° around
the x-axis, which is the same as combination c. Combination d is
rotated 90° around the y-axis, which is the same as combination f,
and the combination f is retained. The combination g rotates 90°
about the z-axis, i.e. the same as the combination h, and the
combination h is also retained. The axis of rotation of the two
joints of combination a and combination I coincide, so that only
one of the joints acts as a linkage, so the unreasonable layout
922
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution License
Fig. 9 Simplified diagram of common configuration
(a) RR-RP-RY-RP-RP, (b) RR-RP-RY-RP-RP, (c) RR-RP-RP-RY-RP, (d) RR-RP-RP-
RP-RP, (e) RR-RP-RP-RP-RY
Fig. 10 Flexibility configuration diagram of the robot arm
(a) gx1A, (b) gx1B, (c) gx1C, (d) gx2A, (e) gx2B, (f) gx3A, (g) gx3B, (h) gx4A, (i)
gx4B, (j) gx5A
should be ruled out. In conclusion, b, d, e, and h are the reasonable
layout of adjacent joints.
A joint of a common industrial mechanical arm has 1-DOF,
therefore, n-DOF hydraulic mechanical arm is composed of n
joints. To have a larger working space, the first joint should
obviously rotate around the z-axis. The only reasonable way to fit
adjacent to the first joint is h, and then the second joint rotates
about the y-axis. There are two adjacent combinations suitable for
the second joint: d and e, i.e. the third joint rotates around the x-
axis or y-axis. When the third joint rotates about the x-axis, the
adjacent combination with the third joint is b, and the fourth joint
should rotate about the y-axis. When the third joint rotates around
the y-axis, the appropriate adjacent combinations include d and e,
and then the fourth joint should rotate around the x-axis or y-axis.
When the fourth joint rotates about the x-axis, the adjacent
combination to be considered is b, and then the fifth joint rotates
about the y-axis. When the fourth joint rotates around the y-axis,
the appropriate adjacent combinations include d and e, and then the
fifth joint rotates around the x- or y-axis. Thus, when the n − 1 joint
rotates around the x-axis, the adjacent combination mode that can
be considered is b, and the n − 1 joint rotates around the y-axis.
When the n − 1 joint rotates around the y-axis, the suitable adjacent
combinations are d and e, and the n − 1 joint rotates around the x-
axis or y-axis. There are five reasonable configurations with 5-
DOF, as shown in Fig. 8.
The simplified configuration corresponding to Fig. 8 is shown
in Fig. 9. Configurations a, b, c, d, and e are reasonable common
configurations, which are briefly described as GX1, GX2, GX3,
GX4, and GX5, respectively.
2.4 Derivation of flexible configuration
After the common configuration is determined, the passive follow-
up joint is continued to be distributed on the rotary joint (R_R,
R_Y) of the common configuration. GX1 contains three rotary
joints, so three cases are derived. GX2, GX3, and GX4 contain two
rotary joints, so there are two cases, respectively; GX5 contains
one rotary joint, so there is only one case. Thus, there are ten
reasonable flexibility configurations, as shown in Fig. 10, which
the passive follow-up joint is simplified in red.
J. Eng., 2020, Vol. 2020 Iss. 14, pp. 920-927
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Fig. 11 Characteristic curves of the first type of compliant configuration
(a) Position curve, (b) Velocity diagram, (c) Collision force diagram
3 Collision simulation experiment
ADAMS
3.1 Setting of experimental environment
ADAMS has a powerful simulation function. It is widely used as a
design simulation experiment platform. It can add constraints,
driving, and special forces, and then set the control parameters to
complete the solution and post-processing. In ADAMS, there are
two ways to define the collision force: one is the compensation
method (restitution) and the other is impact. The parameters of the
former are more difficult to set accurately, so this paper chooses the
latter to calculate the collision force [17]. The experiment is
composed of three groups of comparative simulations. The first
group is the high-stiffness collision of ordinary configurations
without passive follow-up characteristics; the second group is the
collision of compliant configurations with higher stiffness when
passive follow-up joints do not exceed the force limit; the third
group is the collision simulation of compliant configurations with
lower stiffness when passive follow-up joints exceeded the force
limit. Owing to the same environment of the three groups of
simulation experiments, the simulation process of the flexible
configuration is only described here.
The simulation process of flexible configuration is as follows:
(i) Use SOLIDWORKS to carry out 3D model of all flexible
configurations, and then simplify it into ADAMS. Create a spring
slider with a volume of 100 mm × 200 mm × 100 mm below the
side of the end-effector as the impact object. The slider material is
steel and the spring stiffness is 25 N/mm.
(ii) The connection is added for each joint of the robotic arm, and
corresponding motion is added. The impact function method is
used to create contact between the end-effector and the slider. A
rotation speed is set at the input end of the first rotary joint
connected with the base to drive the output connecting rod, passive
J. Eng., 2020, Vol. 2020 Iss. 14, pp. 920-927
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
based on follower joint, and other joints to rotate. The robot arm will collide
with the actuator after turning a certain angle, and then continue to
rotate until the end of simulation.
(iii) The displacement, velocity, and collision force changes of the
three-group experimental manipulators in the whole time period
from the collision to the end of the collision were analysed and
compared.
Also, the simulation parameters are set as follows: the
corresponding parameters are set for each group of models, and the
collision point is set at the lower end of the end-effector. The
distance between the spring slider and the actuator is 150 mm. The
hydraulic force between the valve core and the valve body of the
passive servo joint at the corresponding position is equivalently
replaced by the torsion spring. Its stiffness coefficient is set to
5000 N/mm and the damping coefficient is 0.17 Ns/mm. The spool
motion function of the first rotary joint of the mechanical arm is
CUBSPL (time, 0, SPLINE_n, 0)×30d. SPLINE_n is the function
defining the relationship between the rotation angle and time of the
steering gear. In this experiment, the sine function is employed as
an example. To prevent interference of different posture on the
experimental results, the other joint angle variables should be as
small as possible, and all values are fixed at 0.01 d/s. The number
of simulation steps and the simulation time are 400 and 1.5 s,
respectively. The simulation results are shown in Figs. 11 and 12.
3.2 Analysis of experimental results
After the simulation, the displacement and velocity curves of the
actuator can be measured. The simulation results are shown in
Figs. 11 and 12. Among them, the characteristics of displacement,
velocity, and collision force of the five common configuration
actuators are very close, therefore, only the characteristic curve of
one of them is used for comparison. All the configurations are
divided into two categories according to the collision results, and
923
Fig. 12 Characteristic curves of the second type of compliant configuration
(a) Position curve, (b) Velocity diagram, (c) Collision force diagram
their respective characteristic curves are also very close, so a
representative set of characteristic curves is selected for
comparison.
The first kind of flexible configuration can be defined as those
configurations which add passive servo joints to the first rotating
joint, namely GX1A, GX2A, GX3A, GX4A, and GX5A.
In this case, it can be seen from the response curves of Fig. 8
that the actuator collides with the spring slider at 0.13 s in the
general configuration state. The position error of the motion
response of the manipulator is the smallest compared with the other
two cases, and the reaction speed is obviously the fastest, with the
maximum speed of 3600 mm/s. However, its collision force is the
largest and the maximum collision force is about 4200 N.
In the higher stiffness state, this state simulates the reaction
state of the manipulator when the force limit is not exceeded. The
actuator collides with the spring slider at 0.3 s. The collision time
is delayed and there is a certain position error. The maximum
velocity is 2100 mm/s and the maximum collision force is about
300 N.
Under the condition of low stiffness collision, this state
simulates the reaction state of the manipulator in excess of the
force limit. The actuator collides with the spring slider at 0.4 s. The
collision time is delayed and the position error is large. The
maximum velocity is 1450 mm/s and the maximum collision force
is about 70 N.
Based on the above comparative analysis, it can be concluded
that under the same collision environment, the collision force of the
first type of compliant configuration is significantly better than that
of ordinary configurations without passive follow-up joints, which
indicates that the flexibility performance of this configuration is
outstanding.
The second type can be defined as configurations of passive
follower joints added to the rest of the revolute joints, i.e. GX1B,
GX1C, GX2B, GX3B, and GX4B. As can be seen from the
924
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution License
response curves in Fig. 12, the second type of compliant
configuration is similar to the collision process of ordinary
configuration in both cases where the force limit is exceeded and
the force limit is not exceeded, but the collision force decreases to
some extent. Generally, the position error is small, the speed is fast,
but the collision force is large. By comparing Figs. 11 and 12, it
can be found that the first type of compliant configuration has a
significantly better ability to suppress collision force than the
second type, but the precision is not perfect in the process of
movement. Therefore, from the point of view of safety, the
performance of the first type of flexible configuration is more
prominent.
4 Comparison of workspace
4.1 Establishment of denavit hartenberg (DH) parameters
From the previous section, we can know that GX1A, GX2A,
GX3A, GX4A, and GX5A have the best compliance performance,
besides this, the workspace capability of the manipulator is also a
very important index of the manipulator [18], which has profound
significance for the optimisation of structural parameters of the
manipulator, so it is necessary to discuss its flexibility in the
derivation of configuration theory.
To intuitively show the performance of the above five
configurations, the DH parameter table of each configuration is
obtained after establishing its linkage coordinate system, as shown
in Tables 1–5.
4.2 Result analysis
To determine the precise workspace boundary, the Monte Carlo
method is used to simulate the workspace of each configuration of
the manipulator [19]. Five arbitrary joint angle values obtained
J. Eng., 2020, Vol. 2020 Iss. 14, pp. 920-927
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Table 1 DH parameters of GX1A
i θi di ai αi Range
1 θ1 0 0 −90° ±150°
2 θ2 0 0 0° ±120°
3 θ3 d3 0 90° ±150°
4 θ4 0 0 90° ±120°
5 θ5 0 0 0° ±150°

Table 2 DH parameters of GX2A

i θi di ai αi Range
1 θ1 0 0 −90° ±150°
2 θ2 0 0 0° ±120°
3 θ3 d3 0 90° ±150°
4 θ4 0 0 0° ±120°
5 θ5 0 0 0° ±120°

Table 3 DH parameters of GX3A

i θi di ai αi Range
1 θ1 d1 0 −90° ±150°
2 θ2 0 a2 0° ±120°
3 θ3 0 0 90° ±120°
4 θ4 d4 0 90° ±150°
5 θ5 0 0 0° ±120°

Table 4 DH parameters of GX3A

i θi di ai αi Range
1 θ1 d1 0 −90° ±150°
2 θ2 0 a2 0° ±120°
3 θ3 0 a3 0° ±120°
4 θ4 0 0 90° ±120°
5 θ5 0 0 0° ±150°

Table 5 DH parameters of GX3A

i θi di ai αi Range
1 θ1 d1 0 −90° ±150°
2 θ2 0 a2 0° ±120°
3 θ3 0 a3 0° ±120°
4 θ4 d4 a4 0° ±120°
5 θ5 0 0 0° ±120°

randomly within the range of rotation angles of each joint were
substituted into the end-effector pose equation to obtain its
position, and a programme written in MATLAB is employed to
generate the workspace cloud map of the manipulator [20]. The
steps for calculating the workspace are as follows:
(i) Obtain the positive solution of the robot arm, name the pose
matrix A05 of the end-effector.
(ii) Rand function in MATLAB is used to select the joint angle
values randomly in the range of five joint angles.
(iii) The random value of each joint angle is involved in the
operation of the positive solution of the manipulator of each
configuration, generating a large number of position coordinate
points.
(iv) The set of end-effector position coordinate points is displayed
intuitively in MATLAB window.
The working cloud diagram of the manipulator actuator drawn by
MATLAB robot toolbox is shown in Fig. 13. The cloud diagram of
each configuration represents its 3D view, XZ direction view, XY
direction view, and YZ direction view, respectively, from left to
right and from top to bottom. According to the shape of cloud
pattern, it can be divided into two categories: the first is GX1A and
GX2A. The cloud images show that this kind of configuration has
poor accessibility under the base of the manipulator and distributes
uniformly in other directions. Comparing the two, it is found that
the interior of GX1A is relatively empty and sparse, which
indicates that the accessibility of this configuration is better only in
the periphery. In addition to poor accessibility at the bottom,
GX2A has a uniform distribution of location points and a relatively
dense distribution, indicating a larger accessible range. The second
category is GX3A, GX4A, and GX5A, which are lack of
accessibility on the left side of the base of the robot arm. Among
them, the cloud images of GX5A are very sparse, indicating that
the overall accessibility of the configuration is poor. However, the
workspace visualisation of GX3A and GX4A is almost identical,

J. Eng., 2020, Vol. 2020 Iss. 14, pp. 920-927 925

This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)

Fig. 13 Visual graphics of manipulator arm workspace
(a) GX1A, (b) GX2A, (c) GX3A, (d) GX4A, (e) GX5A
which indicates that the accessibility of the two configurations is
slightly different, but in the YZ direction, GX3A is denser than the
point inside the cloud image of GX4A, which indicates that
GX3A's accessibility is better than GX4A's on the whole.
In summary, GX2A and GX3A are the optimal configurations
for flexibility and accessibility, respectively, and they can be
applied to different work scenarios. Their corresponding two
models are shown in Figs. 14 and 15.
5 Conclusion
(i) Based on the safety concept of man–machine integration, a
hydraulic rotating angle self-servo compliant robot driver joint
with large output torque and smooth operation is designed. Based
on this joint, a variable stiffness passive servo-hydraulic rotary
joint with the multi-stage compliant mode is improved. Combining
the characteristics of the two joints, the compliant series hydraulic
manipulator is proposed.
(ii) Various compliant configurations of the hydraulic manipulator
are derived. The 3D model of each configuration of the
manipulator is established by using SOLIDWORKS. Under the
same posture, the simplified model is imported into ADAMS to
carry out collision simulation experiments.
(iii) Compared with the experimental results, five configurations
with outstanding flexibility are obtained. Furthermore, the
connecting rod coordinate system is established for the obtained
configurations, and the D–H parameter tables of each configuration
are obtained. The working space of each configuration is solved by
the Monte Carlo method, and the working clouds of the end
effectors of each configuration are drawn with the help of
MATLAB, which intuitively shows the working ability of each
configuration.
(iv) A reasonable configuration with both flexibility and motion
performance is obtained, which can be used as an important
theoretical guidance for the follow-up structural design and
optimisation of the manipulator.
926
This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution License
Fig. 14 Model diagram of GX2A
Fig. 15 Model diagram of GX3A
6 Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the open fund of the Institute of
Robotics and Intelligent Systems in 2018 (F201803), Wuhan
Application Foundation Frontier Project (2019010701011404),
Hubei Natural Science Foundation (2018CFB626), and National
Natural Science Foundation of China (61305110)
7 References
[1] Park, J., Song, J., Haddadin, S.: ‘Collision analysis and safety evaluation
using a collision model for the frontal robot–human impact’, Robotica, 2015,
33, (7), pp. 1536–1550
[2] Tian, Y., Wang, H.G., Pan, X.A.: ‘Configuration analysis of a 6R manipulator
based on an improved performance index’. Int. Conf. on Robotics &
Biomimetics, Macao, People's Republic of China, 2017
[3] Zhang, X.L., Gu, X.X., Zhao, H.F., et al.: ‘Design of a compliant mechanical
arm based on a series of elastic actuators’, Robot, 2016, 38, (4), pp. 385–394
[4] Meng, D.S., Wang, X.Q., Liang, B., et al.: ‘Optimization of the safety
