Requirements speci cation of arti cial muscles for robotic...
Transcript of Requirements speci cation of arti cial muscles for robotic...
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for
robotic hands
J Ramırez1‡, A Rubiano1§, T Wallmersperger2, M D’Ottavio1,
L Gallimard1, O Polit1 and N Jouandeau3
1 LEME, Universite Paris Ouest Nanterre La Defense, 92410 Ville d’Avray, FR2 Institute of Solid Mechanics, TU-Dresden, 01069 Dresden, DE3 LIASD, Universite Paris 8, 93526 Saint-Denis Cedex 02, FR
E-mail: jl.ramirez [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract. This paper presents the requirements specification of artificial muscles
for robotic hand prostheses. In a first part, the robotic hand ProMain-I is introduced,
the hand has three fingers and is designed to mimic the human precision grasping also
known as digital grasping. Then, a methodology to determine three critical parameters
(strain, frequency and force) is presented. The methodology uses experimental data
combined with kinematic and dynamic models. As a result, we define that the main
requirements are: i) Active strain 0−30[%], ii) Frequency 0.6−1.2[Hz] and iii) Force /
Torque 2.4− 3.37[N ]/0.61− 0.87[Nmm]. The obtained values are calculated using the
ProMain-I hand, but the methodology can be generalized to other robots. Finally, a
review of smart materials is presented with the aim of choosing the group of materials
that can be used as artificial muscles for robotic hands. In this case we show that the
ionic polymer metal composites (IPMC) and the shape memory alloy (SMA) can fulfil
the established specifications.
Keywords: artificial muscles, robotic hand, soft robotics, smart materials
‡ Present address: LEME, UPO, 50 rue de Sevres, 92410 Ville d’Avray, FR.§ A. Rubiano is with Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, Cr. 11 101-80, Bogota D.C., COL.
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 2
1. Introduction
The utilization of smart and soft materials has led to the development of new adaptive
devices, known as soft robots [1], for physical rehabilitation and improvement of human
skills. Particularly in the field of soft robotic hands, some works have been conducted:
the UB Hand [2] and the Pisa/IIT hand [3] are good examples of the development
achieved. The DLR Hand II [4] can be considered to have a soft behavior also, because
its driving mechanism is based on tendons.
Concerning the smart materials for artificial muscles, significant studies are
currently being carried out to develop new actuation strategies, but these technologies
are still far from implementation in anthropomorphic robotic hands [5]. Considering that
the goal is to design a robotic hand able to mimic human precision grasping movements,
the actuator’s features must be defined from the human hand functionalities and the
robotic hand mechanism.
This paper discusses a methodology to define the requirements of artificial muscles
for robotic hands. The methodology takes into account the human hand capabilities
to define the range and limits of the actuator, but considers also the influence of
mechanical and functional characteristics of the robotic hand. Furthermore, a review
and a comparison of smart materials is presented.
The results presented in this paper are issued from two experiments: the first
measures human hand force and the settling time, the second tracks movements and
measure fingertip force of the robotic finger. Experimental data is analyzed using the
kinematic and dynamic models to define the characteristics of the artificial muscle.
The obtained results indicate that smart materials can satisfy the force, speed and
displacement requirements for a robotic hand prosthesis.
2. Robotic hand prosthesis ProMain-I
The bio-inspired robotic hand prosthesis ProMain-I has three fingers disposed to perform
precision grasping. Each finger has three joints: metacarpophalangeal (MP), proximal
interphalangeal (PIP) and distal interphalangeal (DIP). All joints have one degree of
freedom (DoF) to perform flexion and extension.
Each finger is controlled by only one servo motor: the proximal phalanx is driven
by a gearbox and two groups of tendons are disposed for transmitting motion to the
medial and distal phalanges, respectively. Hence, the clockwise rotation of the actuator
produces flexion, and the counterclockwise rotation produces extension. Therefore, the
rotation angles of the PIP and DIP joints are dependent on the rotation angle of the MP
joint (under-actuated system). The relation between the angles is θj2 = θj3 = 0.9θj1,
where θj1 is the MP joint angle, θj2 is the PIP joint angle and θj3 is the DIP joint angle.
The subindex j represents the fingers: i) thumbs j = 1, ii) index j = 2 and iii) middle
j = 3. Furthermore, lj1, lj2 and lj3 are the lengths of the proximal (P), medial (M)
and distal (D) phalanges, respectively, Figure 1 shows these lengths and the joint angles
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 3
for the finger j = 2. Considering that the robotic hand is a multi-link articular chain,
kinematic and dynamic models are needed to determine the actuator requirements.
𝜃21
𝜃22
𝜃23
𝑙21
𝑙22
𝑙23
Figure 1. ProMain-I Hand.
2.1. Kinematics of the robotic hand
For the kinematic analysis, an hybrid model is used. The model unifies the Denavit-
Hartemberg parametrization modified by Khalil and Kleinfinger (DHKK) and the
formulation of soft rotations using multiple sets of quaternions (SRQ), and is known
as the hybrid DHKK-SRQ model [6]. Thus, each ith joint (for i = 1, . . . , n where n is
the number of joints) is considered as an element that has a hybrid (i.e., rigid and soft)
behavior. The ith joint is modeled, in a first step, as a rigid element, with only the
rotation θi around zi. Subsequently, the rotations αi and βi around axes xi and yi are
added using the hypersphere S3i centered in the joint frame. As a result, the model can
apply rotations about all axes without the need for an extra reference frame.
The DHKK convention allows the representation of open-loop and closed-loop
kinematic chains, and presents a convenient definition of the axis zi, which corresponds
to the rotation axis of the ith joint. The angle of rotation around zi is denoted by θi,
and is applied using the transformation matrix i−1Ti that results from: 1) a rotation αiaround xi−1; 2) a translation ai along xi−1; 3) a rotation θi around zi; 4) a translation
di along zi [7]. The parameters αi, ai, θi and di, are known as the DHKK parameters.
In the DHKK convention αi, ai, θi and di are considered constants and extra rotations
(different of θi) are not possible. Consequently, the kinematics of a robot composed of n
joints is entirely defined by the matrix 0Tn, which is a composition of the orientation of
the end effector 0Rn, and the position vector [0P xn ,
0 P yn ,
0 P zn ], as shown in the following
expression:
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 4
0Tn =n∏i=1
i−1Ti =
0Rn
0P xn
0P yn
0P zn
0 0 0 1
(1)
When rotations around axes xi or yi are needed, those are formulated
using quaternions. A quaternion [8] is a composition of four coefficients
H = h0 + h1~xi + h2~yi + h3~zi, in vectorial notation the quaternion is represented as a
vector in a hypersphere S3i [9] centered in the frame’s origin. Furthermore, the
quaternion is represented with ordered pairs [10] inside double square brackets as
H = [[h0,~h ]], where ~h = h1~xi + h2~yi + h3~zi. Therefore, the group of rotations around
the axes xi, yi, zi and defined by the angles αi, βi, θi applied to the vector ~ri (a unitary
vector with the same direction of xi) are expressed as:
Xi Yi Zi Ri Xi Yi Zi (2)
where Xi = [[ cos(αi/2), ~xi sin(αi/2) ]]
Yi = [[ cos(βi/2), ~yi sin(βi/2) ]]
Zi = [[ cos(θi/2), ~zi sin(θi/2) ]]
Ri = [[ 0, ~ri ]]
Xi Yi Zi is the conjugate of the product Xi Yi Zi
Table 1 reports the notation adopted to adapt the DHKK-SRQ model to the
ProMain-I hand. Furthermore, Figure 2 shows the complete kinematics of the jth
finger and Table 2 shows the DHKK parameters of the ProMain-I hand. The frame
(xf , yf , zf ) corresponds to the fingertip position. Table 2 shows the DHKK parameters
of the ProMain-I finger.
FingerJoint’s frame Phalanx length
MP (i = 1) PIP (i = 2) DIP (i = 3) P (i = 1) M (i = 2) D (i = 3)
Thumbs (j = 1) (x1i, y1i, z1i)(α1i, β1i, θ1i)(S31i) l1i
Index (j = 2) (x2i, y2i, z2i)(α2i, β2i, θ2i)(S32i) l2i
Middle (j = 3) (x3i, y3i, z3i)(α3i, β3i, θ3i)(S32i) l3i
Table 1. Adopted notation for ProMain-I hand.
2.2. Dynamics of the robotic hand
The proposed dynamic model uses the principle of the virtual displacements and virtual
works [11]. The equivalent dynamic model of the finger is shown in Figure 3, where wj1,
wj2 and wj3 are respectively the weights of the proximal, medial and distal phalanges of
the finger j, and are placed at the center of masses CMj1 = (x′j1, y′j1), CMj2 = (x′j2, y
′j2)
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 5
Figure 2. kinematic model of the robotic finger.
iii ααα aaa ddd θθθ
1 0 0 0 θj1
2 0 lj1 0 θj2
3 0 lj2 0 θj3
f 0 lj3 0 0
Table 2. DHKK parameters of the ProMain-I Finger.
Figure 3. Dynamic model of the robotic finger.
and CMj3 = (x′j3, y′j3). fjR is the applied force that is equivalent to the reaction force,
and τj1 is the input torque.
The virtual work is calculated for the external forces (e.g., weight, applied force
and input torque) δWe = QTe δre and the inertial forces (e.g., centrifugal forces)
δWλ = MqT δrλ. QTe is the external forces vector and δre is the virtual displacement
vector of the center of masses and the external forces fjR contact point. M is the diagonal
mass matrix composed of the masses mji and inertias Jji. qT is the second derivative
with respect to the time of q = [x′j1, y′j1, θj1, x
′j2, y
′j2, θj2, x
′j3, y
′j3, θj3], and represents the
acceleration vector. δrλ is the virtual displacement vector of the inertial frameworks.
The dynamic equilibrium is given by δqT [Mq − Qe] = 0. To solve the equilibrium
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 6
equation, considering the movements restrictions, it is necessary to separate dependent
and independent coordinates. The separation is performed using the transformation
proposed as follows:
δq = Bδqiı, B =
[−C−1qd Cqı
I
](3)
where Cqd is the jacobian of dependent coordinates, Cqı is the Jacobian of independent
coordinates and I is the identity matrix. The equilibrium is thus written as follows:
δqTiıBT [Mq −Qe] = 0 (4)
Solving Eq. (4), we obtain the input torque τ1 as function of the force fR and the
kinematic variables q, q, q.
3. Critical parameters of artificial muscles for robotic hands
Generally, an actuator is characterized by three main features: i) blocking force,
ii) active strain and iii) settling time. Considering that the goal is to design a robotic
hand able to mimic human precision grasping movements, the actuator’s features must
be drawn from both the human and the robotic hand. The proposed approach for
identifying artificial muscles requirements, considers the pinch force and settling time
of the human hand with respect to the ProMain-I robotic finger behavior.
Therefore, in the following subsections we introduce the methodology to identify
the actuator characteristics using the experiments with the human hand and robotic
hand ProMain-I.
3.1. Analysis of the human hand
The complex organization (anatomic and functional) of the hand contributes to the
prehension movements that can be classified into three classes [12]: i) digital grasping,
ii) palmar grasping and iii) centered grasping. The most used kind of prehension for
manipulating and interacting with objects is digital grasping, also known as precision
grasping due to the accurate positioning of the fingers. Consequently, this study is
focused on the analysis of the precision grasping to identify reference values for the
pinch force and the settling time.
The pinch force can be considered as the force applied by two fingers of the hand,
usually the index and the thumb. The applied force must be adapted to the object’s
weight, acceleration, surface texture, contour and structure [13]. Consequently, the
measure of the pinch force has to be adapted to each problem [14], and that is why
in this study we carried out an experiment suited to our requirements. Furthermore,
to define a reference value of the human pinch force, experimental data are collected
within a group of five healthy males between 24 and 32 years old. The sensor is
a hand dynamometer VernierTM D-BTA, suitable to measure the pinch force, whose
characteristics are: i) accuracy of 0.6N , ii) resolution of 0.2141N and iii) operational
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 7
Single signal
capture
Dynamometric
Measures
Mean signal analysis
Figure 4. Experimental set-up to measure the human pinch force.
range from 0 to 600N . The data is collected using a digital oscilloscope connected to a
computer. Figure 4 shows the scheme of the experiment.
We have collected multiple samples from each subject and computed a mean force
value for each one, as shown in Table 3. Thus, the measured pinch force is in the interval
[4.80N, 6.74N ], and the mean value is 5.94N . A graphical representation of the analysis
is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Human Pinch Force.
Subject Mean pinch force [N ][N ][N ] Standard deviation [N ][N ][N ]
1 6.74 0.95
2 6.45 0.08
3 4.97 0.21
4 6.71 0.71
5 4.80 0.33
Table 3. The mean value of the human pinch force.
The pinch force shows a damped exponential behavior, and thus it can be considered
as a system G(s) whose output (pinch force) is the result of a step input (muscular
activation). Consequentially, the settling time ts is estimated based on the time constant
of G(s). In a system with an exponential response o(t) = 1− exp(−t/ψ), where ψ is te
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 8
time constant and 1/ψ is the frequency, the time required to settle the output within
a certain percentage ϕ of the input amplitude is the settling time ts. In this case we
consider ϕ = 2% and consequently exp(−ts/ψ) = 0.02, as a result ts = 4ψ.
As a result, considering all subjects and trials, the value of the settling time is in
the range 0.75s − 1.36s with a standard deviation of 0.25s. In Figure 6, the trial 1 of
subject 2 is presented to clarify the measure of the settling time ts, which is proportional
to the time constant of G(s).
Figure 6. Measure of the response time.
3.2. Strain and torque analysis of the ProMain-I hand
Considering that complete finger flexion occurs when joint angles reach values grater
than 80◦, the actuator strain can be obtained in a straightforward manner from the
relationship between angles. In this case, we set the maximum angular value of the MP
joint to 100◦, ensuring that the maximum angular values of PIP and DIP joints will
be 90◦. From the above considerations, we state that for the ProMain-I robotic hand
prosthesis, the active strain must produce a rotation in the range 0◦ − 100◦ in the MP
joint.
The lower limit of the pinch force range is 4.80N , taking into account that this
value is measured in humans, using two fingers pinch. The force applied by each finger
is then approximately half of the total force, i.e. the finger force must be at least 2.4N .
To calculate the required torque (for applying this minimum force) using the proposed
dynamic model, it is necessary to know the vector q, which corresponds to the dependent
and independent coordinates of the robot. The values x′ji and y′ji correspond to position
of the center of masses CMji and are calculated with respect to the local framework as:
x′ji = lji/2 and y′ji = 0, e.g., Figure 7 shows the position of CMj2 with respect to the
framework (xj2, yj2, zj2). The values xji, yji and θji are measured using a single-finger
platform (shown in Figure 8) that also allows to read off the fingertip force.
To measure the force, we used a resistive-based force sensor Flexiforcer, that
measures up to 5N . The sensor is calibrated in the range of 0.6N to 4.8N and is placed
on a support (platform) that is located in the trajectory of the fingertip. Considering
that the finger performs flexion and extension in 2D, the kinematic is measured using
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 9
Figure 7. Position of CMj2 with respect to the framework (xj2, yj2, zj2).
DIP Joint
PIP Joint
MP Joint
Servo Motor
Force Sensor
Figure 8. CAD Model of the single-finger platform.
a high-performance CCD camera Prosilica GE-2040, which tracks black markers placed
on the finger joints and the fingertip. Figure 9 shows the scheme of the experiment.
Interface for controlling the platform
Force
measuring
Kinematic
tracking
Figure 9. Experimental set-up to track the kinematic and measure applied force of
the robotic finger.
The result of the test are the position vectors of the joints, i.e., the vector
[0P xj1,
0P yj1, 0] for the joint 1, [0P x
j2,0P y
j2, 0] for the joint 2 and [0P xj3,
0P yj3, 0] for
the joint 3. Likewise the vector [0P xjf ,
0P yjf , 0] corresponds to the fingertip position.
Considering that the movement is performed in the xy−plane, 0P zji is always zero.
Figure 10 shows the results of the measured kinematics. The standard deviation of
the measures of the MP joint position is 0.8793mm and corresponds to the measured
camera precision. Finally, applying the dynamic model, and using the kinematic DHKK-
SRQ model, we found out that the torque τj1(fjR, q, q, q) = 0.61Nmm. In summary, we
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 10
have defined the operational range that must be fulfilled by an actuator for an artificial
hand.
Figure 10. Results of the position tracking.
4. Smart materials review and comparison
We have introduced three critical parameters defining the requirements of artificial
muscles for robotic hands: the strain (obtained from the robot features), the frequency
(based on the human settling time) and the force (estimated based on the human range
using the robot kinematics and dynamics). The requirements, summarized in Table 4,
can be fulfilled by classical actuators, as it has been shown previously [15]. Now, we
introduce the analysis of smart materials in order to identify possible candidates to be
used as artificial muscles for the hand.
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 11
Parameter Value
Active strain 0− 30[%]
Frequency 0.6− 1.2[Hz]
Force / Torque 2.4− 3.37[N ]/0.61− 0.87[Nmm]
Table 4. summary of requirements of artificial muscles for robotic hands.
Smart materials are artificially designed to have one or more properties that can be
significantly changed in a controlled way by an externally applied excitation. Their
behavior is reversible, and consequently these materials could fulfill actuation and
sensing requirements [16].
In the state of the art, we find electrostrictive and magnetostrictive materials.
Considering the operation and control of the robotic hand, our interest is focused
on the electrostrictive materials. Therefore, we consider the following materials:
i) ionic polymer metal composite (IPMC), ii) hydrogels, iii) conductive polymers
(CPs), iv) piezoelectric ceramics (PCs), v) rheological fluids, vi) electronic electroactive
polymers (electronic EAP). Also we are interested on shape memory alloys (SMA) due
to their characteristics such as blocking force and thermal activation trigger.
the main features of the considered smart materials are summarized in Table 5. It
can be seen that concerning the active strain and frequency, only piezoelectric ceramics
and hydrogels do not satisfy the requirements. However, concerning the force, only the
rheological fluids and the SMA can achieve the range of the human hand pinch force.
Material Frequency [Hz] Active strain [%] Force [N ]
IPMC 1 [17] - 6.6m [18] 10 [19] - 50 [20] 0.001− 0.1 [21]
Hydrogel < 0.2[22] up to 50[23, 22] 0.001− 0.2 [24]
CPs 50m[25] up to 60[25] 0− 0.25 [25]
PCs 100− 600[26] 0.002− 1.5 [26] 0.25 [26]
Rheological Fluid 16[27] min ≈ 2[28] 0.5− 3[28]
Electronic EAP 1− 4[29] 10− 200[30] 0− 0.4[29]
SMA 0.05− 5.5[31] 3− 110[31] 0.032− 9.3[31]
Table 5. Main characteristics of smart materials.
Furthermore, the implementation of smart materials in prostheses is bounded by
other factors, such as the stiffness and the excitation voltages (see Table 6). An
excitation voltage in the order of kV can not be used, considering the impact in the
device autonomy. Based on the performed review, we selected two materials that could
be used as artificial muscles for hand prostheses, namely IPMC and SMA. Even if the
IPMC blocking force is under the requirements the material has a wide potential due
to the movement performance and frequency.
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 12
Material Stiffness Applied voltage
IPMC 50− 83.5 [MPa][32] < 5[V ][33]
Hydrogel below 10[MPa][24] up to 21[V ][23]
CPs 80− 440 [MPa][25] 1[V ] [25]
Piezoelectric ceramic 210 [GPa] [34] ≈ [kV ][26]
Rheological Fluid100[GPa] (1kV )[27]
1− 4[kV/mm][27]to 650[GPa] (4kV )
Electronic EAP 20− 120[Pa][29] 0− 6[kV/mm][29]
SMA 103[MPa][31] 1.72− 6.41[V ][31]
Table 6. Stiffens and voltage excitation of smart materials.
5. Conclusions
We have introduced a methodology to identify the requirements and specifications of
artificial muscles for robotic hand prostheses. Our methodology combines experimental
data with the kinematics and dynamics model of the robotic hand to define actuator
requirements. The methodology is applied to the robotic hand ProMain-I, and the
requirements for the hand are defined as follows: i) Active strain 0−30[%], ii) Frequency
0.6− 1.2[Hz] and iii) Force / Torque 2.4− 3.37[N ]/0.61− 0.87[Nmm].
Moreover, based on a review of smart materials, we have compared the mains
actuator’s features with the requirements of artificial muscles for the ProMain-I hand. As
a result we identify that two kinds of materials ionic polymer metal composites (IPMC)
and shape memory alloys (SMA) could be used and implemented in the ProMain-I hand.
Consequently, we envisage the modeling of both IPMC and SMA, to design and
implement a new prototype of robotic hand prosthesis using artificial muscles based on
smart materials. This progress is encouraging and permits to follow new directions in
the research of smart materials for artificial muscles in robotic hands.
Acknowledgment
We express our gratitude to the Universite Paris Lumieres UPL for the financial suport
through the project PROMAIN. This work has been developed in the context of the
Universite franco-allemande Deutch-Franzosische Hochschule, as a result of the funded
visit of the PhD students to the Institute of Solid Mechanics in the TU-Dresden.
We also acknowledge Colciencias - Colombia and the Universidad Militar Nueva
Granada for the financial support of the PhD students.
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 13
References
[1] S.G. Nurzaman, F. Iida, C. Laschi, A. Ishiguro, and R. Wood. Soft robotics [tc spotlight]. IEEE
Robotics Automation Magazine, 20(3):24–95, Sept 2013.
[2] F. Ficuciello, G. Palli, C. Melchiorri, and B. Siciliano. Experimental evaluation of the UB Hand IV
postural synergies. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems
(IROS), pages 1775–1780, San Francisco, CA, USA, Sep 2011. IEEE.
[3] M.G. Catalano, G. Grioli, E. Farnioli, A. Serio, C. Piazza, and A. Bicchi. Adaptive synergies
for the design and control of the Pisa/IIT SoftHand. The International Journal of Robotics
Research, 33(5):768–782, 2014.
[4] J. Reinecke, A. Dietrich, F. Schmidt, and M. Chalon. Experimental comparison of slip detection
strategies by tactile sensing with the biotac R© on the dlr hand arm system. In IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 2742–2748, Hong Kong, China, Jun
2014. IEEE.
[5] C. Melchiorri, G. Palli, G. Berselli, and G. Vassura. Development of the UB Hand IV: Overview of
Design Solutions and Enabling Technologies. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 20(3):72–
81, September 2013.
[6] J. L. Ramırez, A. Rubiano, N. Jouandeau, M.N. El Korso, L. Gallimard, and O. Polit.
Hybrid kinematic model applied to the under-actuated robotic hand prosthesis promain-i and
experimental evaluation. In 14th IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference in reabilitation
robotics (ICORR), pages 301–306, Singapore, Aug 2015. IEEE.
[7] V. Hugel and N. Jouandeau. Automatic generation of humanoids geometric model parameters.
In Proceedings of 17th annual RoboCup International Symposium (RCUP-2013), pages 408–419,
Eindhoven, Netherlands, Jul 2014. Springer LNCS.
[8] J.S. Dai. An historical review of the theoretical development of rigid body displacements from
Rodrigues parameters to the finite twist. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 41(1):41–52, January
2006.
[9] L. Yan and L. Xu. Study of diagonalization on skew self-conjugate matrix in quaternion field.
In Second International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Natural Computing
Proceedings (CINC), pages 72–75, Wuhan, CN, Sep 2010. IEEE.
[10] S.L. Altmann. Hamilton, rodrigues, and the quaternion scandal. Mathematics Magazine,
62(5):291–308, December 1989.
[11] J. L. Ramırez, A. Rubiano, N. Jouandeau, L. Gallimard, and O. Polit. Morphological optimization
of prosthesis’ finger for precision grasping of little objects. In 4th International workshop in
medical and service robots (MESROB), pages 1–14, Nantes, France, Jul 2015. Springer.
[12] A.I. Kapandji. Anatomie fonctionnelle: Tome 1 - Membre Suprieur. Maloine, 6 edition, 2011.
[13] J. O. Ramsay, X. Wang, and R. Flanagan. A functional data analysis of the pinch force of human
fingers. Applied Statistics, 44:17–30, 1995.
[14] T.A. Schreuders, M.E. Roebroeck, J. Goumans, J.F. van Nieuwenhuijzen, T. H. Stijnen, and H.J.
Stam. Measurement error in grip and pinch force measurements in patients with hand injuries.
Physical therapy, 83(9):806–815, 2003.
[15] J. L. Ramırez, A. Rubiano, N. Jouandeau, L. Gallimard, and O. Polit. Requirements for artificial
muscles to design robotic fingers, chapter Requirements for artificial muscles to design robotic
fingers, pages 1–15. Springer, Manuscript sumbitted for publication (2015).
[16] W.G. Drossel, H. Kunze, A. Bucht, L. Weisheit, and K. Pagel. Smart3 smart materials for smart
applications. Procedia {CIRP}, 36:211–216, 2015. {CIRP} 25th Design Conference Innovative
Product Creation.
[17] K. Jung, J. Nam, and H. Choi. Investigations on actuation characteristics of ipmc artificial muscle
actuator. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 107(2):183–192, 2003.
[18] X. Bao, Y. Bar-Cohen, and S. S. Lih. Measurements and macro models of ionomeric polymer-
metal composites (ipmc). In SPIE’s 9th Annual International Symposium on Smart Structures
Requirements specification of artificial muscles for robotic hands 14
and Materials, pages 220–227, San Diego, CA, USA, Jul 2002. SPIE International Society for
Optics and Photonics.
[19] Q He, M. Yu, L. Song, H. Ding, X. Zhang, and Z. Dai. Experimental study and model analysis
of the performance of ipmc membranes with various thickness. Journal of Bionic Engineering,
8(1):77–85, 2011.
[20] T. G. Noh, Y. Tak, J. D. Nam, and H. Choi. Electrochemical characterization of polymer actuator
with large interfacial area. Electrochimica Acta, 47(13):2341–2346, 2002.
[21] D. Vokoun, Q. He, Heller L., M. Yu, and Z. Dai. Modeling of {IPMC} cantilever’s displacements
and blocking forces. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 12(1):142–51, 2015.
[22] M. Bassil, J. Davenas, and M. E. Tahchi. Electrochemical properties and actuation mechanisms of
polyacrylamide hydrogel for artificial muscle application. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical,
134(2):496–501, 2008.
[23] S. Y. Kim, H. S. Shin, Y. M. Lee, and C. N. Jeong. Properties of electroresponsive poly (vinyl
alcohol)/poly (acrylic acid) ipn hydrogels under an electric stimulus. Journal of applied polymer
science, 73(9):1675–1683, 1999.
[24] P. Calvert. Electroactive Polymer (EAP) Actuators as Artificial Muscles Reality, Potential, and
Challenges, chapter Electroactive Polymer Gels, pages 151–165. SPIE The International Society
for Optical Engineering, Bellingham, WA, USA, 2 edition, 2004.
[25] G. Alici, B. Mui, and C. Cook. Bending modeling and its experimental verification for conducting
polymer actuators dedicated to manipulation applications. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical,
126(2):396–404, 2006.
[26] Q. M. Wang, Q. Zhang, B. Xu, R. Liu, and L. E. Cross. Nonlinear piezoelectric behavior of ceramic
bending mode actuators under strong electric fields. Journal of Applied Physics, 86(6):3352–
3360, 1999.
[27] B. R. Kumar and S Ranganatha. A study of stiffness and damping characteristics of conventional
fluid and smart fluid applied to squeeze film damper. Int J Innovative Technol Exploring Eng,
3:30–34, 2013.
[28] S. Chen and X. Liu. Spectral analysis for response of the dynamic damping force and
phenomenological modeling of electro-rheological fluid. Smart materials and structures,
8(4):499–503, 1999.
[29] S. Dastoor and M. Cutkosky. Design of dielectric electroactive polymers for a compact and scalable
variable stiffness device. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation
(ICRA), pages 3745–3750, St. Paul, MN, USA, May 2012. IEEE.
[30] Y. Bar-Cohen. Electroactive Polymer (EAP) Actuators as Artificial Muscles Reality, Potential,
and Challenges, chapter EAP History, Current Status, and Infrastructure, pages 4–43. SPIE
The International Society for Optical Engineering, Bellingham, WA, USA, 2 edition, 2004.
[31] DYNALLOY Inc. Makers of Dynamic Alloys, 1562 Reynolds Avenue, Irvine, California 92614
USA. Technical Characteristics of FLEXINOL Actuator Wires, f1140rev i.2 edition.
[32] B. Kim, B. M. Kim, J. Ryu, I. H. Oh, S. K. Lee, S. E. Cha, and J. Pak. Analysis of
mechanical characteristics of the ionic polymer metal composite (ipmc) actuator using cast
ion-exchange film. In Smart Structures and Materials: Electroactive Polymer Actuators and
Devices (EAPAD), pages 486–495, San Diego, CA, USA, Mar 2003. SPIE International Society
for Optics and Photonics.
[33] T. Wallmersperger, D. J. Leo, and C. S. Kothera. Transport modeling in ionomeric polymer
transducers and its relationship to electromechanical coupling. Journal of Applied Physics,
101(2):(024912)1–9, 2007.
[34] H. Djojodihardjo, M. Jafari, S. Wiriadidjaja, and K. A. Ahmad. Active vibration suppression of
an elastic piezoelectric sensor and actuator fitted cantilevered beam configurations as a generic
smart composite structure. Composite Structures, 132:848–863, 2015.