Background
Challenges and limitations of previous locomotion robots on rough terrain
Modification of rough terrain by a robot
Aim of the study
Methods
Rigid polyurethane foam as the construction material
One-part
|
Two-part
| |
---|---|---|
polyurethane
|
polyurethane
| |
(ATF-504)
|
(HYPER
♯
30)
| |
Surface curing time [min] | 10-15 | 0.5-1 |
Sufficient curing time | 60 | 2 |
to support robot | ||
climbing [min] | ||
Complete curing time | 18 hours | 5-10 min |
Optimal temperature [°C] | 5-50 | 5-50 |
Optimal humidity [%] | 40-70 | N/A |
Expansion ratio | 1.3-1.8 | 1.5-2 |
(from 1-60 min later) | ||
Density (when fully | 0.025 | 0.03 |
expanded) [g/cm3] | ||
Compressive strength [N/cm2] | 4-6 | 17.2 |
Pulling strength [N/cm2] | 9-11 | 26.4 |
Adhesion force [kg/cm2] | 1 | N/A |
Thermal conductivity [W/mK] | 0.030 | 0.023 |
Construction process
Filling a deep ditch
Building a slope leading to a high step
Hardware design
Complete design of robot system with sensor placement
Head part motion for construction
Robot experiments
Results
Filling a ditch performance
One-part foam type robot
Two-part foam type robot
Performance of building a slope leading to a step
One-part foam type robot
Two-part foam type robot
Discussion
Comparison of performance of building a structure
Curing time [min]
|
Working time
efficiency
|
Foam accuracy
|
Required accuracy
of ejection
|
Material loss
| |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
One-part foam | 60 | Low | Low | Low | High |
Two-part foam | 10-15 | High | High | High | Low |