Comparison of Modern Control Methods for Soft Robots

被引:5
|
作者
Grube, Malte [1 ]
Wieck, Jan Christian [1 ]
Seifried, Robert [1 ]
机构
[1] Hamburg Univ Technol, Inst Mech & Ocean Engn, D-21073 Hamburg, Germany
关键词
soft robotics; control; dynamic control; kinematic control; piecewise constant curvature; CONTINUUM MANIPULATORS; INVERSE KINEMATICS; PREDICTIVE-CONTROL; FEEDBACK-CONTROL; DYNAMIC CONTROL; DESIGN;
D O I
10.3390/s22239464
中图分类号
O65 [分析化学];
学科分类号
070302 ; 081704 ;
摘要
With the rise in new soft robotic applications, the control requirements increase. Therefore, precise control methods for soft robots are required. However, the dynamic control of soft robots, which is required for fast movements, is still an open topic and will be discussed here. In this contribution, one kinematic and two dynamic control methods for soft robots are examined. Thereby, an LQI controller with gain scheduling, which is new to soft robotic applications, and an MPC controller are presented. The controllers are compared in a simulation regarding their accuracy and robustness. Additionally, the required implementation effort and computational effort is examined. For this purpose, the trajectory tracking control of a simple soft robot is studied for different trajectories. The soft robot is beam-shaped and tendon-actuated. It is modeled using the piecewise constant curvature model, which is one of the most popular modeling techniques in soft robotics. In this paper, it is shown that all three controllers are able to follow the examined trajectories. However, the dynamic controllers show much higher accuracy and robustness than the kinematic controller. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the implementation and computational effort for the dynamic controllers is significantly higher. Therefore, kinematic controllers should be used if movements are slow and small oscillations can be accepted, while dynamic controllers should be used for faster movements with higher accuracy or robustness requirements.
引用
收藏
页数:24
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Hardware Methods for Onboard Control of Fluidically Actuated Soft Robots
    McDonald, Kevin
    Ranzani, Tommaso
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN ROBOTICS AND AI, 2021, 8
  • [2] Review on generic methods for mechanical modeling, simulation and control of soft robots
    Schegg, Pierre
    Duriez, Christian
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (01):
  • [3] A Comparison of Tracking Control Methods in Multi-Legged Robots
    Zhong, Guoliang
    Long, Shidong
    Deng, Hua
    Xin, Guiyang
    Kobayashi, Yukinori
    [J]. 2015 10TH ASIAN CONTROL CONFERENCE (ASCC), 2015,
  • [4] FROM THE OCTOPUS TO SOFT ROBOTS CONTROL: AN OCTOPUS INSPIRED BEHAVIOR CONTROL ARCHITECTURE FOR SOFT ROBOTS
    Li, T.
    Nakajima, K.
    Kuba, M.
    Gutnick, T.
    Hochner, B.
    Pfeifer, R.
    [J]. VIE ET MILIEU-LIFE AND ENVIRONMENT, 2011, 61 (04) : 211 - 217
  • [5] Design, fabrication and control of soft robots
    Daniela Rus
    Michael T. Tolley
    [J]. Nature, 2015, 521 : 467 - 475
  • [6] Control of soft robots with inertial dynamics
    Haggerty, David A.
    Banks, Michael J.
    Kamenar, Ervin
    Cao, Alan B.
    Curtis, Patrick C.
    Mezic, Igor
    Hawkes, Elliot W.
    [J]. SCIENCE ROBOTICS, 2023, 8 (81)
  • [7] Optimal Control for Articulated Soft Robots
    Chhatoi, Saroj Prasad
    Pierallini, Michele
    Angelini, Franco
    Mastalli, Carlos
    Garabini, Manolo
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS, 2023, 39 (05) : 3671 - 3685
  • [8] Design, fabrication and control of soft robots
    Rus, Daniela
    Tolley, Michael T.
    [J]. NATURE, 2015, 521 (7553) : 467 - 475
  • [9] Robust control of electrohydraulic soft robots
    Volchko, Angella
    Mitchell, Shane K.
    Scripps, Tyler G.
    Turin, Zoe
    Humbert, J. Sean
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN ROBOTICS AND AI, 2024, 11
  • [10] Comparing model-based control methods for simultaneous stiffness and position control of inflatable soft robots
    Best, Charles M.
    Rupert, Levi
    Killpack, Marc D.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ROBOTICS RESEARCH, 2021, 40 (01): : 470 - 493