configuration of flexible joint manipulator based on head collision equivalent
model’, Robot, 2017, 39, (4), pp. 523–531
[5] Zhao, H.F., Zhang, X.L.: ‘Design and control of lightweight and flexible
manipulators’, J. Beijing Jiaotong Univ., 2018, 42, (1), pp. 113–119
[6] Shi, Y.L., Zhang, X.J., Zhang, M.L.: ‘Design and analysis of active-passive
composite variable stiffness flexible joints’, J. Mech. Eng., 2018, 54, (3), pp.
55–62
[7] Choi, J., Hong, S., Lee, W., et al.: ‘A robot joint with variable stiffness using
leaf springs’, IEEE Trans. Robot., 2011, 27, (2), pp. 229–238
[8] Hyun, D., Yang, H.S., Park, J., et al.: ‘Variable stiffness mechanism for
human-friendly robots’, Mech. Mach. Theory, 2010, 45, (6), pp. 880–897
[9] Mathijssen, G., Schultz, J., Vanderborght, B., et al.: ‘A muscle-like
recruitment actuator with modular redundant actuation units for soft robotics’,
Robot. Auton. Syst., 2015, 74, (PA), pp. 40–50
[10] Yoo, J., Hyun, M.W., Choi, J.H., et al.: ‘Optimal design of a variable stiffness
joint in a robot manipulator using the response surface method’, J. Mech. Sci.
Technol., 2009, 23, (8), pp. 2236–2243
[11] Yeo, S.H., Yang, G., Lim, W.B.: ‘Design and analysis of cable-driven
manipulators with variable stiffness’, Mech. Mach. Theory, 2013, 69,
(Complete), pp. 230–244
[12] Xiang, C., Giannaccini, M.E., Theodoridis, T., et al.: ‘Variable stiffness
Mckibben muscles with hydraulic and pneumatic operating modes’, Adv.
Robot., 2016, 30, (13), pp. 889–899
[13] Fu, X., Wang, W., Wang, L., et al.: ‘Analysis and study on dynamical
characteristics of variable stiffness joint actuator’, Robot, 2017, 39, (4), pp.
466–473
J. Eng., 2020, Vol. 2020 Iss. 14, pp. 920-927
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
[14] Ryusuke, M., Hiroyuki, N., Gen, E., et al.: ‘A proposal of a new rotational-
compliant joint with oil-hydraulic McKibben artificial muscles’, Adv. Robot.,
2018, 32, (9), pp. 511–523
[15] Zhao, J., Song, C., Du, B.: ‘Research on ergonomic mechanical arm
configuration based on ergonomics’, J. Mech. Eng., 2013, 49, (11), pp. 16–21
[16] He, Y., Luo, J., Zhang, Y., et al.: ‘Synthesis and research of anthropomorphic
manipulator configuration based on ergonomics’, Mach. Manuf., 2014, 52,
(11), pp. 28–31
[17] Smith, T., Jones, M.: ‘The title of the paper’, IET Syst. Biol., 2007, 1, (2), pp.
1–7
[18] Zhou, W., Chen, F., Shen, J., et al.: ‘Kinematics simulation of four-degree-of-
freedom manipulator based on MATLAB’, Mach. Manuf. Autom., 2016, 45,
(1), pp. 115–119
[19] Xing, T.: ‘Kinematics and dynamics analysis and simulation of loading and
unloading manipulators’. Master thesis, Qingdao University of Science and
Technology, 2012
[20] Fu, X., Han, S., Zhang, D., et al.: ‘Kinematics analysis and trajectory
planning of packaging sorting manipulator based on D-H method’, Packag.
Food Mach., 2018, 36, (5), p. 46+52–55

J. Eng., 2020, Vol. 2020 Iss. 14, pp. 920-927 927

This is an open access article published by the IET under the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)