Mechanical Design Thinking of Control Architecture



Modern research prevents interdisciplinary activities, in which experts of several fields work together in order to obtain a final solution with high performance characteristics. The main fields in robotics are control, electronics and mechanics. These areas are highly close and they must collaborate together in robotic projects deciding the most suitable solution of every sub-system for a successful operation as an integrate system. For example, a suitable mechanical design can simplify the requirements of control and electronics. This chapter deals with the importance of the mechanical design in the development of mechatronic devices as easy-operation systems. Low-cost robots are related to new emerging application areas and they can be also operated in a simpler way compared to the typical industrial robots. The synthesis process of mechanism that composed the robotic structures represents a key phase in the mechanical design of easy-operation prototypes. The main idea is to obtain dynamic systems in which their transfer functions do not present undesirable characteristics from the control point of view, for instance, all poles equal to zero or non linearity of inputs. For this goal, the mechanical designer should consider the recommendation from the control strategist during the mechanism synthesis. Similar, backlash, hysteresis, shafts offset and fiction are also undesirable mechanical characteristics for non complex control architecture. Some tips are reported in this chapter for a mechanical design in which these undesirable characteristics are reduced as much as possible.


Humanoid Robot Ball Bearing Kinematic Chain Revolute Joint Control Architecture 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Armstrong-Hélouvry B (1991) Control of machines with friction. Kluwer, DordrechtMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Bachmann H, Ammann WJ, Deischl F, Eisenmann J, Floegl I, Hirsch GH, Klein GH, Lande GJ, Mahrenholtz O, Natke HG, Nussbaumer H, Pretlove AJ, Rainer JH, Saemann E, Steinbeisser L (1995) Vibration problems in structures: Practical guidelines. Birkhäuser, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  3. Ceccarelli M, Nava Rodriguez NE, Carbone G, Lopez-Cajun C (2005) Optimal design of driving mechanism in a 1 D.O.F. anthropomorphic finger. J Appl Bionics Biomech 2(2):103–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ceccarelli M, Nava Rodriguez NE, Giuseppe C (2006) Design and tests of a three finger hand with 1 Dof articulated fingers. Int J Robotica 24:183–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cutkosky MR (1989) On grasp choice, grasp model, and the design of hands for manufacturing tasks. IEEE Trans Rob Autom 5(3):269–279MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Silva CW (2007) Vibration: fundamental and practice. Taylor and Francys, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Gonzalez RA, Gonzalez RAG, Morales R (2010) Mechanical synthesis for easy and fast operation in climbing and walking robots. In: Behnam M (ed) Climbing and walking robots, INTECHGoogle Scholar
  8. HD homepage (2010) Accessed October 2010
  9. SKF homepage (2010) Accessed October 2010
  10. Masia L, Casadio M, Nava Rodriguez NE, Morasso P, Sandini G, Giannoni P (2009) Adaptive training strategy of distal movements by means of a wrist-robot. International conferences on advances in computer-human interactions 20223Google Scholar
  11. Nava Rodriguez NE (2010) Design issue of a new icub head sub-system. Rob Comput Integr Manuf 26(2):119–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nava Rodriguez NE, Carbone G, Ottaviano E, Ceccarelli M (2004) An experimental validation of a three—fingered hand with 1 dof anthropomorphic fingers. Intell Manipulation Grasping 285-290Google Scholar
  13. Nava Rodriguez NE, Carbone G, Ceccarelli M (2006) Optimal design of driving mechanism in a 1-d.o.f. anthropomorphic finger. Mech Mach Theory 41(8):897–911MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nava Rodriguez NE, Abderrahim M, Moreno L (2009) A mechanism design of a chest sub-system for humanoid robot. ASME International conference of advance intelligent mechatronics AIM2009 43Google Scholar
  15. Ogata K (1998) Modern control engineering. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  16. Preumont A (2002) Vibration control of active structures: An introduction. Kluwer, DordrechtMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Rao JS, Dukkipati RV (2006) Mechanism and machine science. New Age, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  18. Sandini G, Metta G, Verson D, Caldwell D, Tsagarakis N, Beira R, Santos-Victor J, Ijspeert A, Righetti L, Cappiello G, Stellin G, Becchi F (2005) The robotcub project an open framework for research in embodied cognition. HumanoidsGoogle Scholar
  19. Sciavicco L, Siciliano B (2005) Modelling and control of robot manipulators. Springer-Verlag, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Troch I, Desoyer K, Kopacek P (1991) Robot control 1991 (SYROCO ‘91): Selected papers from the 3rd IFAC/IFIP/IMACS symposium. International federation of automatic control, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  21. Zinn M, Khatib O, Roth B, Salisbury JK (2004) Playing it safe [human-friendly robot]. Rob Autom Mag 11(2):12–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited  2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Robotics LabCarlos III UniversityLeganés, MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations