Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by 24.213.123.102 (talk) to last revision by JJMC89 bot III: nonconstructive edits |
m →Some current systems: HTTP to HTTPS for Cornell University |
||
(15 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Robot that can rearrange its own parts}}
{{See also|Modular design}}
{{more citations needed|date=February 2010}}
{{External links|date=November 2024}}
'''Modular self-reconfiguring
For example, a robot made of such components could assume a [[worm]]-like shape to move through a narrow pipe, reassemble into something with [[spider]]-like legs to cross uneven terrain, then form a third arbitrary object (like a ball or wheel that can spin itself) to move quickly over a fairly flat terrain; it can also be used for making "fixed" objects, such as walls, shelters, or buildings.
Line 37 ⟶ 39:
* '''Heterogeneous''' modular robot systems have different modules, each of which do specialized functions, forming a structure suitable to perform a task. An advantage is compactness, and the versatility to design and add units to perform any task. A commonly described disadvantage is an increase in complexity of design, manufacturing, and simulation methods.[[File:Taxonomy_of_the_reconfigurable_robots.png|thumb|Conceptual representation for intra-, inter- and nested-reconfiguration under taxonomy of reconfigurable robots]]
Other modular robotic systems exist which are not self-reconfigurable, and thus do not formally belong to this family of robots though they may have similar appearance. For example, [[Self-assembly|self-assembling]] systems may be composed of multiple modules but cannot dynamically control their target shape. Similarly, tensegrity robotics may be composed of multiple interchangeable modules but cannot self-reconfigure. Self-reconfigurable robotic systems feature reconfigurability compared to their fixed-morphology counterparts and it can be defined as the extent/degree to which a self-reconfigurable robot or robotic systems can transform and evolve to another meaningful configuration with a certain degree of autonomy or human intervention.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Tan|first1=Ning|last2=Hayat|first2=Abdullah Aamir|last3=Elara|first3=Mohan Rajesh|last4=Wood|first4=Kristin L.|date=2020|title=A Framework for Taxonomy and Evaluation of Self-Reconfigurable Robotic Systems|journal=IEEE Access|volume=8|pages=13969–13986|doi=10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2965327|issn=2169-3536|doi-access=free|bibcode=2020IEEEA...813969T }} {{CC-notice|cc=by4|url=https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8954702}}
</ref> The reconfigurable system can also be classified according to the mechanism reconfigurability.
Line 60 ⟶ 62:
==Application areas==
===Space exploration===
Line 356 ⟶ 358:
|Elara, Prathap, Hayat, Parween (SUTD, Singapore)
|2019
|-
| [https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9738480 Soft Lattice Modules]
| Lattice, Soft Modular 3D
| Zhao et al., (Dartmouth)
| 2022
|-
| [https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/10146508 StarBlocks]
| Hybrid, Deformable 3D
| Zhao et al., (Dartmouth)
| 2023
|-
|AuxBots <ref>Lillian Chin; Max Burns; Gregory Xie; Daniela Rus. "[https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9976216 Flipper-Style Locomotion Through Strong Expanding Modular Robots]" in IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters ( Volume: 8, Issue: 2, Page(s): 528 - 535, February 2023)</ref>
|Chain, 3D
|Chin, Burns, Xie, Rus (MIT, USA)
|2023
|-
| [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-60982-0 Tensegrity-Blocks]
| Hybrid, Tensegrity Modular 3D
| Zhao, Jiang, Chen, Bekris, Balkcom, (Dartmouth)
| 2025
|-
|}
Line 376 ⟶ 392:
;AMOEBA-I (2005)
AMOEBA-I, a three-module reconfigurable mobile robot was developed in Shenyang Institute of Automation (SIA), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) by Liu J G et al.[
Ref_1: see [
Ref_2: see [https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11432-007-0068-8]
Line 385 ⟶ 401:
Three large scale prototypes were built in attempt to demonstrate dynamically programmable three-dimensional stochastic reconfiguration in a neutral-buoyancy environment. The first prototype used electromagnets for module reconfiguration and interconnection. The modules were 100 mm cubes and weighed 0.81 kg. The second prototype used stochastic fluidic reconfiguration and interconnection mechanism. Its 130 mm cubic modules weighed 1.78 kg each and made reconfiguration experiments excessively slow. The current third implementation inherits the fluidic reconfiguration principle. The lattice grid size is 80 mm, and the reconfiguration experiments are under way.<ref>
[
[
</ref>
|