Grippers and End-Effectors

57
Wenjie Chen, Su Zhao, and Siew Loong Chow

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2036
Basic Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2037
Mechanical Grippers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2037
Vacuum Grippers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2038
Magnetic Gripper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2039
Selection of Grippers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2040
Transmission Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2041
Mechanical Gripper Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2042
Adaptive Gripper Mechanisms (Underactuated Grippers) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2046
Actuators and Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2053
Actuators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2053
Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2056
Compliant Gripper Design: A Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2059
Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2059
Modeling and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2061
Optimization of Flexural Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2064
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2067
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2069
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2069

Abstract
Grippers and end effectors are devices through which the robot interacts with the
environment around it. This chapter introduces basic concepts, mechanisms, and
actuation of grippers used in industrial applications. The purpose is to provide
readers with guidelines on design and selection of suitable grippers for their
particular applications.

W. Chen (*) • S. Zhao • S.L. Chow

Mechatronics Group, Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology, Singapore
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected].
edu.sg

# Springer-Verlag London 2015 2035

A.Y.C. Nee (ed.), Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology,
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4670-4_96
2036 W. Chen et al.

Introduction

In robotics, an end effector is a device at the end of a robotic arm, designed to

interact with the environment (http://www.gibsonengineering.com). The nature of
the end effectors depends on the intended task. Although end effectors may be
broadly described in two main categories: grippers and tools, in robotics they are
more commonly referred to as grippers (FESTO Website. http://www.festo.com/;
http://www.piab.com/).
A robotic gripper can be classified either by its gripping principle or by the
method of closing/opening. According to the principles, a gripper can be classified
as mechanical, vacuum, or magnetic grippers (FESTO Website. http://www.festo.
com/; http://www.piab.com/; http://www.liftrite.ie/; http://www.fipa.com/). In
terms of the closing/opening methods, a gripper can be either an angular or parallel
type. If considering the centering requirement, a gripper which can centralize an
object during gripping is termed as a synchronous gripper, and conversely an
asynchronous gripper does not have the feature of object centering. Generally,
mechanical grippers with a parallel closing/opening manner are often synchronous
and able to provide a good part centering function. In industrial applications the
selection of grippers depends on the tasks, specific parts, and requirements (Wolf
et al. 2005; Ceccarelli and Gradini 1992).
At present most industrial robotic grippers are designed for specific purposes and
must be redesigned for different tasks (Okada 1979; Chen 1982; Monkman
et al. 2007; Crisman et al. 1996; Robotics Bible 2011). Generally, most grippers
have to be modified by the gripper manufacturer to accommodate new object
geometry. Shape-specific grippers only allow the gripper to grasp objects with
very specific geometry. Some shape-specific grippers can be changed to accom-
modate a variety of object geometries (Mock 2009). However the change of gripper
often requires significant time, resulting in production delays.
There is a growing demand for more generic, multi-usage robotic grippers
(Laliberte and Gosselin 1998; Belter et al. 2011). A low-cost method is to utilize
hard stops that can customize the stroke length of a gripper to provide flexible
openings (Aukes et al. 2012). Modular or detachable fingers equipped with sensors
are an alternative for engineers to design multi-usage flexibility in their devices. In
addition, multi-fingered grippers are also popular for grasping items that need firm
holding and dexterous manipulation. Multi-usage grippers allow robots to grip
multiple parts with different geometries, thereby increasing the adaptability of the
robotic work cell and reducing the time for the tool change.
Usually the number of actuators present in a gripper determines its degrees of
freedom. A greater number of actuators increase the versatility of the gripping
device, but it also creates issues of larger size, complexity, and increased weight of
the device. A class of devices called underactuated devices has fewer actuators
than their degrees of freedom (Laliberte et al. 2002; Birglen et al. 2008). The
concept of underactuation allows a robotic gripper to adjust itself to an irregular-
shaped object without complex control strategy and numerous sensors (Siciliano
and Khatib 2008; Peerdeman et al. 2013; Odhner and Dollar 2011; Herder and
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2037

Kragten 2010; Belter and Dollar 2011; Krut et al. 2010; Odhner et al. 2013; Aukes
et al. 2011; Dollar and Howe 2010; Belter et al. 2013; Birglen et al. 2002; Air
Muscles From Shadow Robot http://www.shadowrobot.com; Gengenbach
et al. 1997). Therefore, underactuated grippers are able to provide a greater
gripping versatility. They are more efficient, consume less power, simpler, and
generally more reliable than their fully actuated counterparts (Odhner and Dollar
2011; Gengenbach et al. 1997).
The design of robotic grippers is a complex process (Zhao 2007; Physik
Instrumente; Lexcellent 2013), which involves different aspects of mechanics,
actuation, and control (Birglen and Gosselin 2004; Frecker et al. 1997; Chen and
Lin 2008). In the initial design stage, mechanism types and actuation methods have
to be considered in priority. Although the design depends on the specific grasping
task, the design requirements are generally focused on operational reliability,
ability to provide adequate (often adjustable) force, shape/force matched prehen-
sion, as well as good adaptability to handling operations.
This chapter is organized as follows. Basic concepts of robotic grippers are
described in section “Basic Concepts.” Some typical mechanisms of two- or three-
fingered grippers are introduced in section “Transmission Mechanisms.” In section
“Actuators and Sensor,” some of actuator components and sensors used in robotic
grippers are briefed. As a case study, the design process of a compliant gripper is
described in section “Compliant Gripper Design: A Case Study.” Finally, the
chapter is concluded in section “Conclusion.”

Basic Concepts

A gripper used in robots typically works by means of mechanical-, vacuum-, or

magnetic-based grasping methods. This section will introduce these three types of
grippers and their selection guideline.

Mechanical Grippers

Mechanical grippers grasp objects through the clamping forces exerted by fingers.
According to the methods of actuation, the mechanical grippers can be further
divided into electric grippers and pneumatic grippers.
Electric grippers: Electric grippers use motors to make their fingers move. The
advantages are that speed and position can be easily controlled. Adaptive electric
end effectors are a good choice for many applications such as bin picking, handling,
machine tending, and more. Some commercial electric grippers are shown in Fig. 1.
Pneumatic grippers: Pneumatic grippers utilize air to actuate the fingers. Usu-
ally, compressed air is forced through a piston in order to make it move. This
movement can be parallel or angular (Fig. 2).
The mechanisms for motion transmission of mechanical grippers will be
discussed in detail in section “Transmission Mechanisms.”
2038 W. Chen et al.

Fig. 1 Commercial electric grippers (http://www.gibsonengineering.com)

Fig. 2 Commercial pneumatic grippers (FESTO Website. http://www.festo.com/)

Vacuum Grippers

Vacuum grippers (Fig. 3) make use of the vacuum force to hold objects. This type
of grippers will provide good handling if the object surface is smooth, flat, and
clean. Its performance depends on the surface properties of the object being
grasped.
Vacuum cups, also commonly known as suction cups, are used as the gripping
device. Generally, the vacuum cups (suction cups) are in the round shape. These
cups are made of rubber or other elastomeric materials. Sometimes, it is also made
of soft plastics.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2039

Fig. 3 Vacuum gripper and suction cups (http://www.piab.com/)

Fig. 4 Electromagnetic grippers (http://www.liftrite.ie/)

Vacuum grippers are commonly used in heavy industries, automobile assembly

lines, and compact disk manufacturing. It is also used in the packaging industry for
labeling, sealing, bottling, and box manufacturing.

Magnetic Gripper

The magnetic gripper is most commonly used in an end effector for grasping
ferrous materials. It can be classified into two common types, namely, magnetic
grippers with electromagnets and permanent magnets.
Electromagnets: Electromagnetic grippers (Fig. 4) include a controller unit and a
DC power source for handling the materials. This type of grippers is easy to control
and very effective in releasing the part at the end of the operation. In order to reduce
the residual magnetism on the part, the polarity level is minimized by the controller
unit before the electromagnet is turned off to release the part.
2040 W. Chen et al.

Fig. 5 Permanent magnetic grippers (http://www.liftrite.ie/)

Permanent magnets: Unlike the electromagnet-based gripper, the permanent

magnet-based grippers do not require any external power for handling the materials
(Fig. 5). After the gripper grasps a part, an additional device called as stripper push-
off pin is required to separate the part from the magnet. This device is incorporated
at the side of the gripper.
The advantage of this permanent magnet-based gripper is that it can be used in
hazardous environments and explosion-proof apparatus because there is no electric
supply and potential electric sparking.
Apart from being simple and low maintenance, other advantages include no
accidental release of part due to power failures.

Selection of Grippers

Grippers are a key integral part of robotic automation, and in order to ensure the
overall success of the automation projects, choosing the right gripper is essential.
From a process and part perspective, the following technical factors must be taken
into account when choosing the right gripper.

• Task: The tasks to be done by a robot often determine the type of gripper. A very
fast loading/unloading requirement will favor vacuum cups or magnetic grip-
pers, but a slower process will favor mechanical grippers for accuracy.
• Cycle time: The cycle time for the process will determine the speed needed for
opening and closing the gripper which in turn will determine the acceleration.
Robot maximum acceleration possible is determined by the end payload, which
is the total sum of the gripper weight and the part weight. More gripper weight
means the robot has a reduced part carrying capacity.
• Precision need: For assembly work which requires high precision, a mechanical
gripper, actuated by servo electric motors, would be ideal. Part sorting processes
will require gripper adaptability in terms of part size and positioning, which can
be fulfilled by the choice of a mechanical gripper with servo control.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2041

• Environmental need: There is a diverse range of industrial environments

which the end effectors function and this affects the selection. In the food
and pharmaceutical industries, for example, hydraulic-actuated grippers are
forbidden since there is a risk of oil leakage and contamination. In many
cleanroom industries vacuum and pneumatic grippers are not recommended
since they can create turbulent airflow and stir up dust particles. Grippers
used in harsh environments like foundries, machining, and welding are
exposed to dirt and particles so they must be designed with protection fea-
tures. Corrosive or toxic environments in nuclear or chemical industries also
require special considerations to ensure the gripper’s reliability and safe
usage.
• Clamping force: Calculation of the clamping force must take account for part
weight, maximum acceleration during the process, surface friction, and the
maximum stresses sustained by the part and gripper.
• Parts: Knowledge of the part to be manipulated is crucial in determining which
gripper should be used. The main factors are:
– Size: Except for vacuum and magnetic grippers, all other grippers need to
grip parts with a parallel or angular closing motion. This means the bigger the
part, the more reach is required by gripper fingers. The gripper must have
enough reach to handle the parts but not in excess since longer fingers require
more torque on the tool actuator and the robot.
– Shape: The shape of an object will determine the type of grasping. Flat
surfaces can be handled by vacuum- or magnet-type grippers, while other
shapes will be handled by jaws, claws, or multiple fingers. When using
encompassing or fingertip grasps, finger reach must be taken into account.
– Weight: To ensure firm grasping, a gripper must have enough force to
withstand the inertial and dynamic forces generated due to the weight of the
part and the motion during the process. A designer cannot simply use max-
imum clamping force since damage to the part or the gripper may occur.
– Surface type: The type of surface texture and roughness is an important factor
when estimating friction. In turn the friction is used as input for the grasping
force.

Transmission Mechanisms

The design of a gripper can be performed according to many possible design

concepts and methods (Wolf et al. 2005; Ceccarelli and Gradini 1992). One of
the main issues is to determine a proper transmission mechanism. According to
statistical studies, 60–70 % of objects with cylindrical, parallelepiped, and pyrami-
dal shapes can be gripped using two or three fingers grasping (Monkman
et al. 2007). This is why two- and three-fingered grasps are quite common in
industrial applications. This section will therefore focus on introduction of trans-
mission mechanisms of grippers with two or three fingers.
2042 W. Chen et al.

Mechanical Gripper Mechanisms

Finger Movement Classification

Generally, the opening and closing of gripper fingers can be actuated by pivoting,
linear or translational movement.

Pivoting Movement
In this movement, the rotation of fingers is conducted with the fixed pivot points of
the gripper for providing open and close actions. A linkage mechanism is often used
for achieving this movement. Some of typical examples with the fixed pivoting
points are shown in Fig. 6 (Chen 1982).

Linear or Translational Movement

Figure 7 shows some typical structures of grippers with linear or translational
movement. During linear movement, the guide rails are used to move the fingers
parallel to each other for closing and opening. In translational movement, the
fingers are maintained in parallel orientation. As in pivoting movements, linkage
mechanisms are used for actuation.

Mechanisms for Actuation

Actuation of finger motions can be accomplished by anyone of these kinematic
types: linkage, screw, gear and rack, rope and pulley, or cam actuation.

Linkage Actuation
A linkage is an assembly of links connected by joints to manage forces
and movement. The design of linkage actuation helps in finding out the
conversion of gripper’s input force into the gripping force, the time taken to
actuate the gripper, and the maximum capability to open the finger. There
are many possible kinematic designs, and some of them are shown in Fig. 8
(Chen 1982).

Screw Actuation
The screw-type actuated gripper (Fig. 9) consists of a screw connected with a
threaded block. To rotate the screw, a motor is used along with a speed reduction
device. If the screw is turned in one direction, the threaded block is moved in one
direction. Similarly, the threaded block moves in the opposite direction if the screw
is turned in the other direction. As the threaded block is attached with the gripper, it
makes the fingers open and close.

Gear and Rack Actuation

In this actuation, the gear and rack are connected with a piston, which provides
linear-type movement. The two partial pinion gears are driven when the rack is
moved. As it is linked with gripper, the opening and closing of fingers are accom-
plished. Some examples of this type mechanism are shown in Fig. 10.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2043

a b c

Fig. 6 Kinematic schemes of some pivoting-type grippers (Chen 1982)

b
a dedo

Fig. 7 Kinematic schemes of some parallel grasping grippers (Chen 1982)

a b

c d

Fig. 8 Grippers actuated by linkage mechanisms (Monkman et al. 2007)

2044 W. Chen et al.

a b c

d f
e

Fig. 9 Grippers actuated by screw mechanisms (Chen 1982)

a b c

d e f

Fig. 10 Grippers driven by gear and rack mechanisms (Chen 1982)

Rope and Pulley Actuation

In this actuation, a tension device is required to control the rope tension and
keep it taut during movement in the pulley. When the pulley is activated in one
direction for opening the gripper, the tension device will allow the change in
rope length while maintaining the tension. Similarly, the gripper is closed by
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2045

a b

WIRE
PULLEY

ROPE

OBJECT
PULLEY LINK

Fig. 11 Grippers driven by rope and pulley mechanisms (Monkman et al. 2007; Crisman
et al. 1996)

a b c

d
e f

Fig. 12 Gripper actuated by cam mechanisms (Crisman et al. 1996)

activating the pulley on the other direction. Figure 11 illustrates two gripper
mechanisms driven by rope and pulley.

Cam Actuation
As a form of linkage-actuated gripper, the cam actuation types have a wide range of
designs for opening and closing the gripper fingers as shown in Fig. 12. One type
(Fig. 12a) is briefly described here. A cam-actuated gripper with spring-loaded
follower can be used to provide open and close actions of fingers. The spring
function is to force the gripper to close if the cam is moved in one direction,
while the movement of cam on the other direction causes the gripper to open. This
type is useful for holding various sizes of work parts (Crisman et al. 1996).
There are other miscellaneous mechanisms, for example, diaphragm or expand-
able bladder mechanisms (Robotics Bible 2011; Mock 2009), which are inflated or
2046 W. Chen et al.

deflated to open and close the fingers. For more information of other actuation types
of grippers, readers can refer to the book “Robot Grippers” (Monkman et al. 2007).

Adaptive Gripper Mechanisms (Underactuated Grippers)

Adaptive gripper design often adopts the principle of underactuated mechanisms.

An underactuated mechanism is defined as one which has fewer actuators than its
DOFs (Laliberte and Gosselin 1998; Belter et al. 2011; Odhner 2012; Aukes
et al. 2012; Laliberte et al. 2002). The concept of underactuation allows grippers
to envelope the objects to be grasped and automatically adapt to their shape, size, or
position with even one actuator and without complex control strategies. While a
finger is closing on an object, the configuration of the finger at any time is
determined by the external constraints associated with the object. When the object
is fully grasped, the force applied at the actuator is distributed among the finger
joints (phalanges).
There is a large diversity of mechanical devices which enable a hand to adapt to
the geometry of an object. Generally, an underactuated motion can be implemented
through the following types: (a) differential (Birglen et al. 2008; Siciliano and
Khatib 2008), (b) compliant (Peerdeman et al. 2013; Odhner and Dollar 2011),
(c) selective self-locking (Herder and Kragten 2010; Belter and Dollar 2011), or
(d) a combination of these three properties (Krut et al. 2010; Odhner et al. 2013).

Basic Principle of Adaptability

Differential Mechanisms
Figure 13 illustrates a concept of underactuation through a differential mechanism
(Laliberte and Gosselin 1998; Laliberte et al. 2002) which has one input and two
outputs. The finger is actuated through the lower link, as shown by the arrow in the
figure. Since there are two DOFs and one actuator, one (two minus one) elastic
element must be used. In the present example, an extension spring tends to maintain
the finger fully extended. A mechanical limit is used to keep the phalanges aligned
under the action of this spring when no external forces are applied on the phalanges.
The sequence of the phalanges motion is as follows:

(a) The finger is in its initial configuration and no external forces are present. The
finger behaves as a single rigid body in rotation about a fixed pivot.
(b) The proximal phalanx makes contact with the object.
(c) The second phalanx is moving with respect to the first one – the second phalanx
is moving away from the mechanical limit – and the finger is closing on the
object since the proximal phalanx is constrained by the object. During this
phase, the actuator has to produce the force required to extend the spring.
(d) Finally, both phalanges are in contact with the object, and the finger has
completed the shape adaptation phase. The actuator force is distributed
among the two phalanges in contact with the object.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2047

Fig. 13 Grasping sequence performed by an underactuated finger (Laliberte and Gosselin 1998)

Fig. 14 Underactuated finger with compliant element (Siciliano and Khatib 2008)

Compliant Elements
Figure 14 shows an example using the compliant element to achieve adaptive
feature (Siciliano and Khatib 2008). The spring (compliant element) gives exten-
sibility to the tendon. It allows the motion between the first and second link when an
external force is applied to the distal one to be decoupled, providing the possibility
to fit the shape of objects. A design task is the choice of the stiffness of the
deformable element in order to achieve at the same time a strong grasp and a
good shape adaptability.

Selective Self-Locking Device

In this strategy, the motion generated by only one motor is transmitted and
distributed to several joints. Actuation and control of each joint is obtained by
means of devices like self-acting clutch, brake, or self-locking mechanisms. Var-
ious finger trajectories can be attained through selectively locking certain joint
rotations. Figure 15 illustrates an underactuated finger with a friction pawl locking
system (Peerdeman et al. 2013).
2048 W. Chen et al.

Distal
phalanx

Drum

Friction
pawl

Solenoid
actuator

Fig. 15 An underactuated gripper by means of joint locking (Peerdeman et al. 2013)

Examples of Underactuated Grippers (Hands)

Due to increasing demands from industry, a few underactuated fingers have been
proposed in research. Some of them are based on linkages, while others are based
on tendon-actuated mechanisms. This section describes the design features of some
typical underactuated (grippers) hands.

Underactuated Gripper Adaptive to Position Offset

The two-DOF prismatic gripper as shown in Fig. 16 is a simple underactuated
gripper for objects that are not centered in the grasp. The system consists of two
fingers constrained to move only in linear translation. Each finger has certain spring
and a drive cable that exerts force on the fingers. The main actuator tendon pulls on
the system with force Ta. In this setup, the drive tendons are decoupled to two
single actuators TR and TL using a floating pulley system. The floating pulley acts as
a simple differential to match the tension force in each output tendon (Peerdeman
et al. 2013; Odhner and Dollar 2011).
The floating pulley mechanism couples one to two output drive cables and the
gripper is therefore underactuated. It also permits the system to adapt to object
offsets, u, within the grasp. Figure 16c shows the finger displacements XL and XR as
the actuator force increases, demonstrating this adaptability.

Selectively Compliant Underactuated Hand

The hand (Fig. 17), also called SRI hand (Belter and Dollar 2011; Krut et al. 2010),
consists of three identical fingers each actuated by a twisted string actuator. Each
finger has three phalanges connected in series with a cable running along pulleys in
the joints, terminated at the fingertip (Fig. 18a). Since there are three independent
degrees of freedom in the finger and only one actuator, springs are attached across
each joint to provide return actuation and to balance the closing tendon force
between each phalanx. Extending from each phalanx into the joints is an interleaved
set of surfaces used to electrostatically lock each joint (Fig. 18b). Covering each
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2049

XL XR XL XR

Phase 1 Phase 2 FR
u u

TL TR TL TR
K K K K

Ta Ta

XL XR

Phase 3 FR
FL

TL TR
K K

Ta

Fig. 16 Phase of grasp acquisition in the prismatic two-DOF gripper (Peerdeman et al. 2013)

phalanx is a set of capacitive force sensors. Tendon tension is measured using load
cells integrated into the tendon path, allowing for force control using the tendon
tension. The palm has one additional motor to enable reconfiguration of the finger
positions and orientations, allowing for opposed, spherical, and interlaced grasps.

A Compliant Underactuated Hand

This hand, also called iHY (iRobot-Harvard-Yale) hand, was designed to address
the need for a durable, inexpensive, moderately dexterous hand. It has three fingers
and five actuators (Fig. 19): Each of the three fingers has a single flexor tendon
running the length of the finger, and the adduction/abduction degree of freedom on
the finger pair is driven by a fourth. A fifth actuator powers an extensor tendon on
the proximal joint of the thumb. This actuator allows the link angle of the thumb
proximal and distal joints to be set independently and is particularly useful for tasks
in which the tip of the thumb needs to move arbitrarily in the plane, such as the
finger pivoting.
The iHY fingers (Fig. 20) utilize a two-link modular design. The proximal pin
joint connecting the finger to the hand is mounted on a circular magnetic base which
serves as a modular attachment point and also as a high-force breakaway coupling
to ensure that fingers will be minimally damaged in a catastrophic collision. Spring-
loaded “pogo pin” electric contacts further simplify the modular fingers so that
replacing a finger can be accomplished by snapping the finger in place, then
attaching the flexor tendon. A tendon attachment point for the antagonistic tendon
used on the thumb is included at the base of the proximal link on all fingers, so that
any finger can be interchangeably used in any position on the hand.
2050 W. Chen et al.

Fig. 17 The SRI hand

a Pulleys

Plastic Shell Metal Skeleton

Tendon
Sensor Skin

b Electrostatic Brake

Fig. 18 (a) Pulleys and cable routing. (b) Brake

57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2051

Fig. 19 The iHY hand

(Dollar and Howe 2010)

Finger Cross Section

Printed Circuit Board

Pad Pad
Pin Joint w/
Tendon Return Spring
Embedded Tendon Sheath

Flexure

Fingermail Thumb Tendon Attachment Point

Magnetic Breakaway Base

Pogo Pin Electrical Coupling

10mm

Fig. 20 Cross-sectional view of the iHY finger design (Dollar and Howe 2010)

One of the more important features of the iHY finger is its high compliance,
especially at the distal flexure. The distal flexure hinge allows out-of-plane motion.
The proximal pin joint includes a torsion spring, which provides the proximal joint
with some elasticity. This compliance serves several purposes: first, because the
fingers do not have extensor tendons, the joint elasticity alone extends the fingers
when the flexor tendons are relaxed. This is particularly useful when operating the
hand in an unknown environment where collision with obstacles is likely, so that
fingers merely deform in response to unplanned contact. The torsional compliance
at the distal flexure joint provides a similar robustness to the fingertips for out-of-
plane contact. The second purpose served by passive finger compliance is passive
adaptation to the shape of the object grasped, which removes the need to detect and
react to small variations in surface geometry.

Linkage-Driven Underactuated Hand

This hand was developed by the Laval University and also named as Self Adaptive
Robotic Auxiliary Hand (SARAH). It comprises three identical underactuated
2052 W. Chen et al.

Fig. 21 CAD model of the

Laval hand (Birglen
et al. 2002, 2008)

fingers and each has three DOFs. The hand includes ten DOFs in total but only has
two actuators. One actuator is used to control the opening/closing of all three
fingers, while another actuator is used to drive the orientation of the fingers. The
overall system is illustrated in Fig. 21 (Birglen et al. 2002, 2008).
Each of the three identical fingers is mounted on an additional revolute joint
whose axis is located on the vertex of an equilateral triangle and oriented normal to
the plane of the triangle. The orientation transmission uses one actuator to drive the
two rotating fingers. This rotation is synchronized by the gearing system and the
fingers rotate in opposite directions. If some fingers are blocked, the remaining
fingers will continue to close until they properly grasp the object. The force is fully
applied only when all the fingers have properly made contact with the object or the
palm. With these additional revolute joints, the hands can be reconfigured by
modifying the orientation of the fingers to adapt to the general geometry of the
object to be grasped.
The mechanism of the three-DOF underactuated finger is shown in Fig. 22. It is
composed of two parallelograms mounted in series. Two mechanical limits with
springs at the top and bottom ends of the mechanism allow precision grasps to be
performed and the adaptation to power grasps if necessary.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2053

Fig. 22 Grasp diagram of the finger mechanism: (a) Parallel. (b) Power (Birglen et al. 2002,
2008)

Actuators and Sensor

Actuators

Actuators are the “muscles” of a gripper, converting stored energy into movement.
The most commonly used actuators for grippers include electric motors that spin a
wheel or gear and linear actuators that provide linear motions. But the actual
selection of actuators depends on the specific properties of each gripper design.
There are many other alternative types of actuators, powered by electricity,
chemicals, or compressed air, to suit different requirements.

Electric Motors
Electric motors convert electric energy into mechanical energy. They are the
commonly used actuators in both robots and grippers. Stepping motors are used
in low-cost proportional systems instead of pneumatic drives. Servo motors (syn-
chronous motors) are often used for demanding applications in which sensitive
force and position regulation are needed. These motors are often preferred in
systems with lighter loads and where the predominant form of motion is rotational,
for example, in screw actuation, gear and rack actuation, rope and pulley actuation,
and cam actuation mechanisms.
2054 W. Chen et al.

In order to select the appropriate electric motors, the following factors should be
calculated and evaluated:

• Number of motor revolutions needed

• Moment of load
• Moment of inertia from moving masses
• Acceleration torque
• Moment of friction

The suitable motor can be selected to meet the above torque and speed require-
ments. Finally, based on the current and voltage requirement of the motor, a
controller can be selected.

Linear Actuators
Various types of linear actuators move in and out instead of rotating and often have
quicker direction changes, particularly when very large forces are needed such as
with industrial robotics.
The most frequently used linear actuators in grippers are pneumatic drives.
Actuation is realized either by pneumatic cylinders integrated within the gripper
housing or by externally mounted cylinders. Such prime movers are robust and
resistant to overload. The actuation can be single direction cylinders with spring
return or double direction. The actuation force F can be calculated as

F ¼ PAη (1)

in which P is the effective pressure (pressure difference at two sides of the

cylinder), A the cross-sectional area of the cylinder and η the efficiency (typically
between 0.7 and 0.9).
Another interesting pneumatic drive is pneumatic artificial muscles, also known
as air muscles (Air Muscles From Shadow Robot. http://www.shadowrobot.com) or
fluidic muscles (FESTO Website. http://www.festo.com/). They are special tubes
that contract (typically up to 40 %) when air is forced inside them.

Vacuum Suction Cup

Vacuum suction is one of the oldest astrictive gripping methods which can provide
a continuous holding force without the application of compressive stress. It has
been used extensively throughout industry. The key components are normally
elastomeric suction cups or caps. The cups can be either active or passive. Active
suction cups require typically vacuum about 70 % of atmosphere. The simplest
implementation is to force a flexible suction cup against a surface. Air is expelled
by a vacuum pump or vacuum suction nozzle as the flexible polymer cup is
compressed.
In passive suction caps the vacuum is produced simply by pressing a disk sucker
having a relatively soft rim against a flat surface. Mechanical pressure can be
applied by hand or machine. Therefore, the suckers do not require further
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2055

operational force and can also be applied to slightly curved surfaces. These grippers
are not affected by failure in the power supply, though leakage losses cannot be
compensated for.
Grippers based on vacuum cups can be used for both large and heavy parts and
very small components in the semiconductor industry and micro-assemblies
(Gengenbach et al. 1997).

Magnetic Actuator
Similar to vacuum suction, magnetic actuators can exert attractive force on ferrous
materials which can be used for gripper design. The implementation can be in both
passive and active forms.
A simple permanent magnet can be used to acquire ferrous objects. Under
normal temperature, permanent magnets maintain their magnetic force almost
indefinitely. External power supply is no needed; thus, the design can be extremely
simple with low maintenance and well suited for flat materials, rods, and iron tubes.
Electromagnetic actuator can be made from coils wound on cores of high
magnetic permeability. The attractive force may be calculated and designed
according to actual requirement. By controlling the current in the coil, the force
can be actively controlled.
Magnetic grippers have simple and compact construction with no moving parts.
The energy supply is simple with high efficiency. They can be applied with a wide
range of object sizes and shapes. However, there are several disadvantages and
limitations associated with magnetic grippers. They can only be used with ferrous
materials (iron, nickel, cobalt). Extended release time is needed due to magnetic
reminisce. This can also lead to the collection of fine magnetic particles and dust
over prolonged time. Due to permeating effects of the magnetic field, separation of
thin sheet objects from one another is difficult, and the object can become slightly
magnetized.

Piezoelectric Actuators and Motors

Piezoelectric actuators convert electric energy into mechanical force and motion
based on piezoelectric effect. According to the electric drive method, they can be
divided into two categories: the resonant-driven piezoelectric actuators and the
nonresonant-driven piezoelectric actuators. The resonant-driven piezoelectric actu-
ators include ultrasonic transducers and ultrasonic motors. Piezoelectric motors or
ultrasonic motors are the recent alternatives to DC motors. They work on a
fundamentally different principle, whereby tiny piezoceramic elements, vibrating
in ultrasonic frequency range, cause linear or rotary motion. The advantages of
these motors are nanometer resolution, available force for their size, and holding
force when powered off (Zhao 2007). These motors are already available commer-
cially; however, real industrial applications in gripper design are rarely seen.
The nonresonant-driven piezoelectric actuators include various one-stroke actu-
ators such as piezo-stacks and benders (Physik Instrumente). Their operating
frequency range is from quasistatic up to about half of the first resonant frequency
of the mechanical system. These actuators are very compact in size but can generate
2056 W. Chen et al.

relatively large force up to several kilonewtons. However, typical strain levels that
can be obtained by piezoelectric materials are in the range of 0.1 %. This strain
occurs at field strength in the region of 1,000 V/mm. In order to increase the total
displacement and to reduce the driving voltage, these actuators are often built in
stack of very thin layers which are connected in parallel electrically. Typical stroke
of multilayer piezoelectric actuators is from a few to several tens micrometers.
Thus, they are mostly used in small grippers in which high precision and small
strokes are needed.
Beside the abovementioned actuators, many other types of actuator are avail-
able, but less commonly used due to their limitations. These include muscle wire,
also known as Shape Memory Alloy, Nitinol, or Flexinol Wire, which is a material
that contracts slightly (typically under 5 %) when electricity runs through it. They
have been used for some small robot applications (Lexcellent 2013). EAPs or
EPAMs are a new plastic material that can contract substantially (up to 380 %
activation strain) from electricity.

Sensors

Sensors allow the end effector or gripper to receive information about the environ-
ment or internal components. This is essential for them to perform their tasks and
act upon any changes in the environment to calculate the appropriate response.
There are three types of sensing which are related to the end effector or gripper
technology:

• Proximity or presence detection of objects to be manipulated

• Verification of gripping or release
• Sensing of object position and orientation

Numerous types of sensors exist which can be used to fulfill the abovementioned
required sensing requirements. The selection of sensor is independent of the chosen
control strategy, the environment, and the physical design of the end effector or
gripper. The rest of this section will give a brief introduction of the most commonly
used classes of sensors relevant to the task of sensing in grippers.

Proximity Sensors
Proximity sensors are noncontact sensors which deliver a signal from which
information concerning the instantaneous distance to a given object can be derived.
The signal coupling can be realized by inductive, capacitive, fluidic, optical, or
acoustic means.

Inductive Sensors
Inductive sensors are also called as eddy current sensors. They are suitable for
electrically conducting objects, usually metals. The sensor consists of an induction
loop. Electric current generates a magnetic field, which collapses generating a
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2057

current that falls asymptotically toward zero from its initial level when the input
electricity ceases. The inductance of the loop changes according to the material
inside it, and since metals are much more effective inductors than other materials,
the presence of metal increases the current flowing through the loop. This change
can be detected by sensing circuitry, which can signal to some other device
whenever metal is detected. The sensing range can be up to several centimeters,
but recognition of some alloys and carbon fiber parts presents problems. The
detection can also be dependent on the thickness of highly conducting objects.

Capacitive Sensors
Capacitive sensors use the electric property of “capacitance” to make measure-
ments. Capacitance is a property that exists between any two conductive surfaces
within some reasonable proximity. Changes in the distance between the surfaces
change the capacitance. It is this change of capacitance that capacitive sensors use
to indicate changes in position of a target. They are suitable for practically all
materials with a few exceptions but limited to a few millimeters distance. Capac-
itive sensors can achieve nanometer resolution which makes them indispensable in
ultraprecision applications.

Photoelectric or Optoelectronic Sensors

Photoelectric or optoelectronic sensors offer noncontact sensing of almost any
substance or object up to a range of 10 m. Photoelectric sensors consist of a light
source (usually an LED, light emitting diode, in either infrared or visible light
spectrum) and a detector (photodiode). Due to the high-intensity infrared energy
beam, these sensors have major advantages over other optoelectronic systems when
employed in dusty environments. With their focused beam and long range, opto-
electronic sensors are increasingly used in applications where other sensing tech-
niques are lacking in sensing distance or accuracy.
Photoelectric sensors are available in a variety of modes including Infrared
Proximity (Diffuse Reflective), Transmitted Beam (Thru-beam), Retroreflective
(Reflex), Polarized Retroreflective (Polarized Reflex), Fiber Optic and Background
Rejection.

Ultrasonic Sensors
Ultrasonic sensors utilize the reflection of high-frequency (above 20 kHz) sound
waves to detect parts or distances to the parts. The two basic ultrasonic sensor types
are electrostatic and piezoelectric. In general, ultrasonic sensors are the best choice
for transparent targets. They can detect a sheet of transparent plastic film as easily as
a wooden pallet, but not suitable for foamed plastics and some textile fiber products.

Sensors for Contact

This class of sensors responds to physical contact. When a contact happens the
sensor will generate corresponding information which can be used to control the
gripper, e.g., the motor of a gripper. The information being sensed is usually force,
torch, or pressure. In the simplest case it is sufficient to have a binary sensor.
2058 W. Chen et al.

Binary sensors simply register thresholds for a given signal, e.g., contact between
the gripper finger and an object.

Force-Torque Sensors
Force-torque sensors have been widely used in industrial grippers, e.g., load cells.
Force feedback represents a fundamental requirement for the success of any task that
involves physical interaction with the environment, but when trying to use it to assess
the quality of a grasp, the force information coming from a wrist sensor is not that
important. On the other hand, force sensors could be used to detect contact positions if
they are placed on each finger and use that contact information to evaluate grasp
stability. The demands of these systems by industries have driven the force-torque
sensing technology to a great development and robustness. Force-torque sensors are
normally located between the gripper and the robot flange. These are deformable
elements, for which there are many designs. Usually force-torque sensors are 6D:
force and torque. There are also 12D sensors that measure also accelerations.

Tactile Sensors
Tactile sensors are more straightforward to be used in grippers. Tactile sensors can give
information of the surface in contact with the object and use it to determine the stability
of the grasp, for example, using a classification method. The commonest forms of tactile
sensing are piezoresistive, capacitive, and optical (whether infrared or visible light).

Sensors for Orientation and Position

Vision
Naturally, vision is the most suitable sensory cue to locate objects in the workspace and
identify obstacles on its surroundings. It can also be used to detect contacts and to track
the relation between the gripper and the manipulated object. For gripping and manip-
ulation tasks, the most useful information is the location and 3D structure of the objects
and obstacles. The classical and common approach to obtain 3D information of the
environment is the stereo reconstruction system. This method is based in the disparity
between two camera images to extract depth information and has been widely
addressed. Another approach is to actively project a pattern to the scene and observe
its deformation to obtain the 3D structure. This method is used by the Kinect sensor.
However, vision is not widely employed in industry gripper applications,
although it has been extensively studied in the scientific community. The reason
is that vision is not 100 % reliable due to environmental uncertainties, sensing
errors, calibration errors, and so on. A simpler and more commonly used method is
to use laser triangulation or acoustic sensors.

Slip Sensor
Slip of an object between the gripper jaws can be detected by specially designed
slip sensors. The object may be retained using the smallest possible force, and upon
detection of sliding (slip) this force can be automatically increased.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2059

Compliant Gripper Design: A Case Study

Compliant mechanisms, i.e., mechanisms built with elastic joints, offer several
advantages compared to conventional counterparts: reduction of wear, clearance
and backlash, compactness, no need for lubrication, simplified assembly, etc. The
use of compliant joints is a very promising approach for development of compact
grippers used for small part handling. Design of compliant mechanisms normally
includes two methods: kinematostatic model (or pseudo-rigid-body model
(PRBM)) (Birglen and Gosselin 2004) and topological optimization (Frecker
et al. 1997). In this section, we demonstrate how to develop a compliant gripper
for optical fiber handling by using kinematostatic model method.

Design Considerations

The tools used to handle optical fibers have a significant impact on the func-
tionality and reliability of the optical fibers and related components (Chen and
Lin 2004, 2008; Chen et al. 2013). In a typical fiber handling process, a gripper
is normally used. For example, to assemble a laser diode, a gripper needs to
grasp an optical fiber in a limited space and moves with submicron resolution in
six DOFs to maximize the light coupling efficiency between the laser waveguide
and the optical fiber. Since the core of optical fibers is glass based, the gripping
force exerting on it must be delicately controlled. If the gripping force is
too low, the fiber cannot be precisely handled. On the other hand, if the gripping
force is too high, the stress may be introduced into the fiber core, leading to
the distortion of the beam profile, which in turn affects the alignment accuracy.
The excessive gripping force even results in flaws on the core surface, causing
fiber fatigue or compressive damage. The grippers are therefore required to
have the features of a zero-backlash motion and a controllable gripping
force. According to analysis of the requirements of fiber handling, the following
issues impose a great impact on the gripper design, needing to be considered in
design.

Millimeter-Scale Size
In a typical automated pigtailing process, a gripper picks up a fiber with a clad
diameter of 125 μm from an unloading mechanism and positions it in a cramped
space inside the package housing. In such an application, it is desirable to use
a millimeter-scale gripper with a submillimeter opening and slender yet rigid
gripper tips.
Conventional millimeter-scale grippers are assemblies of various metal parts.
Although parts below 1 mm in size could be manufactured through various
microfabrication processes such as micro-electro discharge machining and powder
injection molding, there remains difficulty in assembling of miniature parts. More-
over, the large size of standard components such as actuators and LM guides
2060 W. Chen et al.

imposes another challenge in integration with miniature gripper mechanisms.

As such, a monolithic design may be the best way to meet the requirement of the
miniature-sized gripper.

High-Resolution Motion
The accuracy of the gripping force is affected by the motion resolution of the
gripper. To achieve a fine resolution motion for a motorized gripper, not only its
mechanism for motion transmission needs to be backlash-free but also its actuator
including the controller, and driver should have a high performance in terms of
resolution and controllability. While a flexure-based structure, which is intrinsi-
cally zero backlash in its joints, is chosen as the motion transmission mechanism,
the motion resolution of the gripper will depend upon the actuator. Some actuators
such as SMA, micro-stepper, or inchworm motor can provide a high-resolution
performance, but either their controllability or their output push force cannot
meet the requirement of fiber handling application. To this end, the PZT actuator
is a good selection as it can offer a nanometer-scale resolution and a high push
force.

Passive Compliance
Due to the relative high stiffness of fibers (a high impedance), the control of
gripping forces requires the fingers to exhibit a low gripping impedance. Otherwise,
small perturbations in motion may generate large changes in gripping forces. The
impedance control method can be applied to the case, but the method needs
accurately modeling and some combination of position and force control. Due to
this reason, it is desirable that the gripper itself has a passive compliance when
contacting with a fiber.

Flexural Materials
Two dominant concerns in selection of materials are protection of fibers, which
requires the gripping ends to be made of a pliable material (small elastic module,
E), and the mechanical performance of the gripper, which is defined as the opening
range of fingers under a specified output stiffness. To have a large opening range,
materials should allow a great elastic deformation without undergoing damaging
plastic stress. This means that these materials have the greatest ratios between the
elastic limit and the elastic module, σ/E. A trade-off of selection between the
materials with the low E value and the high σ/E value should be conducted before
a final material is chosen.

Gripping Manners
Generally, there are three types of gripping manners for a grip, namely, parallel
gripping, angular griping, and vacuum suction that is normally used to pick objects
with a flat surface. For cylindrical-shaped fibers, angular gripping cannot provide a
force-close for grasp, and suction manner may not provide a sufficient suction force
to hold the fiber in the position. Obviously, only the parallel gripping manner can
offer a secured grip for the fiber handling.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2061

Modeling and Analysis

Topological Synthesis
Based on the analysis of gripping manners and a study on mechanisms used in the
conventional grippers, a gripper’s topological structure, which is able to meet the
requirements of the fiber handling, is obtained. Its kinematic scheme is illustrated in
Fig. 23, in which the circles represent the hinge joints. Each finger is driven through
a 4-bar parallel-configured mechanism, which also gives motion amplification. The
transmission ratio K can be expressed as

2s 2a
K¼ ¼ : (2)
x b

The parallel four-bar mechanism allows the finger to move predominantly in

translation instead of rotation. When an input motion is exerted with a force P, two
fingertips will close and open in a parallel manner, providing a secure grip for the
cylindrical fibers. The link lengths of the mechanism are determined by the
requirement of the motion amplification. Based on Eq. 2, for the design specifica-
tions of the finger opening 2 s, 800 μm, and the actuator travel x, 40 μm, or the gain
K set at 20, the ratio of a to b (i.e., a/b) is found to be 10.

Generation of Compliant Mechanisms

To eliminate the backlash existing in each joint of the gripper, the linkage mech-
anism obtained needs to be converted to a flexure-based mechanism. In this process,
the design of flexure joints plays a critical role.
Notches in the compliant members have a much lower bending stiffness than
other portions of the material; therefore they can easily provide a compliant
rotational motion. These notches are defined as so-called flexure joints. Under
small deformation, a flexure joint can be modeled as a rigid hinge joint attached
by a linear torsional spring as shown in Fig. 24. The spring constant k is equal to the
bending stiffness of the notch, which is generally expressed as

EI
k ¼ γ ðt, lÞ , (3)
l

where, E is Young’s modulus, I is bending moment of the notch, γ is correctional

coefficient for the different shape of notches, and t and l are the notch’s thickness
and length, respectively. The values of γ in the three typical types of flexure joints
are shown in Fig. 25.
Since flexure joints produce rotational motion by means of material deformation
within elastic range, they are able to offer the following several significant advan-
tages compared to conventional joints: zero backlash, free wear, smooth and
continuous displacement, assembly free, embedded return springs, and so
on. Flexure joints may have some so-called parasitic deficiencies, but they can be
eliminated or minimized through proper design.
2062 W. Chen et al.

Fig. 23 Linkage model of

gripper

Hinge
joint
Torsional
spring

Fig. 24 Flexure joint compliant rigid linkage

modeling mechansim mechansim
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2063

Fig. 25 Three types of L

flexure joints

k = g 1 ( t,l )⋅ EI
l
t = 0.3mm, l = 3mm, M
γ 1 = 3.9 t

EI

k = EI
l M

t
k = g 2 ( t,l )⋅ EI
l
t = 0.3mm, l = 3mm, M
γ2 = 2.8

a flexure joint

Fig. 26 Flexure-based
gripper

Based on the concept of the flexure joints, the linkage model of the
gripper obtained in Fig. 23 can now be easily translated into a flexure-based gripper
as illustrated in Fig. 26. The notch shape with a half circle is selected. It is because
such a notch can be easily fabricated. To ensure the mechanism to produce a good
performance for motion transmission, the appropriate sizes of flexure joints have to
be determined. This work can be done by using methods of optimization.
2064 W. Chen et al.

Optimization of Flexural Structure

Formulation of Optimization
The objective is to ensure the gripper able to produce a maximum opening in tips
under a given input force. In detail, we hope the flexure joints have a high axial
stiffness and a high bending flexibility. Also, the gripper should satisfy potential
constraints in terms of motion requirements, stress limits, bulking of compression
members, and manufacturing limits. Based on the mechanics of material, the
optimization problem of the gripper can be expressed mathematically as follows:
Find a set of design variables q, p which lead to the objective function mini-
mized, i.e.,
 
σ max
min ¼ f ðq, pÞ (4)
δmax

while subject to constraints

2s
K¼ ¼ g0 ðqÞ ¼ 20, (5)
x
σy
σ max jF ¼ g1 ðq, pÞ  , (6)
λ
0:1  ti ¼ giþ1 ð pÞ, i ¼ 1, ::6 (7)

li ¼ giþ7 ð pÞ  3, i ¼ 1, ::6 (8)

where
σ max: the maximum stress of the whole gripper
δmax: maximum output displacement
λ: factor of safety
σ y: material yield strength
q: the shape parameters of the gripper such as a, b
p: the parameter of size of flexure joints such as ti, li.i ¼ 1, . . ., 6.
Equations 5–8 reflect the constraints of motion requirements, stress limits,
minimum thickness (manufacturing limitation), and maximum length (bulking
limitation) of flexure pivots, respectively.
Numerical optimization algorithms such as FEA can be employed to calculate
the shape parameters and the flexure joint sizes. However, direct use of these
techniques in this phase will be time-consuming and difficult because solving
Eqs. 4–8 belongs to a continuum mechanics problem and needs a good understand-
ing of optimization techniques. To relieve the complication of the problem, a hybrid
approach is used, which integrates pseudo-rigid-body model, trail-and-error
method, and FEA simulation. In this way, a set of initial design variables is first
determined by means of the pseudo-rigid-body model. Starting from these values,
the design is modified by using the trail-and-error method and the FEA tool.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2065

Fout Fout

c M5
M4
f4x 5 f
4 4 f 5x
e k5 f 4y 4y f5y
k4 5
M4 f
5 5y
f 4x 4 M5
a f5x

b
2 k6
k3
k2 6 M2 M3 M6
3
d f 2x 2 3 f 3x f6x 6
x f 3y f6y
f 2y f 2y
M2 f 2x
1 k1
2
Fin
M1
f 1x 1
Fin

Fig. 27 A pseudo-rigid-body model and its free-body diagrams for links

Pseudo-Rigid-Body Analysis
The pseudo-rigid-body model (Chen and Lin 2008) treats the flexure joint as a
hinge attaching a torsional spring and other segments of material as rigid links. As
such, the gripper’s full compliant structure can be modeled as a conventional model
with finite number of rigid linkages, as shown in Fig. 27, where ki stands for the
spring constant of the hinge i. The motion and forces of each hinge can be solved
through the conventional kinematic loop closure and the force-equilibrium
equations.
By virtue of the principle of virtual work, the relationship of the input (Fin) and
output (Fout) force can be written as
a x
Fin ¼ Fout þ ðk2 þ k3 þ k4 þ k5 þ k6 Þ: (9)
b b
Using the static equilibrium equations, the unknown reaction forces ( fix, fiy) and
torque (Mi) in Fig. 27 can be found:

f 2y ¼ Fin (10)
x c
f 3y ¼ Fin þ ðk4 þ k5 Þ  Fout (11)
be e
c x
f 4y ¼ Fout  ðk 4 þ k 5 Þ (12)
e be
2066 W. Chen et al.

f 5y ¼ f 4y ¼ f 6y (13)

k 1 x2
M1 ¼ ffi0 (14)
2bd
ki EI i
Mi ¼ x ¼ γi x, i ¼ 2:::6: (15)
b bli
The maximum output displacement, δmax, and the maximum stress, σ max, in each
hinge can be expressed as
2xa
δmax ¼ , (16)
b
Ex f iy
ðσ max Þi ¼ γ i ti þ , i ¼ 2:::6, (17)
2bli ti w

and

f 1y
ðσ max Þ1 ¼ , (18)
t1 w

where w is the width of the notch.

It can be found that the global maximum stress of the whole gripper occurs at the
Joint 3 or Joint 2. Substituting Eqs. 16 and 17 into Eqs. 4 and 6, we can obtain a set
of initial design variables by means of normal optimization techniques.

Finite Element Simulation

After obtaining the initial design values, we can employ FEA tool to simulate the
performance of the gripper and then use the trial-and-error approach to do modifi-
cation. The FEA software package used for this task is ANSYS (Release 5.7). In the
simulation, the gripper was analyzed as a 2D model with the material of AL 7075-
T6. Due to symmetry of the two fingers, only one side of the gripper needs to be
analyzed. The meshed model is shown in Fig. 28.
After a few design iterations are performed, the final version of the flexure-based
gripper is achieved. Some main parameters are a ¼ 16 mm, b ¼ 0.8 mm, the
thickness of flexure joints t ¼ 0.3 mm, l ¼ 0.5 or 3 mm, and the gain K ¼ 20.6
(Note: K ¼ 40 if no elastic deformation). The maximum stress occurs at point
A. When the tip range is equal to 1,000 μm, the maximum stress has a value of
0.035 GPa. It is far less than the elastic limit (0.48 GPa) of the material, therefore
ensuring the motion of the flexure joins within the elastic range. The ratio of the
maximum stress to the yield strength is 7.3 %. According to the theory of fatigue
failure, when this ratio is less than 10–15 %, flexure joints can remain dimension-
ally stable for a long period of time (without fatigue failure).
In addition, the simulation results also confirm that the fingertips exhibit excel-
lent parallel opening and closing motion. The typical drawback of flexural joints in
terms of parasitic motion did not undermine the overall design requirements.
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2067

Fig. 28 Meshed model of tip range

gripper
F

point A
max stress
point

Results

Prototype of Gripper
A close-up view of the prototype of the gripper is shown in Fig. 29. The gripper
mechanism was fabricated from a monolithic aluminum plate AL-7075 through a
wire electric discharge machine process. The overall dimensions of the gripper are
42 mm long, 22 mm wide, and 4 mm thick. It is detachable from the actuator
bracket housing, making it adaptable for handling different miniature optical
components. The gain of motion amplification of the gripper mechanism is 20.6.
The actuator is a high voltage stack PZT actuator with a rational resolution of
3 nm. It can produce a maximum push force of 2,800 N and provides a stroke of
40 μm. The stroke can offer an opening range of 800 μm in the fingertips through
motion amplification of the mechanism.
The gripping force is sensed through a micron strain gauge (Tokyo Sokki
Kenkyujo) adhered on the outside surface of a fingertip. Thanks to the flexure joints
and the high resolution of the PZT actuator, the gripper is capable of achieving
backlash-free motion and has a high motion resolution (0.1 μm in finger tips). These
performances also lead to a fine gripping force increment (force resolution) of
0.01 N.
2068 W. Chen et al.

Fig. 29 Gripper prototype

gripper bracket

flexure-based fingers

micro strain gauge

position

Fig. 30 Optical fiber

handling system

Experiment of Fiber Handling

Fiber handling was carried out by using an optical fiber handling system shown in
Fig. 30, in which the flexure-based gripper was mounted on a vertical X-Y stage. A
single-mode fiber with a diameter of 125 μm was gripped from a V-groove and then
placed on another. In the experiment, the threshold value of entailed force of the
57 Grippers and End-Effectors 2069

fiber, viz., the gripping force was set at 1.40 N. With such settings, the system
performed more than 50,000 cycles without failures. No distortion in the beam
profile was detected under the gripping force.

Summary

End effectors such as grippers have been playing a crucial role in industry robotics.
The design and selection of grippers need a comprehensive consideration in terms
of task, environment, and technological limits. In the industry, simplicity and cost
are often the main guideline for the design of grippers. This situation has led over
the years to the development of a number of special-purpose grippers optimized for
single specialized operations but not suitable for other task. In recent years, since
applications with high-mix and low-volume parts are more and more popular,
adaptive grippers have become a major topic in research community and industry.
It is expected that constant research activities in this field with developments at
technological (mechanism, actuator, sensor, etc.) and methodological (design and
control) levels will be carried on in the future.

References
Aukes D, Heyneman B, Duchaine V, Cutkosky MR (2011) Varying spring preloads to select grasp
strategies in an adaptive hand. In: 2011 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent
robots and systems, San Francisco, USA, pp 1373–1379
Aukes D et al (2012) Selectively compliant underactuated hand for mobile manipulation. In: IEEE
international conference on robotics and automation, Minnesota
Belter JT, Dollar AM (2011) Underactuated grasp acquisition and stability using friction based
coupling mechanisms. In: 2011 international conference on robotics and automation, Shang-
hai, 9 May 2011
Belter JT et al (2011) Underactuated grasp acquisition and stability using friction based coupling
mechanisms. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Shanghai, China,
9 May 2011
Belter JT, Segil J, Dollar AM et al (2013) The mechanical design and performance specifications
of anthropomorphic prosthetic hands. J Rehabil Dev 50(5):599–618
Birglen L, Gosselin C (2004) Kinetostatic analysis of underactuated fingers. IEEE Trans Robot
Autom 20(2):211–221 (3–2)
Birglen L, Laliberte T, Gosselin C (2002) Underactuation in robotic gasping hands. Mach Intell
Robot Control 4(3):1–11
Birglen L, Laliberté T, Gosselin C (2008) Underactuated robotic hands. Springer, Berlin Heidel-
berg, ISBN: 978-3-540-77458-7 (2–1)
Ceccarelli M, Gradini G (1992) Robot’s gripper mechanism: classification and optimization.
Autom Robot Tech :1–20 (1–2)
Chen FY (1982) Gripping mechanisms for industrial robots: an overview. Mech Mach Theory
17(5):299–311 (1–1)
Chen WJ, Lin W (2004),Design of a flexure-based gripper used in optical fiber handling. In:
2004 I.E. conference on robotics, automation and mechatronics, Singapore
Chen WJ, Lin W (2008) Fiber assembly of MEMS switches with U-groove channels. IEEE Trans
Autom Sci Eng 5(2):207–215 (3–1)
2070 W. Chen et al.

Chen WH, Shi XH, Chen WJ (2013) A two degree of freedom micro-gripper with grasping and
rotating functions for optical fibers assembling. Rev Sci Instrum 84(11):1–10
Crisman JD, Kanojia C, Zeid I (1996) Grasper: a flexible, easily controllable robotic hand. IEEE
Robot Autom Mag 3(2):32–38
Dollar AM, Howe RD (2010) The highly adaptive SDM hand: design and performance evaluation.
Int J Robot Res 29(5):585–597
Frecker MI, Ananthasuresh GK, Nishiwaki S, Kikuchi N et al (1997) Topological synthesis of
compliant mechanisms using multi-criteria optimization. J Mech Des 119:238–245
Gengenbach U, Engelhardt F, Scharnowell R (1997) Automatic assembly of microoptical com-
ponents with the MIMOSE-system. In: Proceedings of symposium on handling and assembly
of microparts, Wien, Nov 1997, pp 83–88
Herder J, Kragten G (2010) A platform for grasp performance assessment in compliant or
underactuated hands. J Mech Des 132(2):024502
http://www.physikinstrumente.com
Krut S, Bégoc V, Dombre E, Pierrot F (2010) Extension of the form-closure property to
underactuated hands. IEEE Trans Robot 26(5):853–866
Laliberte T, Gosselin C (1998) Simulation and design of underactuated mechanical hands. Mech
Mach Theory 33(1/2):39–57
Laliberte T et al (2002) Underactuation in robotic grasping hands. Mach Intell Robot Control
4(3):1–11
Lexcellent C (2013) Shape-memory alloys handbook. Wiley-ISTE, March
Mock PW (2009) Expandable ramp gripper. US Patent 7954 562
Monkman GJ, Hesse S, Steinmann R, Schunk H (2007) Robot grippers. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim
Odhner LU (2012) Precision grasping and manipulation of small objects from flat surfaces using
underactuated fingers. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation,
Minnesota
Odhner LU, Dollar AM (2011) Dexterous manipulation with underactuated elastic hands. In:
Proceedings of 2011 international conference on robotics and automation, Shanghai, May,
2011
Odhner LU, Ma RR, Dollar AM (2013) Open-loop precision grasping with underactuated hands
inspired by a human manipulation strategy. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 10(3):625
Okada T (1979) Object-handling system for manual industry. Syst Man Cybern IEEE Trans
9(2):79–89
Peerdeman B et al (2013) Development of underactuated prosthetic fingers with joint locking and
electromyographic control. Mech Eng Res 3(1):130
Robotics Bible (2011) http://www.roboticsbible.com/mechanical-gripper-mechanisms.html
Siciliano B, Khatib O (eds) (2008) Springer handbook of robotics. Springer, Berlin
Wolf A, Steinmann R, Schunk H (2005) Grippers in motion. Springer, Berlin
Zhao C (2007) Ultrasonic Motors, Technologies and Applications, Jointly published with Science
Press. Based on an original Chinese edition: Chaosheng Dianji Jishu Yu Yingyong, Science
Press