Simplest mechanical model of stable hopping with inelastic ground-foot impact

Zelei, Ambrus; Insperger, Tamás

doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.11.570

Cited by 2 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The model is placed in gravitational field above smooth, rigid, and horizontal ground. The constrained model, which is shown in the right panel of Figure 1, has been developed based on the unconstrained hopping model that was published in [24] and is shown in Figure 1 left. The unconstrained model in [24] and our new model match each other in terms of physical parameters and DoF.…”

Section: Mechanical Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The constrained model, which is shown in the right panel of Figure 1, has been developed based on the unconstrained hopping model that was published in [24] and is shown in Figure 1 left. The unconstrained model in [24] and our new model match each other in terms of physical parameters and DoF. The difference is the mathematical representation: the upper and lower body has been split into two parts and constrained to each other in the new model.…”

Section: Mechanical Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In paper [24], we introduced a simple 2 DoF model of hopping that demonstrated how the active control provides stable hopping with uniform hopping height despite of the impact-induced energy absorption. The model consists of two mass blocks one above the other and connected to each other by means of an active spring-damper.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The model consists of two mass blocks one above the other and connected to each other by means of an active spring-damper. In [24], we demonstrated a general dynamic analysis method, which is suitable for more complex models, such as the 6 DoF model in [20]. The analysis of the three-segmented hopping model in [20] is based on the dynamic analysis method explained in [24] and demonstrates the applicability for higher DoF systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The present paper introduces and overview a dynamic analysis methodology which is suitable for higher complexity multibody models. The mathematical representation of the models in [20,24] are based on the classical general coordinates of the minimum set. However, in the case of high number of DoF or closed kinematic loops, the application of non-minimum set (also referred as redundant set) of descriptor coordinates is more efficient.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A Tutorial for the Analysis of the Piecewise-Smooth Dynamics of a Constrained Multibody Model of Vertical Hopping

Zana

Bodor

Bencsik

et al. 2018

MCA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contradictory demands are present in the dynamic modeling and analysis of legged locomotion: on the one hand, the high degrees-of-freedom (DoF) descriptive models are geometrically accurate, but the analysis of self-stability and motion pattern generation is extremely challenging; on the other hand, low DoF models of locomotion are thoroughly analyzed in the literature; however, these models do not describe the geometry accurately. We contribute by narrowing the gap between the two modeling approaches. Our goal is to develop a dynamic analysis methodology for the study of self-stable controlled multibody models of legged locomotion. An efficient way of modeling multibody systems is to use geometric constraints among the rigid bodies. It is especially effective when closed kinematic loops are present, such as in the case of walking models, when both legs are in contact with the ground. The mathematical representation of such constrained systems is the differential algebraic equation (DAE). We focus on the mathematical analysis methods of piecewise-smooth dynamic systems and we present their application for constrained multibody models of self-stable locomotion represented by DAE. Our numerical approach is demonstrated on a linear model of hopping and compared with analytically obtained reference results.

show abstract

Section: Mechanical Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mechanical Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations