BIRLA VISHVAKARMA

MAHAVIDYALAYA

ADAVANCED MECHANISM DESIGN

Study of Research Paper

Prepared by:

SHAILESH PATEL

Guided by:

H. P. PATOLIA

Title:
Theoretical design of a self-rectifying 4-bar linkage
mechanism

Author:

Colin Bell*, Michael Farnsworth,

Ashutosh Tiwari, Rob Dorey

2nd International Through-life Engineering

Services Conference

Introduction

an alternative approach is suggested in which, rather than

compensating for specific failure modes.
a system is instead designed to be adaptable to any
(noncatastrophic) failure i.e. the system is capable of self-repair.
what we are looking for are systems that are able to Maintain
some degree of functionality after a failure has occurred.
What is of more interest is how the system can adapt post-failure
to attempt to maintain functionality as close as possible to the
intended design.

4-bar Linkage Mechanism

For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that the 4-bar linkage
mechanism is designed to trace out a particular pattern.
The apex of the triangular float link will follow a particular pattern
when the input link is rotated one complete revolution.
The specific pattern will depend on:
1. The geometry (length) of the other links
2. The geometry of the triangular float link, which can be completely
described by the length of Link 1 and the two other tracer edge
lengths (TE1 and TE2)

Approach to Designing Self-repairing Systems

Step 0: Cause of Fault

The underlying cause of the fault should not necessarily be the focus;
Instead the focus should be on how the fault manifests itself.
(1) Failure inducing agent :
force, time, temperature,
reactive environment, human

Typically in a 4-bar linkage system under

normal
conditions, the failure inducing agent will
likely be caused by mechanical load
either through vibration, or shock
through
impact.
(2) Location of failure

In a linkage system there are three

primary locations that failure can occur
at a rigid element, a joint and an anchor

(3)Manifestation of failure
1. Failure of rigid element:
1.1. Deformation of body (extension, bending or twisting) either by
failure in stiffness of material or throughthermal expansion/contraction
1.2. Fracture/Split/Break of body typically caused by mechanical load
but might also be caused by corrosion or deterioration of material
1.3. Obstruction of expected motion case fails and prevents normal
motion, or an element fails and inters with other elements
2. Failure of joint
2.1. Complete failure disconnection of joint
2.2. Range of motion limited fundamentally changes behavior of
mechanism, new dead-spots etc.
2.3. Higher than expected resistance increased frictional load, wear, etc
2.4. Joint tolerances play in joint, adds additional DOF to mechanism
3. Failure of anchor point: Anchor point no longer restricts DOF of
node as intended

STEP 1: Prediction or detection of fault

Deviation from expected behavior: System does something unexpected

Externalized sensors: Independent test system to observe behavior,

pressure, temperature, voltage, etc.

User intervention: User reports fault (loses autonomy)

STEP 2:Diagnosis of Fault

Model-based (Abductive reasoning): compare observation with predicted

observation: I expect X but get Y, therefore I must correct Y to get it
to match.

Bayesian belief networks: probabilistic graphical model (a type of

statistical model) that represents a set of random variables and their
conditional dependencies: If X and Y happen, its likely a failure with
Z

Case-based reasoning methods: anecdotal evidence, if X happens, do

Y. Accounts for expected failure only

Model-based (Abductive reasoning

1.
2.
3.
4.

Initially, a model based approach is proposed similar to what is shown

in Figure 3. Using this approach, the system would operate as follows:
During normal operating all dimensions are known and the
relationship between angles - is as expected
An element is damaged, and the angular relationship changes
The damaged element is remodeled as a straight element to
compensate for the change in effective length
The system adapts itself to compensate

Hybrid dynamics of the milling process with

absorbers
once the system has been remodeled with revised dimensions, it can then
attempt to return back to the original desired path through changing
dimensions of the tracer edges
(TE1 and TE2 in Figure 1).
The system thus attempts to solve a simple optimization problem in which
the objective is to minimize the deviation between the designed tracer
pattern and the new tracer pattern, which can be calculated as the average
of the Euclidean distance between each point on the tracer function path at
intervals of 1 changes in the input angle , as shown
in Figure 5.

Results
Using the methodology described, a 4-bar linkage is designed with
dimensions shown in Table 1. Some failure event causes a change to the
desired tracer pattern.
Based on the new tracer pattern, the system is able to determine that Link
2 has changed its effective length to the new value shown in Table 1.
The length of TE1 and TE2 are assumed to be unchanged and both equal
to 3units.

 The effect of these changes on the tracer pattern is

shown in Figure 6 as a function of the input angle .
These differences are from the desired tracer pattern,
hence a perfect solution would have a constant value of
zero.
It can be seen from this that a change of only 5% in
TE2 has yielded a reduction in post-failure tracer error
of almost 90%.
The actual tracer patterns are shown in Figure 7. It can
be seen from this graph that the rectified fix shows an
almost perfect correlation with design (base) curve

CONCLUSION

This paper has used a simple example of a 4-bar linkage mechanism to

demonstrate a possible approach to designing a self-repairing system.

This was achieved by breaking the selfrepair process down into four
individual steps that can be applied to any system. Additionally a number
of pitfalls were encountered:
Diagnosis of Fault: Although model-based reasoning is a tempting option,
it generally leads the designer to only focus on particular, expected
modes of failure. It is perhaps better to infer a possible, effective failure
from a change in behavior.

Corrective Action: Where possible the designer should avoid introducing

changes that would fundamentally alter the basic system mechanism. In
this example, it might have been tempting to replace the rigid linkages
with deformable linkages that could alter their length (such as a linear
actuator), however this would fundamentally change Steps 0-3, and the
process would have to be repeated, leading to an endless design circle.

Title:
Development of a Four bar Compliant Mechanism
using Pseudo
Rigid Body Model (PRBM)

Author:

Bhagyesh Deshmukha*, Sujit

Pardeshib, Roohshad Mistryc, Sachin
Kandharkard,
Santosh Waghe
3rd International Conference on Materials
Processing and Characterisation (ICMPC 2014)

Introduction

A flexure based compliant parallel (4-bar) mechanism for linear

translational motion actuated via a precision slide has been
proposed.

The compliant mechanism is designed using Pseudo Rigid Body

Model (PRBM) approach and results obtained are compared with
finite element analysis.

The performance of the compliant parallel mechanism

demonstrated by experiments validates the simulation results and
hence PRBM results.

The effect of point of motion actuation on performance of

mechanism is also investigated.

PRBM for Compliant 4-bar

Mechanism
While carrying out the PRBM analysis of a 4-bar
compliant mechanism, the hinges (flexure) in Fig. 1 (a)
are replaced by torsional springs as shown in Fig. 1 (b).
The input force (Fin) causes horizontal deflection (X1),
which
deflects the hinges by very small angle .

Detailed displacement analysis for motion transfer has been

carried out and the resultant magnitude of motion is similar to
the input.
The percentage Error (in input displacement by PRBM and
FEA) throughout the analysis is almost constant irrespective of
change in magnitude of force; indicating correctness of the
model and methodology adapted. The various displacements
using FEA, PRBM and Geometric Amplification are obtained
and cited in the Table 1.

Fig. 2 indicates the comparative

representation of Input Force Vs
displacement using PRBM and FEA
model developed; and the resulting
displacements predicted are in close
agreement.

The resultant displacement for a force range 0.1-0.1-1N and 1-1-10N

is obtained by simulation and is represented in Fig.3 (a) and (b) for
extreme load conditions (0.1N and 10N).
The displacement plot shows that the upper link AB is showing
uniform motion transfer

Experimentation of Compliant four

bar
In continuation,
rigorous experiments
mechanism
are carried out in order to compare
the analytical and simulation results
for compliant four bar mechanism.
The input motion is provided via a
precision actuator (a microslide) on
the basis of the displacements
obtained via simulation results and
the output was recorded using a 3D
Optical Profilometer.

Table 2 gives the detailed results

during trials using compliant 4-bar
mechanism made up of Carbon steel
for displacement (40-40-200 m)
provided at the input link and
corresponding output displacement
was observed.
It is observed from Fig.5 that
simulation results are in close

CONCLUSION

A Displacement Model for Compliant 4-bar mechanism has

been developed using PRBM and verified using simulation.

PRBM simplifies the design of the compliant mechanism

where the flexure is replaced by equivalent torsional
stiffness of the hinge and the mechanism is modeled as a
rigid body model.

The experimental results obtained in current work validate

the importance of combination of PRBM and FEA techniques
in analysis for compliant mechanisms.

Title:
Design of a single DOF gripper based on
four-bar and slider-crank mechanism for
educational purposes

Author: Alaa Hassana, Mouhammad

Abomoharama
24th CIRP Design Conference Procedia CIRP
21 ( 2014 ) 379 384

Introduction

This paper presents the design and the realization of a novel robot gripper
which can be used in various automation processes including pick and
place operation.possible to the intended design.
The gripper consists of four fingers which move simultaneously allowing
the gripper to open and close. It is a single degree of freedom (DOF)
system. One finger is driven by an electrical motor via a four-bar
mechanism.
The motion is transmitted from the driver finger to the other three fingers
by slider-crank mechanism.
This gripper has two closed loop structure, a study is performed to
determine its geometric and kinematic models. This leads to find a
geometrical solution space, which is verified via a CAD model of the
gripper.
Thus, the gripper design will be modified or optimized, whether at the
level of the mechanism embodiment design and/or at the level of the
finger profile. The mechanical design and the electrical circuit of the
gripper prototype are also described.

Gripper specifications
The design of the gripper must meet the following
features:
Load: the gripper must be able to grasp an object mass
of 300 g
Speed: the desired rotation speed of the motor is 30
deg/s

External grasping of solid cylinder with three different

external diameters: 190, 220, 250 mm

Internal grasping of hollow cylinder with three

different internal diameters: 350, 380, 420 mm

Structure description and

geometric
Structure description
modeling

Fig. 1 (a) shows the main parts of the gripper CAD model, while
the structure of the gripper mechanism is shown in Fig. 1 (b).
The gripper consists of six links L0-L5 and seven joints J1-J7 (J3 is
prismatic; all other joints are revolute). L0 is the ground link.
L2 link represents the driver finger, which is a part of four-bar
mechanism L0-L1-L4-L2. The three other fingers are driven via a
slider-crank mechanism L0-L2-L5-L3.

Kinematic modeling and singular

configurations
For the lower closed chain, there is one possible
singularity
expressed in Eq. 19, and illustrated in Fig.3 (c).

Gripper design and development

of a physical model
A prototype is manufactured to verify
the gripper functionality; a stepper
motor is used to drive the gripper. Fig.
7 shows this physical prototype.

Fig. 7. Physical prototype of the grip

CONCLUSION

kinematic model is found and singular configurations are

identified. Some geometric parameters are determined to
avoid these singularities.
Dynamic simulation is carried out and a suitable stepper
motor is selected to drive the gripper.
An electronic circuit, based on ATmega8 microcontroller, is
built to control the gripper.
A prototype is realized to validate the design and test its
functionality.

THANK YOU