Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-p5m67 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-31T12:05:31.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Design of an Autonomous Trash-Picking Service Robot Focussed on Human-Robot Interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

A. Vazhapilli Sureshbabu ,
N. M. Martins Pacheco ,
L. I. Duran Noy  and
M. Zimmermann
A. Vazhapilli Sureshbabu*
Affiliation:
Technical University of Munich, Germany
N. M. Martins Pacheco
Affiliation:
Technical University of Munich, Germany
L. I. Duran Noy
Affiliation:
Technical University of Munich, Germany
M. Zimmermann
Affiliation:
Technical University of Munich, Germany
*
anand.suresh@tum.de

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The design of service robots is typically treated as a mechatronic design problem aimed at implementation of its core technical functionalities. Intuitive operation and usability are ignored. We developed a trash-picking service robot with a strong focus on human-robot interaction (HRI) using the double diamond framework. The HRI-focussed hardware features were successfully implemented and tested. The results were shown to satisfy the ease of operation and usability requirements set as development goals for the robot.

Keywords

industrial designconceptual designdesign creativityinteraction designnew product development

Information

Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 2523 - 2532
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2022.

References

Adams, J. A. (2005). Human-Robot Interaction Design: Understanding User Needs and Requirements. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 49, 447–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, J. (2019). The double diamond: A universally accepted depiction of the design process. The Design Council UK Designcouncil.Org.Uk/News-Opinion/Double-Diamond-Universally-Accepted-Depiction-Design-Process.Google Scholar
Bütepage, J., & Kragic, D. (2017). Human-Robot Collaboration: From Psychology to Social Robotics. ArXiv, abs/1705.10146.Google Scholar
Damiano, L., Dumouchel, P., & Lehmann, H. (2015). Towards Human–Robot Affective Co-evolution Overcoming Oppositions in Constructing Emotions and Empathy. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(1), 7–18. 10.1007/s12369-014-0258-7Google Scholar
Garner, S., & McDonagh-Philp, D. (2001). Problem Interpretation and Resolution via Visual Stimuli: The Use of Mood Boards in Design Education. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 20, 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hameed, I. A., Tan, Z., Thomsen, N. B., & Duan, X. (2016). User Acceptance of Social Robots. ACHI 2016.Google Scholar
Jevtić, A., Colomé, A., Alenyà, G., & Torras, C. (2016). User Evaluation of an Interactive Learning Framework for Single-Arm and Dual-Arm Robots. 10.1007/978-3-319-47437-3_6Google Scholar
Lehmann, H., Sureshbabu, A. V., Parmiggiani, A., & Metta, G. (2016). Head and Face Design for a New Humanoid Service Robot. 10.1007/978-3-319-47437-3_37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martins Pacheco, N. M., Vazhapilli Sureshbabu, A., Nürnberger, M. C., Durán Noy, L. I., & Zimmermann, M. (2021). A FUZZY FRONT-END PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR START-UPS. Proceedings of the Design Society, 1. 10.1017/pds.2021.12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parmiggiani, A., Fiorio, L., Scalzo, A., Sureshbabu, A. V., Randazzo, M., Maggiali, M., Pattacini, U., Lehmann, H., Tikhanoff, V., Domenichelli, D., Cardellino, A., Congiu, P., Pagnin, A., Cingolani, R., Natale, L., & Metta, G. (2017, September). The design and validation of the R1 personal humanoid. 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). 10.1109/IROS.2017.8202224Google Scholar
Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: how today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses.Google Scholar
So, C., Jun, S., & Nah, K. (2016). Configuring Time for Creativity: How to Optimize the Ideation Process in Design Thinking Workshops.Google Scholar
Tschimmel, K. (2012). Design Thinking as an effective Toolkit for Innovation. ISPIM Conference Proceedings, 1.Google Scholar
Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2016). Product design and development (6. ed.). McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Wiethoff, A., Kowalski, R. A., & Butz, A. (2011). inTUIt: simple identification on tangible user interfaces. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction.Google Scholar
Wirtz, J., Patterson, P. G., Kunz, W. H., Gruber, T., Lu, V. N., Paluch, S., & Martins, A. (2018). Brave new world: service robots in the frontline. Journal of Service Management, 29, 907–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar