Energy Efficient MPC for Biped Semi-passive Locomotion

  • C. NevesEmail author
  • R. Ventura
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 418)


Traditional methods for robotic biped locomotion employing stiff actuation display low energy efficiency and high sensitivity to disturbances. In order to overcome these problems, a semi-passive approach based on the use of passive elements together with actuation has emerged, inspired by biological locomotion. However, the control strategy for such a compliant system must be robust and adaptable, while ensuring the success of the walking gait. In this paper, a Model Predictive Control (MPC) approach is applied to a simulated actuated Simplest Walker (SW), in order to achieve a stable gait while minimizing energy consumption. Robustness to slope change and to external disturbances are also studied.


Model predictive control Biped locomotion Simplest walker Energy efficiency 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bemporad, A., Morari, M.: Robust model predictive control: a survey. In: Robustness in Identification and Control, pp. 207–226. Springer (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhounsule, P., et al.: Foot placement in the simplest slope walker reveals a wide range of walking solutions. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 30(5), 1255–1260 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camacho, E., Ramirez, D., Limon, D., de la Pena, D.M., Alamo, T.: Model predictive control techniques for hybrid systems. Annual Reviews in Control 34(1), 21–31 (2010). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Daerden, F., Lefeber, D.: Pneumatic artificial muscles: actuators for robotics and automation. European Journal of Mechanical and Environmental Engineering 47, 10–21 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Diedam, H., Dimitrov, D., Wieber, P.B., Mombaur, K., Diehl, M.: Online walking gait generation with adaptive foot positioning through linear model predictive control. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, IROS 2008, pp. 1121–1126. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garcia, M., Chatterjee, A., Ruina, A., Coleman, M.: The simplest walking model: stability, complexity, and scaling. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering 120(2), 281–288 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goswami, A., Thuilot, B., Espiau, B.: Compass-like biped robot part i: Stability and bifurcation of passive gaits. INRIA Research Report No. 2996 (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goswami, A., Thuilot, B., Espiau, B.: A study of the passive gait of a compass-like biped robot: symmetry and chaos. International Journal of Robotics Research 17(12), 1282–1301 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hobbelen, D.G.: Limit cycle walking. TU Delft, Delft University of Technology (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGeer, T.: Passive dynamic walking. The International Journal of Robotics Research 9(2), 62–82 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McGeer, T.: Passive walking with knees. In: Proceedings. 1990 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, vol. 3, pp. 1640–1645 (1990)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Morari, M., Lee, J.H., Garcia, C., Prett, D.: Model predictive control. Preprint (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morimoto, J., Nakanishi, J., Endo, G., Cheng, G., Atkeson, C.G., Zeglin, G.: Poincare-map-based reinforcement learning for biped walking. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA 2005, pp. 2381–2386. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morris, B., Grizzle, J.: A restricted poincaré map for determining exponentially stable periodic orbits in systems with impulse effects: application to bipedal robots. In: 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and 2005 European Control Conference, CDC-ECC 2005, pp. 4199–4206. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neves, C., Ventura, R.: Survey of semi-passive locomotion methodologies for humanoid robots. In: 15th International Conference on Climbing and Walking Robots and the Support Technologies for Mobile Mechanics, pp. 393–400 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vanderborght, B., Ham, R.V., Lefeber, D., Sugar, T.G., Hollander, K.W.: Comparison of mechanical design and energy consumption of adaptable, passive-compliant actuators. International Journal of Robotics Research 28(1), 90–103 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vanderborght, B., Verrelst, B., Ham, R.V., Damme, M.V., Lefeber, D., Duran, B.M., Beyl, P.: Exploiting natural dynamics to reduce energy consumption by controlling the compliance of soft actuators. International Journal of Robotics Research 25, 343–358 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Williamson, M.M.: Series elastic actuators. Tech. rep., Massachusetts Institute of Technology - Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wisse, M.: Essentials of dynamic walking; Analysis and design of two-legged robots. Ph.D. thesis, TU Delft, Delft University of Technology (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Systems and RoboticsInstituto Superior TécnicoLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations