single-rb.php

JRM Vol.19 No.4 pp. 374-380
doi: 10.20965/jrm.2007.p0374
(2007)

Paper:

Mechanical Dynamics That Enables Stable Passive Dynamic Bipedal Running – Enhancing Self-Stability by Exploiting Nonlinearity in the Leg Elasticity –

Dai Owaki and Akio Ishiguro

Dept. of Electrical and Communication Engineering, Tohoku University, 6-6-05 Aoba, Aramaki, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8579, Japan

Received:
January 11, 2007
Accepted:
April 17, 2007
Published:
August 20, 2007
Keywords:
mechanical dynamics, passive dynamic bipedal running, leg elasticity, stability of running
Abstract

Recently, it has been widely recognized that control and mechanical systems cannot be designed separately due to their tight interdependency. However, there still leaves much to be understood about how well-balanced coupling between control and mechanical systems can be achieved. Therefore, as an initial step toward this goal, we intensively discuss the effect of intrinsic dynamics of a robot’s body on resulting behavior, in the hope that the mechanical systems appropriately designed will allow us to significantly reduce complexity of control algorithm required. More precisely, we focus on the property of leg elasticity of a passive dynamic running biped and investigate how this influences stability of running. As a result, we found that a certain type of nonlinearity in leg elasticity plays a crucial role in enhancing the stability of passive dynamic running. To the best of our knowledge, this has not been explicitly addressed in papers presented thus far.

Cite this article as:
D. Owaki and A. Ishiguro, “Mechanical Dynamics That Enables Stable Passive Dynamic Bipedal Running – Enhancing Self-Stability by Exploiting Nonlinearity in the Leg Elasticity –,” J. Robot. Mechatron., Vol.19, No.4, pp. 374-380, 2007.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] R. Pfeifer and C. Scheier, “Understanding Intelligence,” The MIT Press, 1999.
  2. [2] T. McGeer, “Passive Dynamic Walking,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, Vol.9, No.2, pp. 62-82, 1990.
  3. [3] S. H. Collins, A. Ruina, M. Wisse, and R. Tedrake, “Efficient Bipedal Robots Based on Passive-dynamic Walkers,” Science, 307, pp. 1082-1085, 2005.
  4. [4] T. McGeer, “Passive Dynamic Running,” in Proc. of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological Science, Vol.240, No.1297, pp. 107-134, 1990.
  5. [5] S.-H. Hyon and T. Emura, “Energy-preserving Control of a Passive One-legged Running Robot,” Advanced Robotics, Vol.18, No.4, pp. 357-450, 2004.
  6. [6] A. Seyfarth, H. Geyer, M. Gunther, and R. Blickhan, “A Movement Criterion for Running,” Journal of Biomechanics, Vol.35, pp. 649-655, 2002.
  7. [7] R. Ghigliazza, R. Altendorfer, P. Holmes, and D. E. Koditschek, “A Simply Stabilized Running Model,” ASME J. on Applied Dynamical Systems, Vol.2, No.2, pp. 187-218, 2003.
  8. [8] R. J. Full and D. E. Koditschek, “Templates and Anchors: Neuromechanical Hypotheses of Legged Locomotion on Land,” The Journal of Experimental Biology, Vol.202, pp. 3325-3332, 1999.
  9. [9] R. Pfeifer and F. Iida, “Morphological Computation: Connecting Body, Brain and Environment,” Japanese Scientific Monthly, Vol.58, No.2, pp. 48-54, 2005.
  10. [10] C. Paul, “Morphological Computation,” in Proc. of the International Conference on Adaptive Behavior, pp. 33-38, 2004.
  11. [11] K. Matsushita, M. Lungarella, C. Paul, and H. Yokoi, “Locomoting with Less Computation but More Morphology,” in Proc. of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 2020-2025, 2005.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, IE9,10,11, Opera.

Last updated on Jul. 16, 2019