Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T14:56:13.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The average speed of motion and optimal power consumption in biped robots

Part of: Robot Athletes and Entertainers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 December 2019

Vida Shams Esfanabadi ,
Mostafa Rostami ,
Seyed Mohammadali Rahmati ,
Jacky Baltes Open the ORCID record for Jacky Baltes [Opens in a new window]  and
Soroush Sadeghnejad Open the ORCID record for Soroush Sadeghnejad [Opens in a new window]
Vida Shams Esfanabadi
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), No. 424, Hafez Avenue, Tehran, 15875-4413, Iran e-mail: s.sadeghnejad@aut.ac.ir
Mostafa Rostami
Affiliation:
Biomedical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), No. 424, Hafez Avenue, Tehran, 15875-4413, Iran
Seyed Mohammadali Rahmati
Affiliation:
Biomedical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), No. 424, Hafez Avenue, Tehran, 15875-4413, Iran
Jacky Baltes
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan Normal University, 162 Heping E Road Section 1, Taipei, 10610, Taiwan
Soroush Sadeghnejad
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), No. 424, Hafez Avenue, Tehran, 15875-4413, Iran e-mail: s.sadeghnejad@aut.ac.ir
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

One of the issues that have garnered little attention, but that is nevertheless important for developing practical robots, is optimal walking conditions like power consumption during walking. The main contribution of this research is to prepare a correct walking pattern for humans who have a problem with their walking and also study the effect of average motion speed on optimal power consumption. In this study, we firstly optimize the stability and minimize the power consumption of the robot during the single support phase using parameter optimization. Our approach is based on the well-known Zero Moment Point method to calculate the stability of the proposed biped robot. Secondly, we performed experiments on healthy male, age 29 years, to analyze human walking by placing 28 markers, attached to anatomical positions and two power plates for a distance of more than one gait cycle at an average speed of 1.23 ± 0.1 m s−1 validate our results for motion analysis of correct walking ability. Our model was continuously validated by comparing the results of our empirical evaluation against the prediction of our model. The errors between experimental test and our prediction were about 4%–11% for the joint trajectories and about 0.2%–0.5% for the ground reaction forces which is acceptable for our prediction. Due to the presented model and optimized issue and predicted path, the robot can move like a person in a way that has maximum stability along with the minimum power consumption. Finally, the robot was able to walk like a specific person that we considered. This study is a case study and also can be generalized to all samples and can perform these procedures to another person’s with different features.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Knowledge Engineering Review , Volume 34 , 2019 , e25
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbas Shangari, T., Sadeghnejad, S. & Baltes, J. 2016. Importance of humanoid robot detection. In Humanoid Robotics: A Reference, Goswami, A. & Vadakkepat, P. (eds). Springer Netherlands, 1–9.Google Scholar
Akachi, K., Kaneko, K., Kanehira, N., Ota, S., Miyamori, G., Hirata, M., Kajita, S. & Kanehiro, F. 2005. Development of humanoid robot HRP-3P. In Humanoid Robots, 2005 5th IEEE-RAS International Conference on IEEE, 50–55.Google Scholar
Asano, F. & Luo, Z.-W. 2008. Energy-efficient and high-speed dynamic biped locomotion based on principle of parametric excitation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 24(6), 1289–1301.Google Scholar
Baltes, J., Bagot, J., Sadeghnejad, S., Anderson, J. & Hsu, C.-H. 2016. Full-body motion planning for humanoid robots using rapidly exploring random trees. KI-Künstliche Intelligenz 30(3–4), 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltes, J., Hosseinmemar, A., Jung, J., Sadeghnejad, S. & Anderson, J. 2015. Practical real-time system for object counting based on optical flow. In Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 3, 299–306. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltes, J., Sadeghnejad, S., Seifert, D. & Behnke, S. 2014. RoboCup humanoid league rule developments 2002–2014 and future perspectives. In Robot Soccer World Cup, 649–660. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltes, J., Tu, K.-Y., Sadeghnejad, S. & Anderson, J. 2017a. Active balancing and turning for alpine skiing robots. Knowledge Engineering Review 32, e6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltes, J., Tu, K.-Y., Sadeghnejad, S. & Anderson, J. 2017b. HuroCup: competition for multi-event humanoid robot athletes. The Knowledge Engineering Review 32, e6.Google Scholar
