Advertisement

Soft Robotics pp 100-119 | Cite as

Simulation Technology for Soft Robotics Applications

  • Jürgen Roßmann
  • Michael Schluse
  • Malte Rast
  • Eric Guiffo Kaigom
  • Torben Cichon
  • Michael Schluse
Conference paper

Abstract

Soft robots are implied to be inherently safe, and thus "compatible", not only with human coworkers in a production environment, but also with the "family around the house". Such soft robots today still hold numerous new challenges for their design and control, for their commanding and supervision approaches as well as for human-robot interaction concepts. The research field of eRobotics is currently underway to provide a modern basis for efficient soft robotic developments. The objective is to effectively use electronic media - hence the "e" at the beginning of the term – to achieve the best possible advance in the research field. A key feature of eRobotics is its capability to join multiple process simulation components under one "software roof" to build "Virtual Testbeds", i.e. to alleviate the dependancy on physical prototypes and to provide a comprehensive tool chain support for the analysis, development, testing, optimization, deployment and commanding of soft robots.

Keywords

Data Processing System Bond Graph Robot Dynamic Soft Robot Robotic Simulation 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Atorf L, Schluse M, Rossmann J (2014) Simulation-based optimization, reasoning, and control: The eRobotics approach towards intelligent robots. In: Int. Symp. on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space (i-SAIRAS), to be publishedGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Blochwitz T, Otter M, Arnold M, Bausch C, Clauß C, Elmqvist H, Junghanns A, Mauss J, Monteiro M, Neidhold T, et al (2011) The functional mockup interface for tool inde-pendent exchange of simulation models. In: 8th International Modelica Conference, pp 20–22Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Borutzky W (2006) Bond graph modeling and simulation of mechatronic systems: An in-troduction into the methodology. In: 20th European Conference on Modeling and Simula-tion (ECMS)Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Broenink JF (1999) Introduction to physical systems modelling with bond graphs. URL http://www.ce.utwente.nl/bnk/papers/BondGraphsV2.pdf
  5. [5]
    Busch M (2012) Zur effizienten Kopplung von Simulationsprogrammen. Kassel Univer-sity Press GmbHGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Coppelia Robotics Software (2014) V-rep. URL http://www.coppeliarobotics.com
  7. [7]
  8. [8]
    Dolinsky JU (2001) The development of a genetic programming method for kinematic robot calibration. Dissertation, Liverpool John Moores UniversityGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Featherstone R (2008) Rigid Body Dynamics Algorithms, vol 49. Springer New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Ferraguti F, Golinelli N, Secchi C, Preda N, Bonfe M (2013) A component-based soft-ware architecture for control and simulation of robotic manipulators. In: Emerging Tech-nologies & Factory Automation (ETFA), IEEEGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Festo AG & Co KG (2012) Bionic Handling Assistant. URL http://www.festo.com/net/SupportPortal/Files/42050/Brosch%5C_FC%5C_BHA%5C_3%5C_0%5C_EN%5C_lo.pdf. Accessed 2014-16–05
  12. [12]
    Fisette P, Samin J (1993) Robotran: Symbolic generation of multi-body system dynamic equations. In: Advanced Multibody System Dynamics, Springer, pp 373–378Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Germann JM, Maesani A, Floreano D, Stöckli M (2013) Soft cell simulator: A tool to study soft multi-cellular robots. In: Int. Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, IEEE, EPFL-CONF-196284, pp 1300–1305Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Giorelli M, Renda F, Calisti M, Arienti A, Ferri G, Laschi C (2012) A two dimensional inverse kinetics model of a cable driven manipulator inspired by the octopus arm. In: Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp 3819–3824Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Hiller J, Lipson H (2014) Voxcad. URL http://www.voxcad.com/
  16. [16]
    Hiller J, Lipson H (2014) Dynamic simulation of soft multimaterial 3d-printed objects. Soft Robotics 1(1):88–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Iida F, Laschi C (2011) Soft robotics: Challenges and perspectives. Procedia Computer Science 7:99–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Jung TJ (2009) Methoden der Mehrkörperdynamiksimulation als Grundlage realitätsna-her virtueller Welten. Dissertation, RWTH Aachen UniversityGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Kaigom EG, Rossmann J (2013) A new eRobotics approach: Simulation of adaptable joint admittance control. In: Int. Conf. on Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA), IEEE, pp 550–555Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Kaigom EG, Rossmann J (2013) Simulation of actuated and controlled robot manipula-tors. International Journal of Mechatronics and Automation (IJMA)) 3(3):191–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Lipson H (2013) Challenges and opportunities for design, simulation, and fabrication of soft robots. Soft Robotics 1(P):21–27Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Müller R, Esser M, Janßen C, Vette M (2010) Systemidentifikation für Montagezellen-Erhöhte Genauigkeit und bedarfsgerechte Rekonfiguration. wt Werkstattstechnik online 100(9):687–691Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Open Source Robotics Foundation (2014) Gazebosim homepage. URL http://gazebosim.org/
  24. [24]
    Ott C, Albu-Schäffer A, Kugi A, Hirzinger G (2003) Decoupling based Cartesian imped-ance control of flexible joint robots. In: Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE, pp 3101–3107Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Pfeifer R, Marques HG, Iida F (2013) Soft robotics: the next generation of intelligent ma-chines. In: Int. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press, pp 5–11Google Scholar
  26. [26]
  27. [27]
    Renda F, Cianchetti M, Giorelli M, Arienti A, Laschi C (2012) A 3d steady-state model of a tendon-driven continuum soft manipulator inspired by the octopus arm. Bioinspira-tion & biomimetics 7(2):025,006Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Robinson G, Davies J (1999) Continuum robots - a state of the art. In: Int. Conf. on Ro-botics and Automation (ICRA), IEEEGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Roos E, Behrens A, Anton S (1997) Rds-realistic dynamic simulation of robots. In: Int. Symp. on Industrial Robots, Int. Fed. of Robotics & Robotic Industries, vol 28, pp 17–27Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    Rossdeutscher M, Zuern M, Berger U (2010) Virtual robot program development for as-sembly processes using rigid-body simulation. In: Int. Conf. on Computer Supported Co-operative Work in Design, IEEE, pp 417–422Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Rossmann J, Schluse M, Jung T, Rast M (2009) Close to reality simulation of bulk solids using a kind of 3d cellular automaton. In: Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf. & Computers and Information in Engineering Conf. (IDETC/CIE), ASMEGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Rossmann J, Wischnewski R, Stern O (2010) A comprehensive 3-d simulation system for the virtual production. In: Int. Industrial Simulation Conference (ISC), pp 109–116Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Rossmann J, Steil T, Springer M (2012) Validating the camera and light simulation of a virtual space robotics testbed by means of physical mockup data. In: Int. Symp. on Artifi-cial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space (i-SAIRAS)Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Rossmann J, Schluse M, Schlette C, Waspe R (2013) A new approach to 3d simulation technology as enabling technology for erobotics. In: Int. Simulation Tools Conf. & EXPO (SIMEX), pp 39–46Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Rudolph J, Woittennek F (2008) An algebraic approach to parameter identification in lin-ear infinite dimensional systems. In: Mediterranean Conf. on Control and Automation, IEEE, pp 332–337Google Scholar
  36. [36]
  37. [37]
  38. [38]
    Song P, Trinkle JC, Kumar V, Pang JS (2004) Design of part feeding and assembly pro-cesses with dynamics. In: Int. Conf. in Robotics and Atomation (ICRA), IEEE, vol 1, pp 39–44Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    Trivedi D, Rahn CD (2014) Model-based shape estimation for soft robotic manipulators: The planar case. Mechanisms and Robotics 6:021,005-1-021,005–10Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    Trivedi D, Rahn CD, Kier WM, Walker ID (2008) Soft robotics: Biological inspiration, state of the art, and future research. Applied Bionics and Biomechanics 5(3):99–117Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    Vukobratovic M (2009) Dynamics and robust control of robot-environment interaction, vol 2. World ScientificGoogle Scholar
  42. [42]
    Wahl FM, Thomas U (2002) Robot programming-from simple moves to complex robot tasks. Institute for Robotics and Process Control, Technical University of BraunschweigGoogle Scholar
  43. [43]
    Yoo YH, Jung T, Römmermann M, Rast M, Kirchner F, Rossmann J, & Center RI (2010). Developing a virtual environment for extraterrestrial legged robot with focus on lunar crater exploration. In Proceeding of 10th International Symposium on Artificial In-telligent, Robotics and Automation in Space, vol. 29, No. 01.9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jürgen Roßmann
    • 1
  • Michael Schluse
    • 1
  • Malte Rast
    • 1
  • Eric Guiffo Kaigom
    • 1
  • Torben Cichon
    • 1
  • Michael Schluse
    • 1
  1. 1.RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations