اعتبار سنجی از راهنمای فونز به پشتیبانی تقلید از حرکات ورزشی با استفاده از یک ربات صنعتی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|19133||2012||6 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||2639 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Procedia Engineering, Volume 34, 2012, Pages 307–312
Mechanical testing plays an important role in the development of athletic footwear. Typically, these tests do not accurately represent the forces and motions the footwear experiences during human use and there is substantial scope to improve this situation. The purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which RoboGuide software can be used as a virtual environment to support the emulation of the ground contact phase of human locomotion on a FANUCTM six degrees of freedom industrial robot. A series of simple (linear and corner) and complex (sagittal plan heelstrike running) movements were completed on both the robot and RoboGuide using the same input kinematics. The effect of movement velocity, level of robotic smoothing and number of co-ordinate points defining the trajectory were also investigated. The resulting movement and timings on the robot and Roboguide were compared to the input kinematics as well as to each other. The results indicated small differences in the robot and RoboGuide trajectories for simple linear motions (< 30 mm), that became much greater for the complex footstrike motion (∼ 100 mm). These differences were affected by levels of smoothing and movement velocity and, notably, only with no smoothing did the robot and Roboguide approach the input trajectory. To conclude, RoboGuide does not accurately represent the motion of the FANUCTM robot and therefore only has limited use in supporting the physical emulation of complex sporting movements.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Displacements (start to turn point) for the vertical motion on the robot and RoboGuide for the different smoothing levels, velocities and co-ordinate points applied are shown in Figs 2 – 3. The general trend for both the robot and RoboGuide was for the displacement to drop as the level of robotic smoothing or velocity was increased or fewer additional co-ordinate points were used. The RoboGuide displacements tended to be slightly greater than for the robot (by up to 30 mm). For the robot, the programmed displacement of 400 mm was only reached when no smoothing was used with lower velocities and additional co-ordinate points. For RoboGuide, the programmed displacement of 400mm was reached whenever no smoothing was used. At the other extreme, i.e. maximum smoothing and higher velocities, the displacements only reached two-thirds of the programmed value (~ 250 – 270 mm). Very similar results were obtained for the horizontal motion. The total movement time and time taken to reach the turn point for the vertical movement on the robot and RoboGuide for different levels of robotic smoothing are shown in Fig. 4. Generally, as smoothing level was reduced movement time increased. The robot tended to take longer moving from the start point to the turn point compared to returning to the start point, whereas the opposite was observed on RoboGuide particularly at higher smoothing levels. Similar results were observed for horizontal and corner movements.