JRM Vol.16 No.6 pp. 613-621
doi: 10.20965/jrm.2004.p0613


Insertion of Long Peg into Tandem Shallow Hole Using Search Trajectory Generation

Takayuki Matsuno*, Toshio Fukuda*, and Yasuhisa Hasegawa**

*Department of Micro-Nano Systems Engineering, Nagoya University, 1 Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8603, Japan

**Graduate School of Systems and Information Engineering, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8573, Japan

April 22, 2004
September 21, 2004
December 20, 2004
robotic assembly, peg-in-hole, force sensor-less, search trajectory generation, floating unit

In this paper, we propose a method to insert a long peg into a tandem shallow hole using search trajectory generation without force feedback. The use of RCC (Remote Center Compliance) is a possible solution for robotic assembly, but it is no longer useful when the remote center cannot be set correctly. We focus a task to insert a peg into the tandem shallow hole as an example that cannot be accomplished by robots using RCC devices. For this task, firstly, a new peg insertion method using search trajectory generation is proposed to continuously adjust the peg position. Secondly, a floating unit is made in order to reduce the number of positions to be corrected. And then, a method to estimate an indication of the insertion axis and a method to revise the inclination in order to avoid a jamming phenomenon are also proposed. Finally, the effectiveness of these methods is verified by an experiment.

Cite this article as:
Takayuki Matsuno, Toshio Fukuda, and Yasuhisa Hasegawa, “Insertion of Long Peg into Tandem Shallow Hole Using Search Trajectory Generation,” J. Robot. Mechatron., Vol.16, No.6, pp. 613-621, 2004.
Data files:
  1. [1] D. E. Whitney, “Quasi-Statics Assembly of Compliantly Supported Rigid Parts,” ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, Vol.104, pp. 65-77, 1982.
  2. [2] D. E. Whitney, and J. M. Rourke, “Mechanical Behavior and Design Equations for Elastomer Shaer Pad Remote Center Compliances,” ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, Vol.108, pp. 223-232, 1986.
  3. [3] J. Wei, “Improving Robotic Assembly Performance through Autonomous Exploration,” Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 3303-3308, 2002.
  4. [4] M. Minami, H. Osumi, T. Arai, and K. Moriyama, “Trajectory Planning of Dual Arm System for Automatic Assembly,” Proceedings of The 13th Annual Conference of the Robotics Society of Japan, pp. 785-786, 1985.
  5. [5] S. Hirai, H. Asada, and H. Tokumaru, “Kinematic Analysis of Contact State Transition in Assembly Operations and Automatic Generation of Transition Network,” Journal of The Society of Instrument and Control Engineers, Vol.24, No.4, pp. 406-413, 1987.
  6. [6] T. Yoshikawa, Y. Yokokohji, and Y. Yu, “Assembly Planning Operation Strategies Based on the Degree of Constraint,” Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp.682-687, 1991.
  7. [7] T. Arai, and N. Kinoshita, “The Probability of Success in Assembly –The Stochastic Estimation of Assembly Machine–,” Journal of Japan Society for Precision Mechanics, Vol.45, No.3. pp. 299-304, 1979.
  8. [8] A. Diaz-Calderon, D. Navin-Chandra, and P. K. Khosla, “Measuring the diffculty of assembly tasks from tool access information,” Proceedings IEEE International Symposium on Assembly and Task Planning, pp. 87-93, 1995.
  9. [9] G. Xue, T. Fukuda, F. Arai, H. Asama, H. Kaetsu, and I. Endo, “Dynamically Reconfigurable Robotic System –Assembly of New Type Cells as a Dual-Peg-in-Hole Problem–,” Proc. of Int’l Symp. on Distributed Autonomous Robotics Systems (DARS’94), pp. 383-394, 1994.
  10. [10] M. Tsuda, and T. Takahashi, “A method for changing contact states for robotic assembly by using some local models in a multiagent system,” Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Vol.3, pp. 2713-2719, 1995.
  11. [11] T. Fukuda, M. Nakaoka, T. Ueyama, and Y. Hasegawa, “Direct teaching and error recovery method for assembly task based on a transition process of a constraint condition,” Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 1518-1523, 2001.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Feb. 25, 2021