Gerndt, R., Seifert, D., Baltes, J. H., Sadeghnejad, S. & Behnke, S. 2015. Humanoid robots in soccer: robots versus humans in RoboCup 2050. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 22(3), 147–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillespie, R. B. & Colgate, J. E. 1997. A survey of multibody dynamics for virtual environments. In Proceedings of the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exhibition.Google Scholar
Janati, F., Abdollahi, F., Ghidary, S. S., Jannatifar, M., Baltes, J. & Sadeghnejad, S. 2017. Multi-robot task allocation using clustering method. In Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 4, 233–247. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Javadi, M., Azar, S. M., Azami, S., Ghidary, S. S., Sadeghnejad, S. & Baltes, J. 2017. Humanoid robot detection using deep learning: a speed-accuracy tradeoff. In Robot World Cup, 338–349. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaneko, K., Harada, K., Kanehiro, F., Kimura, T., Miyamori, G. & Akachi, K. 2008. Development of humanoid robot “HRP-3”. Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan 26(6), 658–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, J. C. & Stoy, K. 2011. Energy efficiency of robot locomotion increases proportional to weight. Procedia Computer Science 7, 228–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, H.-o. & Takanishi, A. 2007. Biped walking robots created at Waseda University: WL and WABIAN family. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 365(1850), 49–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, J., Tan, M. & Zhao, X. 2007. Legged robots—an overview. Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control 29(2), 185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moro, F. L., Tsagarakis, N. G. & Caldwell, D. G. 2011. A human-like walking for the COmpliant huMANoid COMAN based on CoM trajectory reconstruction from kinematic Motion Primitives. In Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), 2011 11th IEEE-RAS International Conference on IEEE, 364–370.Google Scholar
Mu, X. & Wu, Q. 2006. On impact dynamics and contact events for biped robots via impact effects. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 36(6), 1364–1372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Navabi, H., Sadeghnejad, S., Ramezani, S. & Baltes, J. 2017. Position control of the single spherical wheel mobile robot by using the fuzzy sliding mode controller. Advances in Fuzzy Systems 2017, 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ott, C., Roa, M. A., Schmidt, F., Friedl, W., Englsberger, J., Burger, R., Werner, A., Dietrich, A., Leidner, D. & Henze, B. 2017. Mechanisms and Design of DLR Humanoid Robots. In Humanoid Robotics: A Reference, 1–26. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sardain, P. & Bessonnet, G. 2004. Forces acting on a biped robot. Center of pressure-zero moment point. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans 34(5), 630–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafei, H. R., Sadeghnejad, S., Bahrami, M. & Baltes, J. 2014. A comparative study and development of a passive robot with improved stability. In Robot Soccer World Cup, 443–453. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shams Esfand Abadi, V., Rahmati, S. M. A. & Sadeghnejad, S. 2018. Walking path prevision of biped robot along with stability and optimization of power consumption in a single support phase. Modares Mechanical Engineering 17(11), 1–11.Google Scholar
Shangari, T. A., Shams, V., Azari, B., Shamshirdar, F., Baltes, J. & Sadeghnejad, S. 2017. Inter-humanoid robot interaction with emphasis on detection: a comparison study. The Knowledge Engineering Review 32, e8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shangari, T. A., Shamshirdar, F., Heydari, M. H., Sadeghnejad, S., Baltes, J. & Bahrami, M. 2015. AUT-UofM humanoid TeenSize joint team; A new step toward 2050’s humanoid league long term RoadMap. In Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 3, 483–494. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shih, C.-L. & Gruver, W. A. 1992. Control of a biped robot in the double-support phase. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 22(4), 729–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todd, D. J. 2013. Walking Machines: An Introduction to Legged Robots. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Vukobratović, M. & Borovac, B. 2004. Zero-moment point—thirty five years of its life. International Journal of Humanoid Robotics 1(1), 157–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vukobratović, M. & Stepanenko, J. 1972. On the stability of anthropomorphic systems. Mathematical Biosciences 15(1–2), 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winter, D. A. 2009. Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement. John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yazdankhoo, B., Shahsavari, M. N., Sadeghnejad, S. & Baltes, J. 2018. Prediction of a ball trajectory for the humanoid robots: a friction-based study. In Robot World Cup, 387–398. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar