Advertisement

Simulating robotic manipulation of cabling and interaction with surroundings

  • A. Papacharalampopoulos
  • P. Aivaliotis
  • S. Makris
Open Access
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

The manipulation of non-rigid parts, particularly cabling structures, such as the cable harness, raises various issues that require dealing with complex modeling. The first important issue is the prediction of the shape of flexible parts itself. Also, addressing collision detection problems is of high importance. However, both are computationally intensive problems, as well as coupled. More specifically, regarding modeling, the structure of a harness can affect the mechanics (regardless of whether it is modeled like a cable). In this paper, such phenomena have been taken into account. What is more, collision detection between cables and rigid bodies is performed, regarding a quasi-static approach. Furthermore, cable-cable interaction cases are also addressed with the herein presented algorithm. A methodology, based on the geometrical characteristics of a cable, is given, and illustration from implementation in a commercial software is discussed. The simulation of an industrial case of assembling cabling harness in automotive sector is used to prove the usability of the algorithm and the modeling.

Keywords

Flexible parts handling Harness assembly Dual arm Cable shape prediction Collision avoidance Bodies contact Assembly parts interaction Simulation 

Notes

Funding information

The work reported in this paper was partially supported the project X-act/FoF-ICT-314355, funded by the European Commission in the 7th Framework Programme.

References

  1. 1.
    Chryssolouris G (2006) Manufacturing systems—theory and practice, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Papacharalampopoulos A, Makris S, Bitzios A, Chryssolouris G (2016) Prediction of cabling shape during robotic manipulation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 82(1-4):123–132.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7318-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Makris S, Michalos G, Chryssolouris G (2012) Virtual commissioning of an assembly cell with cooperating robots. In: Advances in Decision Sciences. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ads/2012/428060/. Accessed 19 Jan 2018
  4. 4.
    Dini G, Santochi M (1992) Automated sequencing and subassembly detection in assembly planning. CIRP Ann 41(1):1–4.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)61140-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaltsoukalas K, Makris S, Chryssolouris G (2015) On generating the motion of industrial robot manipulators. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 32:65–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2014.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Michalos G, Makris S, Chryssolouris G (2015) The new assembly system paradigm. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 28(12):1252–1261.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192X.2014.964323 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu SC, Hu SJ (1997) Variation simulation for deformable sheet metal assemblies using finite element methods. J Manuf Sci Eng 119(3):368–374.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2831115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wischnitzer Y, Shvalb N, Shoham M (2008) Wire-driven parallel robot: permitting collisions between wires. Int J Robot Res 27(9):1007–1026.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364908095884 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Loock A, Schömer E, Stadtwald I (2001) A virtual environment for interactive assembly simulation: from rigid bodies to deformable cables. In: In 5th world multiconference on Systemics, cybernetics and informatics, pp 325–332Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Linn J, Stephan T, Carlsson J, Bohlin R (2008) Fast simulation of quasistatic rod deformations for VR applications. In: Progress in industrial mathematics at ECMI 2006. Springer, Berlin, pp 247–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Millington I, Millington I, Daly L, et al (2007) The Morgan Kaufmann series in interactive 3D technology. In: Game physics engine development. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, pp iiGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Platt R, Permenter F, Pfeiffer J (2011) Using Bayesian filtering to localize flexible materials during manipulation. IEEE Trans Robot 27(3):586–598.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2011.2139150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shellshear E (2014) 1D sweep-and-prune self-collision detection for deforming cables. Vis Comput 30(5):553–564.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00371-013-0880-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zi B, Lin J, Qian S (2015) Localization, obstacle avoidance planning and control of a cooperative cable parallel robot for multiple mobile cranes. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 34:105–123.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2014.11.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bakhy SH (2014) Modeling of contact pressure distribution and friction limit surfaces for soft fingers in robotic grasping. Robotica 32(07):1005–1015.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0263574713001215 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pop N, Vladareanu L, Popescu IN et al (2014) A numerical dynamic behaviour model for 3D contact problems with friction. Comput Mater Sci 94:285–291.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2014.05.072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Papacharalampopoulos A, Stavropoulos P, Doukas C et al (2013) Acoustic emission signal through turning tools: a computational study. Procedia CIRP 8:426–431.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2013.06.128 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fantoni G, Santochi M, Dini G et al (2014) Grasping devices and methods in automated production processes. CIRP Ann 63(2):679–701.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bayada G, Chambat M, Lakhal A (1998) A dynamic contact problem with regularized friction law. Application to impact problems. Math Comput Model 28(4-8):67–85.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-7177(98)00109-5 MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stein GJ, Zahoranský R, Múčka P (2008) On dry friction modelling and simulation in kinematically excited oscillatory systems. J Sound Vib 311(1-2):74–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2007.08.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Papacharalampopoulos A, Stavropoulos P, Stavridis J, Chryssolouris G (2016) The effect of communications on networked monitoring and control of manufacturing processes. Procedia CIRP 41:723–728.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.12.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Papacharalampopoulos
    • 1
  • P. Aivaliotis
    • 1
  • S. Makris
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory for Manufacturing Systems and Automation, Department of Mechanical Engineering and AeronauticsUniversity of PatrasPatrasGreece

Personalised recommendations