AI helps you reading Science
AI generates interpretation videos
AI extracts and analyses the key points of the paper to generate videos automatically
AI parses the academic lineage of this thesis
AI extracts a summary of this paper
Current computer-aided design software was not created with free-form 3D fabrication processes in mind, and does not accommodate the complex non-homogeneous 3D designs that may be desired for soft robotics
Design, fabrication and control of soft robots
NATURE, no. 7553.0 (2015): 467-475
Conventionally, engineers have employed rigid materials to fabricate precise, predictable robotic systems, which are easily modelled as rigid members connected at discrete joints. Natural systems, however, often match or exceed the performance of robotic systems with deformable bodies. Cephalopods, for example, achieve amazing feats of ma...More
PPT (Upload PPT)
- Engineers have employed rigid materials to fabricate precise, predictable robotic systems, which are modelled as rigid members connected at discrete joints.
- The key challenge for creating soft machines that achieve their full potential is the development of controllable soft bodies using materials that integrate sensors, actuators and computation, and that together enable the body to deliver the desired behaviour.
- Conventional approaches to robot control assume rigidity in the linkage structure of the robot and are a poor fit for controlling soft bodies, soft materials require new algorithms.
- Engineers have employed rigid materials to fabricate precise, predictable robotic systems, which are modelled as rigid members connected at discrete joints
- Softness and body compliance are salient features often exploited by biological systems, which tend to seek simplicity and show reduced complexity in their interactions with their environment
- In contrast to hard-bodied robots, soft robots have bodies made out of intrinsically soft and/or extensible materials that can deform and absorb much of the energy arising from a collision
- These robots have a continuously deformable structure with muscle-like actuation that emulates biological systems and results in a relatively large number of degrees of freedom compared with their hard-bodied counterparts
- Other groups[29,33,34,35] (Fig. 2b, c) used soft lithography techniques adapted from microfluidics, as well as soft composite materials composed of various silicone polymers and elastomers at times embedded with paper or cloth, to design and fabricate pneumatically actuated soft systems
- Current computer-aided design software was not created with free-form 3D fabrication processes in mind, and does not accommodate the complex non-homogeneous 3D designs that may be desired for soft robotics
- In the following three sections the authors review recent developments in the field of soft robotics as they pertain to design and fabrication, computation and control, and systems and applications.
- Other groups[29,33,34,35] (Fig. 2b, c) used soft lithography techniques adapted from microfluidics, as well as soft composite materials composed of various silicone polymers and elastomers at times embedded with paper or cloth, to design and fabricate pneumatically actuated soft systems.
- Stretchable electronics So far, most integrated soft-robotic systems have relied on conventional, rigid electronics to store the control algorithms and connect to the systems’ actuators, sensors and power sources.
- Because soft robots are different from conventional rigid linkage-based systems, researchers have developed new static, dynamic and kinematic models that capture their ability to bend and flex.
- Real-time, closed-loop curvature controllers are required that drive the bending of the soft pneumatic body segments of the manipulator despite their high compliance and lack of kinematic constraints.
- Control Researchers have used these models to develop new approaches to low-level control, inverse kinematics, dynamic operations and planning for soft-robotic systems.
- Physical phenomena common to soft robots — including actuation limits, the self-loading effects of gravity, and the high compliance of the manipulator — can be represented as constraints within a trajectory optimization algorithm that operates on a dynamic model of the soft robot.
- Dynamic control of soft robots can be achieved using a new dynamic model for a spatial soft fluidic elastomer manipulator, a method for identifying all unknown system parameters, and a planning algorithm that computes locally optimal dynamic manoeuvres through iterative learning control.
- Soft systems have a natural advantage over rigid robots in grasping and manipulating unknown objects because the compliance of soft grippers allows them to adapt to a variety of objects with simple control schemes.
- The authors need rapid design tools and fabrication recipes for low-cost soft robots, novel algorithmic approaches to the control of soft robots that account for their material properties, tools for developing device-specific programming environments that allow non-experts to use the soft machines, creative individuals to design new solutions and early adopters of the technology.
- This work was done with partial support from the National Science Foundation grant number IIS-1226883, for which we are grateful
- Full, R. J. in Comprehensive Physiology 853–930 (Wiley, 1997).
- Dickinson, M. H. et al. How animals move: an integrative view. Science 288, 100–106 (2000).
- Trivedi, D., Rahn, C. D., Kier, W. M. & Walker, I. D. Soft robotics: biological inspiration, state of the art, and future research. Appl. Bionics Biomech. 5, 99–117 (2008). This paper discusses the biological inspiration for soft robotics and reviews the first generation of soft-robotic systems, which employ primarily pneumatic artificial muscle or electroactive polymer actuators.
- Kim, S., Laschi, C. & Trimmer, B. Soft robotics: a bioinspired evolution in robotics. Trends Biotechnol. 31, 287–294 (2013). This paper reviews design and actuation approaches for soft robots, and discusses the biomechanics of three organisms that frequently serve as inspiration.
- Majidi, C. Soft robotics: a perspective — current trends and prospects for the future. Soft Robotics 1, 5–11 (2014).
- Laschi, C. & Cianchetti, M. Soft robotics: new perspectives for robot bodyware and control. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2, 3 (2014).
- 8. Onal, C. D. & Rus, D. Autonomous undulatory serpentine locomotion utilizing body dynamics of a fluidic soft robot. Bioinspir. Biomim. 8, 026003 (2013). This paper presents a mobile soft robot composed of bidirectional fluidic elastomer actuators to achieve snake-like locomotion.
- 9. Mazzolai, B., Margheri, L., Cianchetti, M., Dario, P. & Laschi, C. Soft-robotic arm inspired by the octopus: from artificial requirements to innovative technological solutions. Bioinspir. Biomim. 7, 025005 (2012). This paper presents the design of a biologically inspired artificial muscular hydrostat for underwater soft robotics.
- 10. Tolley, M. T. et al. A resilient, untethered soft robot. Soft Robotics 1, 213–223 (2014). This paper addresses the design of a soft-robot system with legs that is capable of carrying the components required for untethered walking without a skeleton, and demonstrates that soft robots can be resilient to harsh conditions such as large external forces and extreme temperatures.
- 11. Marchese, A. D., Onal, C. D. & Rus, D. Autonomous soft robotic fish capable of escape maneuvers using fluidic elastomer actuators. Soft Robotics 1, 75–87 (2014). This paper describes a self-contained autonomous robot fish that is capable of executing biologically inspired escape manoeuvres (rapid changes in direction) in hundreds of milliseconds, which is on a par with similarly sized fish.
- 12. Albu-Schaffer, A. et al. Soft robotics. IEEE Robot. Automat. Mag. 15, 20–30 (2008).
- 13. Deimel, R. & Brock, O. A novel type of compliant, underactuated robotic hand for dexterous grasping. In Proc. Robotics: Science and Systems 1687–1692 (2014). This paper describes the design and testing of an inexpensive, modular, underactuated soft robot hand with pneumatically actuated fibre-reinforced elastomer digits.
- 14. Majidi, C., Shepherd, R. F., Kramer, R. K., Whitesides, G. M. & Wood, R. J. Influence of surface traction on soft robot undulation. Int. J. Robot. Res. 32, 1577–1584 (2013).
- 15. Paul, C. Morphological computation: a basis for the analysis of morphology and control requirements. Robot. Auton. Syst. 54, 619–630 (2006).
- 16. Hauser, H., Ijspeert, A. J., Fuchslin, R. M., Pfeifer, R. & Maass, W. Towards a theoretical foundation for morphological computation with compliant bodies. Biol. Cybern. 105, 355–370 (2011).
- 17. Hannan, M. W. & Walker, I. D. Kinematics and the implementation of an elephant’s trunk manipulator and other continuum style robots. J. Robot. Syst. 20, 45–63 (2003).
- 18. Camarillo, D. B., Carlson, C. R. & Salisbury, J. K. Configuration tracking for continuum manipulators with coupled tendon drive. IEEE Trans. Robot. 25, 798–808 (2009).
- 19. McMahan, W. et al. Field trials and testing of the octarm continuum manipulator. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2336–2341 (2006).
- 20. Lin, H., Leisk, G. & Trimmer, B. Soft robots in space: a perspective for soft robotics. Acta Futura 6, 69–79 (2013).
- 21. Correll, N., Onal, C., Liang, H., Schoenfeld, E. & Rus, D. in Experimental Robotics 227–240 (Springer, 2014).
- 22. Jung, K. et al. Artificial annelid robot driven by soft actuators. Bioinspir. Biomim. 2, S42–S49 (2007).
- 23. Calisti, M. et al. An octopus-bioinspired solution to movement and manipulation for soft robots. Bioinspir. Biomim. 6, 036002 (2011).
- 24. Laschi, C. et al. Soft robot arm inspired by the octopus. Adv. Robot. 26, 709–727 (2012).
- 25. Schulte, H. in The Application of External Power in Prosthetics and Orthotics 94–115 (1961).
- 26. Chou, C.-P. & Hannaford, B. Measurement and modeling of McKibben pneumatic artificial muscles. IEEE Trans. Robot. Automat. 12, 90–102 (1996).
- 27. Suzumori, K., Iikura, S. & Tanaka, H. Applying a flexible microactuator to robotic mechanisms. IEEE Control Syst. 12, 21–27 (1992).
- 28. Onal, C. D., Chen, X., Whitesides, G. M. & Rus, D. Soft mobile robots with on-board chemical pressure generation. In Proc. International Symposium on Robotics Research 1–16 (2011).
- 29. Shepherd, R. F. et al. Multigait soft robot. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 20400–20403 (2011). This paper describes the rapid design and fabrication of a soft robot body capable of walking and undulating tethered to a pneumatic actuation system.
- 30. Marchese, A. D., Komorowski, K., Onal, C. D. & Rus, D. Design and control of a soft and continuously deformable 2D robotic manipulation system. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2189–2196 (2014).
- 31. Katzschmann, R. K., Marchese, A. D. & Rus, D. Hydraulic autonomous soft robotic fish for 3D swimming. In Proc. International Symposium on Experimental Robotics 1122374 (2014).
- 32. Polygerinos, P., Wang, Z., Galloway, K. C., Wood, R. J. & Walsh, C. J. Soft robotic glove for combined assistance and at-home rehabilitation. Robot. Auton. Syst. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2014.08.014 (2014). This paper demonstrates a wearable soft robotic system, which augments the grasping force of wearers for rehabilitation.
- 33. Ilievski, F., Mazzeo, A. D., Shepherd, R. F., Chen, X. & Whitesides, G. M. Soft robotics for chemists. Angew. Chem. 123, 1930–1935 (2011). This paper demonstrates the effective use of methods and materials from chemistry and soft-materials science in the fabrication of soft robots.
- 34. Martinez, R. V. et al. Robotic tentacles with three-dimensional mobility based on flexible elastomers. Adv. Mater. 25, 205–212 (2013).
- 35. Morin, S. A. et al. Camouflage and display for soft machines. Science 337, 828–832 (2012).
- 36. Mosadegh, B. et al. Pneumatic networks for soft robotics that actuate rapidly. Adv. Funct. Mater. 24, 2163–2170 (2014).
- 37. Park, Y.-L. et al. Design and control of a bio-inspired soft wearable robotic device for ankle–foot rehabilitation. Bioinspir. Biomim. 9, 016007 (2014).
- 38. Bar-Cohen, Y. Electroactive Polymer (EAP) Actuators as Artificial Muscles: Reality, Potential, and Challenges (SPIE, 2004).
- 39. Wallace, G. G., Teasdale, P. R., Spinks, G. M. & Kane-Maguire, L. A. Conductive Electroactive Polymers: Intelligent Polymer Systems (CRC, 2008).
- 40. Cheng, N. G., Gopinath, A., Wang, L., Iagnemma, K. & Hosoi, A. E. Thermally tunable, self-healing composites for soft robotic applications. Macromol. Mater. Eng. 299, 1279–1284 (2014).
- 41. Shan, W., Lu, T. & Majidi, C. Soft-matter composites with electrically tunable elasticrigidity. Smart Mater. Struct. 22, 085005 (2013).
- 42. Steltz, E., Mozeika, A., Rodenberg, N., Brown, E. & Jaeger, H. M. JSEL: jamming skin enabled locomotion. In Proc. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems 5672–5677 (2009).
- 43. Cianchetti, M. et al. Stiff-flop surgical manipulator: mechanical design and experimental characterization of the single module. In Proc. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems 3576–3581 (2013).
- 44. Brown, E. et al. Universal robotic gripper based on the jamming of granular material. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 18809–18814 (2010).
- 45. Rogers, J. A., Someya, T. & Huang, Y. Materials and mechanics for stretchable electronics. Science 327, 1603–1607 (2010).
- 46. Hammock, M. L., Chortos, A., Tee, B. C.-K., Tok, J. B.-H. & Bao, Z. The evolution of electronic skin (e-skin): a brief history, design considerations, and recent progress. Adv. Mater. 25, 5997–6038 (2013).
- 47. Kaltenbrunner, M. et al. An ultra-lightweight design for imperceptible plastic electronics. Nature 499, 458–463 (2013).
- 48. Yang, S. & Lu, N. Gauge factor and stretchability of silicon-on-polymer strain gauges. Sensors 13, 8577–8594 (2013).
- 49. Kim, D.-H. et al. Epidermal electronics. Science 333, 838–843 (2011).
- 50. Vogt, D. M., Park, Y.-L. & Wood, R. J. Design and characterization of a soft multiaxis force sensor using embedded microfluidic channels. IEEE Sensors J. 13, 4056–4064 (2013).
- 51. Majidi, C., Kramer, R. & Wood, R. J. A non-differential elastomer curvature sensor for softer-than-skin electronics. Smart Mater. Struct. 20, 105017 (2011).
- 52. Kramer, R. K., Majidi, C. & Wood, R. J. Masked deposition of gallium-indium alloys for liquid-embedded elastomer conductors. Adv. Funct. Mater. 23, 5292–5296 (2013).
- 53. Muth, J. T. et al. Embedded 3D printing of strain sensors within highly stretchable elastomers. Adv. Mater. 26, 6307–6312 (2014).
- 54. Taylor, R. F. & Schultz, J. S. Handbook of Chemical and Biological Sensors (CRC, 1996).
- 55. Wehner, M. et al. Pneumatic energy sources for autonomous and wearable soft robotics. Soft Robotics 1, 263–274 (2014).
- 56. Goldfarb, M., Barth, E. J., Gogola, M. A. & Wehrmeyer, J. A. Design and energetic characterization of a liquid-propellant-powered actuator for self-powered robots. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 8, 254–262 (2003).
- 57. Shepherd, R. F. et al. Using explosions to power a soft robot. Angew. Chem. 125, 2964–2968 (2013).
- 58. Tolley, M. T. et al. An untethered jumping soft robot. In Proc. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems 561–566 (2014).
- 59. Xu, S. et al. Stretchable batteries with self-similar serpentine interconnects and integrated wireless recharging systems. Nature Commun. 4, 1543 (2013).
- 60. Li, N., Chen, Z., Ren, W., Li, F. & Cheng, H.-M. Flexible graphene-based lithium ion batteries with ultrafast charge and discharge rates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 17360–17365 (2012).
- 61. Suga, T., Ohshiro, H., Sugita, S., Oyaizu, K. & Nishide, H. Emerging n-type redox-active radical polymer for a totally organic polymer-based rechargeable battery. Adv. Mater. 21, 1627–1630 (2009).
- 62. Gaikwad, A. M. et al. Highly stretchable alkaline batteries based on an embedded conductive fabric. Adv. Mater. 24, 5071–5076 (2012).
- 63. Lipson, H. Challenges and opportunities for design, simulation, and fabrication of soft robots. Soft Robotics 1, 21–27 (2014).
- 64. Hiller, J. & Lipson, H. Automatic design and manufacture of soft robots. IEEE Trans. Robot. 28, 457–466 (2012).
- 65. Rieffel, J., Knox, D., Smith, S. & Trimmer, B. Growing and evolving soft robots. Artif. Life 20, 143–162 (2014).
- 66. Cho, K. J. et al. Review of manufacturing processes for soft biomimetic robots. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Man. 10, 171–181 (2009).
- 67. Lipson, H. & Kurman, M. Fabricated: The New World of 3D Printing (Wiley, 2013).
- 68. Cham, J. G., Bailey, S. A., Clark, J. E., Full, R. J. & Cutkosky, M. R. Fast and robust: hexapedal robots via shape deposition manufacturing. Int. J. Robot. Res. 21, 869–882 (2002).
- 69. Xia, Y. & Whitesides, G. M. Soft lithography. Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. 28, 153–184 (1998).
- 70. Marchese, A. D., Katzschmann, R. & Rus, D. A recipe for soft fluidic elastomer robots. Soft Robotics 2, 7–25 (2015).
- 71. Sumbre, G., Fiorito, G., Flash, T. & Hochner, B. Octopus uses human-like strategy to control point-to-point arm movement. Curr. Biol. 16, 767–772 (2006).
- 72. Margheri, L., Laschi, C. & Mazzolai, B. Soft robotic arm inspired by the octopus: I. from biological functions to artificial requirements. Bioinspir. Biomim. 7, 025004 (2012).
- 73. Lin, H.-T., Leisk, G. G. & Trimmer, B. GoQBot: a caterpillar-inspired soft-bodied rolling robot. Bioinspir. Biomim. 6, 026007 (2011). This paper describes a soft mobile robot developed as a tool to study caterpillar locomotion including crawling and ballistic rolling.
- 74. Saunders, F., Trimmer, B. A. & Rife, J. Modeling locomotion of a soft-bodied arthropod using inverse dynamics. Bioinspir. Biomim. 6, 016001 (2011).
- 75. Webster, R. J. & Jones, B. A. Design and kinematic modeling of constant curvature continuum robots: a review. Int. J. Robot. Res. 29, 1661–1683 (2010).
- 76. Gravagne, I. A., Rahn, C. D. & Walker, I. D. Large deflection dynamics and control for planar continuum robots. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 8, 299–307 (2003).
- 77. Jones, B. A. & Walker, I. D. Kinematics for multisection continuum robots. IEEE Trans. Robot. 22, 43–55 (2006).
- 78. Renda, F., Giorelli, M., Calisti, M., Cianchetti, M. & Laschi, C. Dynamic model of a multi-bending soft robot arm driven by cables. IEEE Trans. Robot. 30, 1109–1122 (2014).
- 79. Neppalli, S., Csencsits, M. A., Jones, B. A. & Walker, I. D. Closed-form inverse kinematics for continuum manipulators. Adv. Robot. 23, 2077–2091 (2009).
- 80. Wang, H. et al. Visual servo control of cable-driven soft robotic manipulator. In Proc. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems 57–62 (2013).
- 81. Khatib, O., Sentis, L., Park, J. & Warren, J. Whole body dynamic behavior and control of human-like robots. Int. J. Humanoid Robot. 1, 29–43 (2004).
- 82. Napp, N., Araki, B., Tolley, M. T., Nagpal, R. & Wood, R. J. Simple passive valves for addressable pneumatic actuation. In Proc. International Conference on Robotics and Automation 1440–1445 (2014).
- 83. Chirikjian, G. S. Hyper-redundant manipulator dynamics: a continuum approximation. Adv. Robot. 9, 217–243 (1994).
- 84. Yekutieli, Y. et al. Dynamic model of the octopus arm. I. biomechanics of the octopus reaching movement. J. Neurophysiol. 94, 1443–1458 (2005). This paper describes a 2D dynamic model for a soft manipulator based on muscular hydrostats.
- 85. Snyder, J. & Wilson, J. Dynamics of the elastic with end mass and follower loading. J. Appl. Mech. 57, 203–208 (1990).
- 86. Tatlicioglu, E., Walker, I. D. & Dawson, D. M. Dynamic modeling for planar extensible continuum robot manipulators. In Proc. International Conference on Robotics and Automation 1357–1362 (2007).
- 87. Luo, M., Agheli, M. & Onal, C. D. Theoretical modeling and experimental analysis of a pressure-operated soft robotic snake. Soft Robotics 1, 136–146 (2014).
- 88. Seok, S. et al. Meshworm: a peristaltic soft robot with antagonistic nickel titanium coil actuators. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 18, 1485–1497 (2013).
- 89. Stokes, A. A., Shepherd, R. F., Morin, S. A., Ilievski, F. & Whitesides, G. M. A hybrid combining hard and soft robots. Soft Robotics 1, 70–74 (2014).
- 90. Amend, J. R., Brown, E. M., Rodenberg, N., Jaeger, H. M. & Lipson, H. A positive pressure universal gripper based on the jamming of granular material. IEEE Trans. Robot. 28, 341–350 (2012).
- 91. Sanan, S., Lynn, P. S. & Griffith, S. T. Pneumatic torsional actuators for inflatable robots. J. Mech. Robot. 6, 031003 (2014).
- 92. Kramer, R. K., Majidi, C. & Wood, R. J. Wearable tactile keypad with stretchable artificial skin. In Proc. International Conference on Robotics and Automation 1103–1107 (2011).
- 93. Mengüç, Y. et al. Wearable soft sensing suit for human gait measurement. Inter. J. Robotics Res. 33, 1748–1764 (2014).
- 94. Song, Y. S. et al. Soft robot for gait rehabilitation of spinalized rodents. In Proc. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems 971–976 (2013).
- 95. Roche, E. T. et al. A bioinspired soft actuated material. Adv. Mater. 26, 1200– 1206 (2014).
- 96. Ieropoulos, I., Anderson, I. A., Gisby, T., Wang, C.-H. & Rossiter, J. Microbialpowered artificial muscles for autonomous robots. Proc. SPIE 7287, 728708– 728708 (2009).
- 97. Nawroth, J. C. et al. A tissue-engineered jellyfish with biomimetic propulsion. Nature Biotechnol. 30, 792–797 (2012).
- 98. Chambers, L., Winfield, J., Ieropoulos, I. & Rossiter, J. Biodegradable and edible gelatine actuators for use as artificial muscles. Proc. SPIE 9056, 90560B (2014).
- 99. Pfeifer, R., Bongard, J. & Grand, S. How the Body Shapes The Way We Think: A New View of Intelligence (MIT Press, 2007). 100.Suzumori, K., Endo, S., Kanda, T., Kato, N. & Suzuki, H. A bending pneumatic rubber actuator realizing soft-bodied manta swimming robot. In Proc. International Conference on Robotics and Automation 4975–4980 (2007).