Multi-objective optimal design of a novel multi-function rescue attachment based on improved NSGA-II

  • Chunrong Wang
  • Jing ZhaoEmail author
  • Erdong Xia
Technical Paper


A novel multi-function rescue attachment with tonging, shearing and grasping capabilities is proposed to improve the rescue operation efficiency and save time when switching between different attachments during rescue operations. The tonging and shearing form, as well as the grasping form, of the rescue attachment, is analyzed. Furthermore, the tonging diameter, shearing diameter and grasping force are simultaneously chosen as objective functions, and respective mathematical models are established for estimating the attachment’s performance. The nondominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) is used for multi-objective optimization of the attachment. To improve the population diversity and increase the search capability and uniformity of the distribution of Pareto fronts of NSGA-II, the elitist strategy, crossover operator and mutation operator are improved. The Pareto front is visualized in a specific polygon, and the best solution is then selected. More importantly, the simulation results indicate that the astringency, population diversity and search ability of the proposed algorithm can be improved. The uniformity of the Pareto front distribution can also be improved, which may lead to an increased number of available design schemes. The values of the three objectives of the best solution obtained via the improved algorithm are superior to those for other algorithms.


Multi-function rescue attachment NSGA-II Multi-objective optimization Pareto front Tonging, shearing and grasping integration 



This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51475016) and the Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province (No. 2018J01513). The authors thank the editors and anonymous reviewers for suggestions on improving the paper and Glenn Pennycook, MSc, from Liwen Bianji, Edanz Group China (, for editing the English text of a draft of this manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Borcherdt RD (2014) Implications of next generation attenuation ground motion prediction equations for site coefficients used in earthquake resistant design. Earth Eng Struct Dyn 43(9):1343–1360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Qi JT, Song DL, Shang H (2016) Search and rescue rotary-wing UAV and its application to the Lushan Ms7.0 earthquake. J Field Robot 33(3):290–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koresawa A (2013) Evidence-based analysis of search and rescue operations following the great East Japan earthquake. J Disaster Res 8(9):746–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tadokoro S, Takamori T, Osuka K, Tsurutani S (2000) Investigation report of the rescue problem at Hanshin-Awaji earthquake in Kobe. In: 2 IEEE/robotics society of Japan international conference on intelligent robots and systems, Takamatsu, Japan, October 31–November 5Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhou X, Li D, Li G (2014) A ground moving target emergency tracking method for catastrophe rescue. In: ISPRS Technical Commission II Midterm symposium, Toronto, Canada, October 06–08Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang ZX, Zhao DX (2009) Heterogeneous-type force tele-presence tele-operation system control strategy. In: International conference on information engineering and computer science, Wuhan, China, December 19–20Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fernando V, Barquero MJ, Javier S (2009) Large area smart tactile sensor for rescue robot. In: IEEE international workshop on robotic and sensors environments, Lecco, Italy, November 6–7Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Richardson RC, Nagendran A, Scott RG (2012) Experimental tests of bidi-bot: a mechanism designed for clearing loose debris from the path of mobile search and rescue robots. Adv Robot 26(15):1799–1823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hayashi K, Tamura T (2009) Teleoperation performance using excavator with tactile feedback. In: IEEE international conference on mechatronics and automation, Changchun, China, August 9–12Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cui HG, Li HL, Fen K (2013) Kinematic simulation of hydraulic excavator’s working attachment based on Matlab/Robot. In: International conference on manufacturing science and engineering, Dalian, China, March 30–31Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fang C, Ding X (2014) A novel movement-based operation method for dual-arm rescue construction machinery. Robotica 34(05):1090–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kamezaki M, Iwata H, Sugano S (2008) Development of an operation skill-training simulator for double-front work machine. In: IEEE/ASME international conference on advanced intelligent, Xian, China, July 2–5Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Woerner M, Weickgenannt M, Neuhaeuser S (2013) Kinematic modeling of a hydraulically actuated 3-SPR-Parallel manipulator for an adaptive shell structure. In: IEEE/ASME international conference on advanced intelligent, Wollongong, NSW, Australia, July 9–12Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cao Y, Dai X (2014) Modeling for performance degradation induced by wear of a hydraulic actuator of a hydraulic excavator. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci 229(3):556–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zang X, Liu Y, Lin Z, Zhang C, Iqbal S (2016) Two multi-linked rescue robots: design, construction and field tests. J Adv Mech Des Sys Manuf 10(6):1–12Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zang XZ, Liu YX, Zhu YH (2013) Structure design of a mobile jack robot. In: IEEE international conference on information and automation, Yinchuan, China, August 26–28Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang GW, Li B, Li ZQ (2014) Development of robotic spreader for earthquake rescue. In: IEEE international symposium on safety, security and rescue robotics, Hokkaido, Japan, October 27–30Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zang XZ, Wang JL, Liu YX (2015) Development of two rescue robots for disaster relief operations in narrow debris. High Technol Lett 21(4):339–406Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sharma V, Kumar V (2016) Multi-objective optimization of laser curve cutting of aluminium metal matrix composites using desirability function approach. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 38(4):1221–1238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ghodsiyeh D, Golshan A, Izman S (2013) Multi-objective process optimization of wire electrical discharge machining based on response surface methodology. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 36(2):301–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multi-objective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6(2):182–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Van Veldhuizen David A, Lamont Gary B (1999) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithm test suites. In: Proceedings of the ACM symposium on applied computing, New York, USA, February 28–March 2Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lu XH, Xie XP (2014) Multi-objective structural optimization of hub unit bearing using response surface methodology and genetic algorithm. J Adv Mech Des Syst Manu 8(3):1–10Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Walker DJ, Everson RM, Fieldsend JE (2013) Visualizing mutually nondominating solution sets in many-objective optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 17(2):165–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beijing University of TechnologyBeijingChina
  2. 2.Sanming UniversitySanmingChina

Personalised recommendations