Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-v2srd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-21T13:37:30.199Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A material point-based simulation method for soft robots with free boundary interactions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2024

Siwei He ,
Jie Shen ,
Beijia Zhang ,
Faizan Ahmad ,
Hao Deng ,
Xiaohui Li ,
Jing Xiong Open the ORCID record for Jing Xiong [Opens in a new window]  and
Zeyang Xia Open the ORCID record for Zeyang Xia [Opens in a new window]
Siwei He
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China
Jie Shen
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Beijia Zhang
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Faizan Ahmad
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China
Hao Deng
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China
Xiaohui Li
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China
Jing Xiong*
Affiliation:
Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China
Zeyang Xia
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
*
Corresponding author: Jing Xiong; Email: jing.xiong@siat.ac.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Soft robots show an advantage when conducting tasks in complex environments due to their enormous flexibility and adaptability. However, soft robots suffer interactions and nonlinear deformation when interacting with soft and fluid materials. The reason behind is the free boundary interactions, which refers to undetermined contact between soft materials, specifically containing nonlinear deformation in air and nonlinear interactions in fluid for soft robot simulation. Therefore, we propose a new approach using material point method (MPM), which can solve the free boundary interactions problem, to simulate soft robots under such environments. The proposed approach can autonomously predict the flexible and versatile behaviors of soft robots. Our approach entails incorporating automatic differentiation into the algorithm of MPM to simplify the computation and implement an efficient implicit time integration algorithm. We perform two groups of experiments with an ordinary pneumatic soft finger in different free boundary interactions. The results indicate that it is possible to simulate soft robots with nonlinear interactions and deformation, and such environmental effects on soft robots can be restored.

Keywords

sensor or actuator designsoft robotmaterial point methodfree boundary interactiondeformation

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , February 2025 , pp. 582 - 595
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Shintake, J., Cacucciolo, V., Floreano, D. and Shea, H., “Soft robotic grippers,” Adv Mater 30(29), 1707035 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, C.-J. and Cheng, B., “Design of a robotic gripper for casting sorting robots with rigid-flexible coupling structures,” Robotica, 42, 1–19 (2024).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, N., Phua, K. S., Lai, H. S., Tam, P. K., Tang, K. Y., Cheng, K. K., Yeow, R. C. H., Ang, K. K., Guan, C. and Lim, J. H., “Brain-computer interface-based soft robotic glove rehabilitation for stroke,” IEEE Trans BioMed Eng 67(12), 3339–3351 (2020).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Malvezzi, M., Iqbal, Z., Valigi, M. C., Pozzi, M., Prattichizzo, D. and Salvietti, G., “Design of multiple wearable robotic extra fingers for human hand augmentation,” Robotics 8(4), 102 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikafrooz, N. and Leonessa, A., “A single-actuated, cable-driven, and self-contained robotic hand designed for adaptive grasps,” Robotics 10(4), 109 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosselin, C., Pelletier, F. and Laliberte, T., “An Anthropomorphic Underactuated Robotic Hand with 15 Dofs and a Single Actuator,” In: 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, (2008) pp. 749–754.Google Scholar
Niola, V., Rossi, C. and Savino, S., “Influence of the Tendon Design on the Behavior of an Under-Actuated Finger,” In: Advances in Service and Industrial Robotics: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Robotics in Alpe-Adria-Danube Region, RAAD 2017, (2018) pp. 1033–1042.Google Scholar
Di, Y., Zhang, Y., Wen, Y. and Ren, Y., “Modeling and optimization of motion for inchworm-inspired magnetically driven soft robot,” Robotica 42(1), 72–86 (2024).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Z., Wang, Y., Wang, J., Fei, Y. and Du, Q., “An obstacle-avoiding and stiffness-tunable modular bionic soft robot,” Robotica 40(8), 2651–2665 (2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armanini, C., Boyer, F., Mathew, A. T., Duriez, C. and Renda, F., “Soft robots modeling: A structured overview,” IEEE Trans Robot 39(3), 1728–1748 (2023).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polygerinos, P., Lyne, S., Wang, Z., Nicolini, L. F., Mosadegh, B., Whitesides, G. M. and Walsh, C. J., “Towards a Soft Pneumatic Glove for Hand Rehabilitation,” In: 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, (2013) pp. 1512–1517.Google Scholar
Comber, D. B., Slightam, J. E., Gervasi, V. R., Neimat, J. S. and Barth, E. J., “Design, additive manufacture, and control of a pneumatic MR-compatible needle driver,” IEEE Trans Robot 32(1), 138–149 (2016).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, Y., Xia, Z. and Zhao, Q., “Optimal design of soft pneumatic bending actuators subjected to design-dependent pressure loads,” IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 24(6), 2873–2884 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, R., Zhang, X., Zhu, B., Zhang, H., Chen, B. and Wang, H., “Topology optimization of a cable-driven soft robotic gripper,” Struct Multidiscip Optim 62(5), 2749–2763 (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bathe, K.-J. and Chaudhary, A., “A solution method for planar and axisymmetric contact problems,” Int J Numer Meth Eng 21(1), 65–88 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitra, S. and Sinhamahapatra, K. P., “2D simulation of fluid-structure interaction using finite element method,” Finite Elem Anal Des 45(1), 52–59 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Vaucorbeil, A., Nguyen, V. P., Sinaie, S. and Wu, J. Y., “Material point method after 25 years: Theory, implementation, and applications,” Adv Appl Mech 53, 185–398 (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, S. J., Rogers, B. D. and Stansby, P. K., “Review of smoothed particle hydrodynamics: Towards converged Lagrangian flow modelling,” Proc Royal Soc A 476(2241), 20190801 (2020).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sun, Z., Li, H., Gan, Y., Liu, H., Huang, Z. and He, L., “Material point method and smoothed particle hydrodynamics simulations of fluid flow problems: A comparative study,” Prog Comput Fluid Dyn Int J 18(1), 1–18 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrandy, V., Indrawanto, F. F., Sugiharto, A., Franco, E., Garriga-Casanovas, A., Mahyuddin, A. I., Rodriguez, F., Baena, S. M. and Virdyawan, V., “Modeling of a two-degree-of-freedom fiber-reinforced soft pneumatic actuator,” Robotica 41(12), 3608–3626 (2023).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, T., Wu, K., Ma, P., Wah, S., Spielberg, A., Rus, D. and Matusik, W., “Diffpd: Differentiable projective dynamics,” ACM Trans Graph (TOG) 41(2), 1–21 (2021).Google Scholar
Du, T., Hughes, J., Wah, S., Matusik, W. and Rus, D., “Underwater soft robot modeling and control with differentiable simulation,” IEEE Robot Autom Lett 6(3), 4994–5001 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Min, S., Won, J., Lee, S., Park, J. and Lee, J., “SoftCon: Simulation and control of soft-bodied animals with biomimetic actuators,” ACM Trans Graph 38(6), 208 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, Y., Liu, J., Spielberg, A., Tenenbaum, J. B., Freeman, W. T., Wu, J., Rus, D. and Matusik, W., “ChainQueen: A Real-Time Differentiable Physical Simulator for Soft Robotics,” In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), (2019) pp.6265–6271.Google Scholar
Spielberg, A., Du, T., Hu, Y., Rus, D. and Matusik, W., “Advanced soft robot modeling in chainQueen,” Robotica 41(1), 74–104 (2023).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, Y., Anderson, L., Li, T.-M., Sun, Q., Carr, N., Ragan-Kelley, J. and Durand, F., “Difftaichi: Differentiable programming for physical simulation,” arXiv preprint arXiv: 1910.00935, (2019).Google Scholar
Naughton, N., Sun, J., Tekinalp, A., Parthasarathy, T., Chowdhary, G. and Gazzola, M., “Elastica: A compliant mechanics environment for soft robotic control,” IEEE Robot Autom Lett 6(2), 3389–3396 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xavier, M. S., Harrison, S. M., Howard, D., Yong, Y. K. and Fleming, A. J., “Modeling of soft fluidic actuators using fluid-structure interaction simulations with underwater applications,” Int J Mech Sci 255, 108437 (2023).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soomro, A. M., Memon, F. H., Lee, J.-W., Ahmed, F., Kim, K. H., Kim, Y. S. and Choi, K. H., “Fully 3D printed multi-material soft bio-inspired frog for underwater synchronous swimming,” Int J Mech Sci 210, 106725 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brackbill, J., Kothe, D. and Ruppel, H. M., “FLIP: A low-dissipation, particle-in-cell method for fluid flow,” Comput Phys Commun 48(1), 25–38 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, C., Schroeder, C. and Teran, J., “An angular momentum conserving affine-particle-in-cell method,” J Comput Phys 338, 137–164 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, C., Schroeder, C., Selle, A., Teran, J. and Stomakhin, A., The affine particle-in-cell method, (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, Y., Fang, Y., Ge, Z., Qu, Z., Zhu, Y., Pradhana, A. and Jiang, C., “A moving least squares material point method with displacement discontinuity and two-way rigid body coupling,” ACM Trans Graph 37(4), 1–14 (2018).Google Scholar
Wright, J. N. a. S. J., “Numerical optimization,” (2006).Google Scholar
Bergström, J., “Mechanics of Solid Polymers: Theory and Computational Modeling,” In: Mechanics of Solid Polymers: Theory and Computational Modeling (William Andrew, New York, United States, 2015) pp. 1–509.Google Scholar
Pajankar, A., Hands-on Matplotlib: Learn Plotting and Visualizations with Python 3 (Apress, Berkeley, CA, U.S., 2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stomakhin, A., Schroeder, C., Jiang, C., Chai, L., Teran, J. and Selle, A., “Augmented MPM for phase-change and varied materials,” ACM Trans Graph 33(4), 1–11 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koschier, D., Bender, J., Solenthaler, B. and Teschner, M., Smoothed particle hydrodynamics techniques for the physics based simulation of fluids and solids, (2020).Google Scholar
Jiang, C., The material point method for the physics-based simulation of solids and fluids (University of California, Los Angeles, 2015).Google Scholar
Press, W., Flannery, B., Teukolsky, S. and Vetterling, W., “Numerical recipe in C the art of scientific computing,” (2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1991).Google Scholar
Cheng, F., Wang, X. and Barsky, B. A., “Quadratic B-spline curve interpolation,” Comput Math Appl 41(1), 39–50 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frostig, R., Johnson, M. J. and Leary, C., “Compiling machine learning programs via high-level tracing,” Syst Mach Learn 4(9), (2018). https://cs.stanford.edu/~rfrostig/pubs/jax-mlsys2018.pdf.Google Scholar
Li, M., Pal, A., Aghakhani, A., Pena-Francesch, A. and Sitti, M., “Soft actuators for real-world applications,” Nat Rev Mater 7(3), 235–249 (2021).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geuzaine, C. and Remacle, J.-F., “Gmsh: A 3-D finite element mesh generator with built-in pre- and post-processing facilities,” Int J Num Meth Eng 79(11), 1309–1331 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Q.-Y., Park, J. and Koltun, V., “Open3D: A modern library for 3D data processing,” arXiv preprint arXiv: 1801.09847, (2018).Google Scholar