Optimum Design of 6R Passive Haptic Robotic Arm for Implant Surgery

  • Serter Yilmaz
  • E. Ilhan Konukseven
  • Hakan Gurocak
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6191)


The aim of this research was to design an optimum 6R passive haptic robotic arm (PHRA) to work in a limited workspace during dental implant surgery. Misplacement of an implant during dental surgery causes longer recuperation periods and functional disorders. In this study, a passive guidance robot arm was designed as a surgical aid tool for a dentist during the operation to reduce the surgical complications. Optimum design of a 6R robot is a complex issue since minimum energy has to be consumed while maximum workspace is to be achieved using optimized link lengths. The methodology used deals not only with link lengths of manipulator but also mass and inertia of the links along with the location of the tool path. Another feature of the methodology is to maximize haptic device transparency using an objective function that includes end-effector torques/forces with workspace limits taken as constraints. The objective function was obtained from dynamic equations and the constraints were defined using kinematic equations. The constrained nonlinear optimization problem was solved using Sequential Quadratic Programming (SQP) and Genetic Algorithms (GA). Main contribution of this paper is an optimization algorithm that considers spatial dynamics to reduce parasitic torques leading to an optimal 6R robot design. Details of the methodology, solutions, and performance of the optimization techniques are presented.


Passive guidance multivariable optimization dental implant surgery haptic feedback haptic transparency 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Casap, N., Wexler, A., Lustmann, J.: Image-Guided Navigation System for Placing Dental Implants. Technology in Practice 25(10), 783–788 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brief, J., Edinger, D., Hassfeld, S., Eggers, G.: Accuracy of image-guided implantology. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 16, 495–501 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Theodossy, T., Bamber, M.A.: Model surgery with a passive robot arm for orthognathic surgery planning. Jour. of Oral and Max. Surgery 61(11), 1310–1317 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Senkal, D., Gurocak, H., Konukseven, I.: Passive Haptic Interface with MR-Brakes for Dental Implant Surgery, Presence. MIT Press, Cambridge (2010) (in review)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vlachos, K., Papadopoulos, E.: Transparency Maximization Methodology for Haptic Devices. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 11(3), 249–255 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khatib, O., Bowling, A.: Optimization of the inertial and acceleration characteristics of manipulators. In: Proc. IEEE ICRA, vol. 4, pp. 2883–2889 (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carbone, G., Ceccarelli, M.: An optimum design procedure for both serial and parallel manipulators. In: Proc. I. Mech. E., J. Mech. Eng. Sci., Part C, vol. 221, pp. 829–843Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Serter Yilmaz
    • 1
  • E. Ilhan Konukseven
    • 1
  • Hakan Gurocak
    • 2
  1. 1.Dep. of Mechanical EngineeringMiddle East Technical Uni.AnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.School of Engineering and Computer ScienceWashington State University VancouverUSA

Personalised recommendations