A pressure field model for fast, robust approximation of net contact force and moment between nominally rigid objects

Elandt, Ryan; Drumwright, Evan; Sherman, Michael P.; Ruina, Andy

doi:10.48550/arxiv.1904.11433

Cited by 1 publication

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We utilize a hydroelastic model supported in DRAKE [33], a simulator that considers surface contact and offers fast calculation speeds. In our scenario, a virtual robot guides the peg towards a hole, accounting for friction.…”

Section: Dynamic Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We account for the interaction between robot and peg via a simple linear spring model. Therefore, the force applied on the peg is generated by a spring, which only depends on the pose difference between the robot frame R and peg top center P 1 , Numerically, we make use of a simulator, (DRAKE [33]) depicted in Figure 2, to obtain discrete-time evaluation of the dynamics captured by: (q P , qP , qP ) = Φ(q P , q R , H)…”

Section: Dynamic Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, for defining the material properties of peg and hole in the simulator, we refer the DRAKE's manual [33], which provides guidelines on how to set parameters that correspond to the physical characteristics and behavior of the materials used in the contactrich tasks. According to the suggestions, we set the hydroelastic modulus same as Young's modulus.…”

Section: Comparison Between Hydroelastic Model and Whitney's Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From Figure 4, we observe that the hydroelastic model exhibits the same phases as observed in Whitney's method, albeit with some difference. In the hydroelastic model [33], the horizontal contact force F x in the peg frame gradually increases during the chamfer contact phase, rather than experiencing a sudden force at the initial contact. As the peg penetrates deeper into the hole, the contact force gradually builds up.…”

Section: Comparison Between Hydroelastic Model and Whitney's Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To account for this delay, we shift the results generated by the hydroelastic model based on the depth axis. This is because the contact force arises linearly after instantaneous contact, which is caused by the theory of hydroelastic contact [33]. The insertion depth and contact force will both continue increasing until the two bodies achieve quasi-static force equilibrium.…”

Section: Comparison Between Hydroelastic Model and Whitney's Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A Planning Framework for Robotic Insertion Tasks via Hydroelastic Contact Model

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robotic contact-rich insertion tasks present a significant challenge for motion planning due to the complex force interaction between robots and objects. Although many learning-based methods have shown success in contact tasks, most methods need sampling or exploring to gather sufficient experimental data. However, it is both time-consuming and expensive to conduct real-world experiments repeatedly. On the other hand, while the virtual world enables low cost and fast computations by simulators, there still exists a huge sim-to-real gap due to the inaccurate point contact model. Although finite element analysis might generate accurate results for contact tasks, it is computationally expensive. As such, this study proposes a motion planning framework with bilevel optimization to leverage relatively accurate force information with fast computation time. This framework consists of Dynamic Movement Primitives (DMPs) used to parameterize motion trajectories, Black-Box Optimization (BBO), a derivative-free approach, integrated to improve contact-rich insertion policy with hydroelastic contact model, and simulated variability to account for visual uncertainty in the real world. The accuracy of the simulated model is then validated by comparing our contact results with a benchmark Peg-in-Hole task. Using these integrated DMPs and BBO with hydroelastic contact model, the motion trajectory generated in planning is capable of guiding the robot towards successful insertion with iterative refinement.

show abstract

Section: Dynamic Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Dynamic Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison Between Hydroelastic Model and Whitney's Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison Between Hydroelastic Model and Whitney's Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison Between Hydroelastic Model and Whitney's Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations