Quadruped robots are designed to work in remote or hazardous environments which are unreachable or harmful for humans. In these situations, reliability and adaptability are the most critical issues for the quadruped robot. During the failure of any actuator, the performance of quadruped robot is severely affected. The failure can lead to joint locking or free joint. In the case of free joint, leg joint loses actuator torque and also the capability to support the robot body on the ground. Leg joint also loses resistance to external load and acts as a free rotating hanging link. This article presents strategies for controlling a compliant legged quadruped robot in the presence of free swinging failure. The strategy is motivated by the natural crawling by infants and adapted crawling by persons with specific disabilities. Bond graph has been used for dynamic modeling of the system. The control strategy has been tested both through simulations and experiments conducted on a prototype quadruped robot.
LeeYJHiroseS. Three-legged walking for fault tolerant locomotion of a quadruped robot with demining mission. In: Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, Takamatsu, Japan, 31 October–5 November 2000, pp.973−978. New York: IEEE.
2.
YangJM. Fault-tolerant gaits of quadruped robots for locked joint failures. IEEE T Syst Man Cy C2002; 32(4): 507–516.
3.
YangJM. Crab walking of quadruped robots with a locked joint failure. Adv Robotics2003; 17(9): 863–878.
4.
YangJM. Two-phase discontinuous gaits for quadruped walking machines with a failed leg. Robot Auton Syst2008; 56(9): 728–737.
5.
KrishnanVLPathakPMJainSCet al. Reconfiguration of four-legged walking robot for actuator faults. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2012; 226: 11–26.
6.
EnglishJDMaciejewskiAA. Fault tolerance for kinematically redundant manipulators: anticipating free-swinging joint failures. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Minneapolis, MN, 22–28 April 1996, pp.460−467. New York: IEEE.
7.
EnglishJDMaciejewskiAA. Robotic workspaces after a free-swinging failure. J Intell Robot Syst1997; 19: 55–72.
8.
MostafaKTsaiCSHerI. Alternative gaits for multiped robots with leg failures to retain maneuverability. Int J Adv Robot Syst2010; 7(4): 31–38.
9.
ShinJHLeeJJ. Fault detection and robust fault recovery control for robot manipulators with actuator failures. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Detroit, MI, 10–15 May 1999, pp.861−866. New York: IEEE.
10.
FromPJGravdahlJT. On the mobility and fault tolerance of closed chain manipulators with passive joints. Model Ident Control2008; 29(4): 151–165.
11.
HassanMNotashL. Analysis of active joint failure in parallel robot manipulators. J Mech Des: T ASME2005; 126: 959–968.
12.
Patarinsky-RobsonNMcCarthyJMTumerIY. Failure recovery planning for an arm mounted on an exploratory rover. IEEE T Robot2009; 25(6): 1448–1453.
13.
ChoCJMinBCKimDH. A gait generation for an unlocked joint failure of the quadruped robot with balance weight. In: KimJHGeSSVadakkepatPet al. (eds) Advances in robotics—FIRA robo world congress. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer, 2009, pp.251−261.
14.
GorMMPathakPMSamantarayAKet al. Dynamic modeling and simulation of compliant legged quadruped robot. In: Proceedings of the 1st international and 16th national conference on machines and mechanisms (iNaCoMM2013), IIT Roorkee, Roorkee, India, 18–20 December 2013, pp.7−16. Association of Machine and Mechanisms (AMM).
15.
GorMMPathakPMSamantarayAKet al. Control oriented model-based simulation and experimental studies on a compliant legged quadruped robot. Robot Auton Syst2015; 72: 217–234.
16.
GorMMPathakPMSamantarayAKet al. Control of compliant legged quadruped robots in the workspace. Simulation2015; 91(2): 103–125.
17.
GorMMPathakPMSamantarayAKet al. Reduction in body disturbance of quadruped robot using two moving appendage. In: Proceedings of the international conference on bond graph modeling and simulation (ICBGM’ 2014), Monterey, CA, 6–10 July 2014, vol. 46, no. 8, pp.85−92. Society for Modeling & Simulation International (SCS).
18.
KarnoppDCMargolisDLRosenbergRC. System dynamics: modeling and simulation of mechatronic systems. 4th ed.Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2006.
19.
MukherjeeAKarmakarRSamantarayAK. Bond graph in modeling, simulation and fault identification. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2006.
20.
Dauphin-TanguyG. Les bond graphs. Paris: Hermes Science, 2000.
21.
BorutzkyW. Bond graph methodology: development and analysis of multidisciplinary dynamic system models. London: Springer, 2010.
22.
GawthropPSmithL. Metamodelling: for bond graphs and dynamic systems. London: Prentice Hall, 1996.
23.
BeraTKSamantarayAKKarmakarR. Robust overwhelming control of a hydraulically driven three-degrees-of-freedom parallel manipulator through a simplified fast inverse model. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2010; 224(2): 169–184.
24.
BorutzkyW. Bond graphs for modelling, control and fault diagnosis of engineering systems. London: Springer, 2017.
25.
MerzoukiRSamantarayAKPathakPMet al. Intelligent mechatronic systems—modeling, control and diagnosis. London: Springer-Verlag, 2012.
26.
SamantarayAKGhoshalSK. Sensitivity bond graph approach to multiple fault isolation through parameter estimation. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2007; 221(4): 577–587.
27.
GhoshalSKSamantaSSamantarayAK. Robust fault detection and isolation of hybrid systems with uncertain parameters. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2012; 226(8): 1013–1028.
28.
BorutzkyW. Bond graph model-based fault diagnosis of hybrid systems. London: Springer, 2015.
29.
WangDYuMLowCBet al. Model-based health monitoring of hybrid systems. London: Springer, 2013.
30.
BeraTKMerzoukiROuld BouamamaBet al. Design and validation of a reconfiguration strategy for a redundantly actuated intelligent autonomous vehicle. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2012; 226(8): 1060–1076.
31.
Ould BouamamaBMedjaherKSamantarayAKet al. Supervision of an industrial steam generator. Part I: bond graph modelling. Control Eng Pract2006; 14(1): 71–83.
32.
MedjaherKSamantarayAKOuld BouamamaBet al. Supervision of an industrial steam generator. Part II: online implementation. Control Eng Pract2006; 14(1): 85–96.
33.
Ould BouamamaBMedjaherKBayartMet al. Fault detection and isolation of smart actuators using bond graphs and external models. Control Eng Pract2005; 13(2): 159–175.
34.
AlexanderR McN. The gaits of bipedal and quadrupedal animals. Int J Robot Res1984; 3(2): 49–59.
35.
TedeschiFCafollaDCarboneG. Design and operation of Cassino Hexapod II. Int J Mech Control2014; 15(1): 19–25.
36.
TedeschiFCarboneG. Design of hexapod walking robots: background and challenges. In: HabibMK (ed.) Handbook of research on advancements in robotics and mechatronics. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2015, pp.527−586.
37.
BlankeMKinnaertMLunzeJet al. Diagnosis and fault-tolerant control. London: Springer-Verlag, 2006.
38.
IsermannR. Fault-diagnosis systems: an introduction from fault detection to fault tolerance. London: Springer, 2005.
39.
BiswasGCordierMOLunzeJet al. Diagnosis of complex systems: bridging the methodologies of the FDI and DX communities. IEEE T Syst Man Cy B2004; 34(5): 2159–2162.
40.
FeenstraPJMandersEJMostermanPJet al. Modeling and instrumentation for fault detection and isolation of a cooling system. In: Proceeding of the IEEE south east conference, Nashville, TN, 9 April 2000, pp.365–372. New York: IEEE.
41.
MandersEJNarasimhanSBiswasGet al. A combined qualitative/quantitative approach for fault isolation in continuous dynamic systems. IFAC Proc Vol 2000; 33(11): 505–510.
42.
Ould BouamamaBBiswasGLoureiroRet al. Graphical methods for diagnosis of dynamic systems: review. Annu Rev Control2014; 38(2): 199–219.
43.
BregonABiswasGPulidoBet al. A common framework for compilation techniques applied to diagnosis of linear dynamic systems. IEEE T Syst Man Cy: S2014; 44(7): 863–876.
44.
SamantarayAKOuld BouamamaB. Model-based process supervision. London: Springer-Verlag, 2008.
45.
BeraTKMerzoukiROuld BouamamaBet al. Force control in a parallel manipulator through virtual foundations. Proc IMechE, Part I: J Systems and Control Engineering2012; 226(8): 1088–1106.
46.
BeraTKSamantarayAKKarmakarR. Bond graph modeling of planar prismatic joints. Mech Mach Theory2012; 49(1): 2–20.
47.
SamantarayAKMukherjeeA. User manual of SYMBOLS. Kharagpur, India: High Tech Consultants, S.T.E.P., Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, 2000.
48.
TiernegoMJLBosAM. Modelling the dynamics and kinematics of mechanical systems with multibond graphs. J Frankl Inst1985; 319(1): 37–50.
49.
BreedveldPC. Proposition for an unambiguous vector bond graph notation. J Dyn Syst: T ASME1982; 104: 267–270.
50.
BosAMTiernegoMJL. Formula manipulation in the bond graph modelling and simulation of large mechanical systems. J Frankl Inst1985; 319(1): 51–65.
51.
BehzadipourSKhajepourA. Causality in vector bond graphs and its application to modeling of multi-body dynamic systems. Simul Model Pract Th2006; 14(3): 279–295.
52.
TomeiP. A simple PD controller for robots with elastic joints. IEEE T Automat Contr1991; 36(10): 1208–1213.
53.
LozanoRValeraAAlbertosPet al. PD control of robot manipulators with joint flexibility, actuators dynamics and friction. Automatica1999; 35(10): 1697–1700.
54.
DC motors and drive systems by Maxon Motor, http://www.maxonmotor.in/ (2013, accessed 9 August 2017).
