Telegenov, K. et al.

Paper:

Preliminary Design of a Three-Finger Underactuated

Adaptive End Effector with a Breakaway Clutch Mechanism
Kuat Telegenov∗ , Yedige Tlegenov∗ , Shahid Hussain∗∗ , and Almas Shintemirov∗
∗ Departmentof Robotics and Mechatronics, School of Science and Technology, Nazarbayev University
53 Kabanbay Batyr Avenue, Astana, Kazakhstan
∗∗ School of Mechanical, Materials and Mechatronic Engineering, University of Wollongong

Wollongong, New South Wales 2522, Australia

E-mail: {ktelegenov, yedige.tlegenov, ashintemirov}@nu.edu.kz, mechatronics636@gmail.com
[Received March 16, 2015; accepted July 28, 2015]

Commercially available robotic grippers are often ex- lot of end effector designs utilize individual actuation of
pensive and not easy to modify for specific purposes each joint of the fingers with small high precision DC ser-
of robotics research and education. To extend the vomotors [8, c]. This ensures a high number of control-
choice of robotic end effectors available to researchers, lable degrees of freedom (DOF) suitable for grasping of
this paper presents the preliminary work on prototype complex shape objects. However, the presence of multi-
design and analysis of a three-finger underactuated ple actuators in each finger mechanism results in high cost
robotic end effector with a breakaway clutch mech- and control complexity of the end effector.
anism suitable for research in robot manipulation of A number of designs utilize pulley/tendon actuation
objects for industrial and service applications. Kine- mechanisms that are used for industrial and service
matic models of the finger and the breakaway clutch robotic systems [9, 10]. These mechanisms have advan-
mechanisms are analyzed aiming to define selection tages in terms of cost due to less number of actuators, have
criteria of design parameters. Grasping performance high degree of adaptability and are suitable for different
of the end effector prototype manufactured with a 3D applications. However, these designs have limitations in
printing technology and off-the-shelf components is load carrying capacity and wear resistance. Tendon excur-
evaluated using simulation and experimental analyses. sion must be taken into account during the design process.
Comparison with widely applied available robotic end As an alternative there are many studies reported in liter-
effectors shows the potential advantages of the pro- ature on different designs of underactuated artificial fin-
posed end effector design. gers based on mechanical linkage systems [b, d, e]. Above
mentioned end-effectors with mechanical linkage system
are complex in their manufacturing and have high number
Keywords: underactuated robotic end effector, gear train of miniature parts. Thus, there is a need for an end effec-
mechanism, breakaway clutch mechanism, 3D printing, tor, providing configurability for different range of grip-
adaptive grasping ping operations with high degree of wear and shock re-
sistance, relatively high payload, simple control systems,
and simple mechanical structure [11].
1. Introduction Applications of adaptive mechanical system concepts
to design of robotic devices were recently studied in [12].
Development of robotic end effectors that are employed The presented new design paradigms motivated the au-
for grasping of a variety of objects is an active research thors for this work. The use of mechanical linkage mech-
area. Various robotic end effectors were developed for anisms in finger design was one of the design criteria to
wide range of applications where reproducing the hu- provide relatively high payload carrying capacity com-
man hand functionality is desired [1, 2, a]. In most of paring to tendon driven systems. Another important de-
industrial and service applications manipulation of ob- sign criteria was to use additive manufacturing and sim-
jects with anthropomorphic robotic hands is not required ple units for end effector mechanical structure allowing
and two- or three-finger robot end effectors are sufficient further modification of the proposed design according to
for grasping [3]. Examples of such end-effector designs specific purposes. Additive manufacturing, or 3D print-
are a microgripper with piezo-actuator for handling very ing, is rapidly maturing with unlimited application poten-
small objects with complex or flexible shapes [4], an in- tial. Integration of the 3D printing technology in prod-
telligent robotic gripper for accurate electronic connector uct development process can give the possibility to built
mating [5], a combined gripper with a cutting tool [6] for products with lighter weight and lower cost but still retain
sweet pepper harvesting, a three-finger pneumatically ac- adequate stability and performance [13].
tuated gripper [7], and an adaptive three-finger robot grip- Robotics research and education have gained signifi-
per [b] for use in unstructured industrial applications. A cant attention in recent years due to increased develop-

496 Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.27 No.5, 2015

 Design and Analysis of 3-Finger Underactuated Adaptive End Effector

ment and commercial deployment of industrial and ser-

vice robots. A majority of researchers working on robot
grasping and object manipulation utilize commercially
available robot-manipulators equipped with various end
effectors for experimental studies. Currently available
commercial robotic end effectors that are employed for
grasping of a variety of objects are expensive and not in
mass distribution for research and educational purposes.
In general, many of the commercially available hands Fig. 1. Closing sequence of a 2-DOF underactuated finger.
do not accommodate extensive customisation of the de-
sign features for attachment to different robotic arm plat-
forms or integration of additional sensors for research pur-
poses [14]. To address such problems the 3D printing
rapid prototyping technology is being actively applied for
manufacturing of low-cost robotic hands [15–17].
To extend the choice of robotic end effectors available
to researchers, in this paper the authors present a prelim-
inary design and analysis of an underactuated adaptive
robotic three-finger end effector. An important charac-
teristic of the presented end effector is provision of the
underactuation within the end effector palm and fingers Fig. 2. 2D model underactuated finger.
that provides full enveloping of an object without detailed
prior knowledge of its shape. Underactuation between fin-
gers is achieved by using a breakaway clutch mechanism, tuated finger mechanism is normally required to provide
which has novel application to grippers and robotic end close wrapping of different shape objects due to its adap-
effectors. The gripper can be used for various robotics tive grasping capability with fewer actuators [22].
research and educational projects on manipulation of ob- In this work, the underactuated gripper finger design
jects in industrial and service applications [18, 19]. presented in [23, 24] is adopted. The design utilizes a
The organization of the paper is as follows. In Sec- simple mechanical linkage system which is the one of the
tion 2, the design and analysis of a 2-DOFs underactuated main design objectives for the proposed gripper. Consider
finger and a breakaway clutch mechanisms are outlined in a 2-DOF and one degree-of-actuation finger mechanism
detail. Section 3 presents a design and parameters of the shown in Fig. 1. A passive element, i.e., a spring, between
three-finger end-effector. Results of simulation and exper- the first and second phalanges is used for providing actu-
imental evaluation of grasping performance of the robotic ation of the second DOF of the finger [23]. The closing
end effector prototype are presented and discussed in Sec- sequence of the underactuated finger is described as fol-
tion 4, which are followed by conclusion and future work. lows. Firstly, the finger moves as a rigid body from its ini-
tial position since no external force is acting on it. When
the first phalanx of the finger is in contact with an object,
2. Design of the Underactuated Finger and the second phalanx starts movement around a pivot point
Breakaway Clutch Mechanism to complete a full wrapping. Same method can be applied
to n-phalanx finger [24]. However, accurate finger mech-
2.1. Underactuated Finger Mechanism anism analysis is required to calculate parameters for the
passive elements.
There has been a long aspiration to reduce the number Utilizing the same principle, an underactuated finger
of actuators and control electronics in robotic end effector mechanism has been designed using SolidWorks CAD
designs, that would in turn, lead to reducing of size and software and is presented in Fig. 2. The finger consists of
mass and cost reduction of the simplified robotic devices. two phalanges, two links, an extension spring and a worm
This can be achieved by coupling the motion of numerous wheel. Note that the worm wheel and link 1 are rigidly
joints, resulting to the end effector designs with fewer ac- connected. The worm wheel transmits rotary motion to
tuators than DOF. Such robotic end effectors or hands, link 1 around its pivot point; subsequently link 1 trans-
termed “underactuated,” have shown significant advan- fers the motion to link 2. The extension spring, shown in
tages in grasping applications due to the passive flexibility Fig. 2, allows the finger to behave as a single rigid body
and adaptability between degrees of freedom. during rotary motion around the fixed pivot. When the
Underactuated fingers with less number of actuators first phalanx touches an object, the force produced by an
than totals DOFs are widely utilized in design of various actuator extends the spring which starts transferring mo-
robotic hands for industrial [20] and service robotics [21]. tion to the second phalanx only. Finally, the contact of
This is largely attributed to the relatively simple design both the phalanges with an object concludes the finger
of such mechanisms comparing with fully actuated dex- closing sequence.
terous artificial fingers. At the same time, an underac- In overall, the underactuated mechanical linkage sys-

Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.27 No.5, 2015 497

Telegenov, K. et al.

and is used to select appropriate spring for selected finger

configuration defined mainly by the actuator characteris-
tics Ta and desired fingertip rotational displacement θ2
and its derivative θ̇2 .
Note that the stiffness of the spring K1 found in Eq. (6)
is used in further analysis of the robotic end effector
Fig. 3. Schematic model of the 2-DOF underactuated finger. mechanism design.

2.2. Breakaway Clutch Mechanism

With the purpose to achieve adaptive passive grasping
tem may provide relatively higher load carrying capacity of an object the robotic end effector should provide inde-
comparing to similar tendon driven mechanisms and re- pendent actuation of its fingers from each other. Taking
quires minimum number of actuators in the gripper. This into account the requirement to reduce the number of the
jointly with utilization of off-the-shelf components and a actuators, the end effector design utilizes the underactu-
3D printing technology ensures lower cost, simple control ation principle in finger actuation. In this work the au-
effort and less weight of the gripper prototype. thors propose to use a breakaway clutch mechanism with
Grasping characteristics of the gripper can be modified a single actuator, which can provide high underactuation
by setting various geometries of two actuation links of the between three fingers of the robotic end effector.
fingers. For instance, changing the length of two actuation As all three fingers are driven by a single actuator, the
links of the finger can result in various dynamic outputs actuator drives the fingers through a series of gears. To
of the first and second phalanges. achieve full wrapping of an object with three fingers by a
Selection of an appropriate spring stiffness coefficient single actuator, the underactuation principle is used be-
K1 that defines actuation of the finger’s second phalange tween individual fingers for providing maximum grasp
is based on the kinematic analysis of the underactuated contact. If one finger is blocked by contact of an object,
finger mechanism. The schematic model of the finger is other fingers still continue to move to complete their clos-
presented in Fig. 3. The quasi-static equilibrium mod- ing sequence until they contact the grasping object.
elling of the finger is defined as follows. By equating the In general, the underactuation principle between fin-
input and the output virtual powers [3], the following ex- gers can be achieved using various differential mecha-
pression is derived nisms such as gear differentials, linkage seesaw differ-
t T ωa = f T v, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1) entials, and pulley differentials [27, 28]. However, ap-
plication of a gear differential mechanism results to rel-
where t is the input torque vector, ωa is the velocity vector, atively larger space requirements whereas linkage seesaw
f is the vector of contact wrenches, and v is the vector and pulley differential systems have payload capacity lim-
containing the twist of the contact points [25], defined as itations [29].
    Previously, a novel breakaway clutch mechanism for
Ta θ̇
t= ; ωa = 1 ; . . . (2) accomplishing an enveloping grasping for a three fingered
T2 = −K1 θ2 θ̇2
    end effector was presented in [30]. However, the pro-
ζ ◦ ξ posed mechanism is relatively complex and hard to proto-
f = 1 ; v= 1 . . . . . . . . . (3)
ζ2 ◦ ξ2 type using 3D printing technology due to low resolution
Here, Ta denotes the actuation wrench, K is the spring of printing and low elastic modulus of printing materials.
stiffness, θ̇i is the first derivative i = 1, 2 joint To achieve compatibility with 3D printing technol-
 of phalange
y
angles. Row vectors ζi ◦ = mz fix fi for i = 1, 2, ogy, the robotic end effector design should utilize sim-
are obtained from the ple structural units and have minimal number of minia-
 corresponding
y  three-dimensional
wrench vectors ζi = fix fi mz by writing the moment ture parts [15, 16, 28]. Hence, a novel breakaway clutch
mz of the force axis about theplatform center before the mechanism for the three fingered robotic end effector is
 y  y
force unit vector fi = fix fi [26]. ξi = ωz ϑix ϑi designed and presented in this paper.
is the three-dimensional vector for planar twist. The architecture of the breakaway clutch mechanism
Substitution of Eqs. (2) and (3) into Eq. (1) yields for a single finger consists of two helical gears, a worm,
    a worm wheel and a compression spring, and is shown
  θ̇   ξ in Fig. 4. The driver helical gear rotates the driven heli-
Ta −K1 θ2 · 1 = ζ1 ◦ ζ2 ◦ · 1 , . (4)
θ̇2 ξ2 cal gear, which in its turn, drives the worm on the same
from where by equating two matrices from each side the shaft. The driven helical gear and the worm are rigidly
following equation is obtained: connected with the shaft along their vertical axis. The
worm transmits motion to the worm wheel, which is piv-
Ta θ̇a1 − Kθ2 · θ̇2 = ζ1 ◦ ·ξ1 + ζ2 ◦ ·ξ2 . . . (5) otally connected to the palm and transmits rotational mo-
tion to the finger. The 3D model of the clutch mechanism
Thus, the stiffness of the spring can be expressed as
and its allocation in the palm are presented in Fig. 5(a).
Ta θ̇1 − ζ1 · ◦ξ1 − ζ2 ◦ ·ξ2 The main reason for utilizing helical gears is that when
K1 = . . . . . . (6) two helical gear are engaged in motion axial thrust load is
θ2 · θ̇2

498 Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.27 No.5, 2015

 Design and Analysis of 3-Finger Underactuated Adaptive End Effector

the shaft and is computed as follows:

Fx = Ft tan ψ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)
where Ft is the tangential or transmitted force and ψ is a
helix angle.
The force Ft = 2T /D is tangential to the pitch surface
of the gear and is perpendicular to axis of the shaft car-
rying the gear. T and D are transmitted torque and pitch
diameter of the gear respectively. This is the force that ac-
tually drives the gear. The angle ψ defines the angle that
teeth are inclined with the axis.
Substituting Ft in Eq. (7) yields
2T
Fx = tan ψ . . . . . . . . . . . . . (8)
D
Axial thrust load must be larger than the force exerted
by the compression spring to start helical gear sliding up-
ward along its axis.
Fig. 4. 2D model of breakaway clutch mechanism. By Hooke’s law the spring force
Fs = K2 x, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (9)
where K2 and x is the stiffness and displacement of the
compression spring of the breakaway clutch mechanism
respectively.
By equating Eq. (8) to Eq. (9) the equilibrium equation
for the breakaway clutch mechanism in vertical direction
is obtained. Hence, the stiffness of the compression spring
is defined as
2T
K2 = tan ψ . . . . . . . . . . . . (10)
Dx
The stiffness of the compression spring is the same for
the clutches of three fingers in the proposed design.
(a) (b)

Fig. 5. (a) 3D CAD model of the breakaway clutch mech-

anism; (b) a perspective view of the driven helical gear ge- 3. Design of a Three-Finger Robotic End Effec-
ometry and forces. tor
Three finger robotic end effector includes three under-
actuated fingers each having two degrees of freedom, a
produced as a natural result of the inclined arrangement of frame housing a palm, the breakaway clutch mechanism
gear teeth. The driven helical gear is able to slide along its and an actuator. The finger arrangement on the palm al-
vertical axis while rotating. However, the sliding move- lows the gear trains of the fingers to be driven from a sin-
ment is restricted by the compression spring located be- gle actuator. Two fingers are placed opposite to each other
tween the driven helical gear and the worm on the same whereas the third finger is adjusted to one of them by cer-
shaft. When the compression spring restricts the motion tain angle. This design solution allows the end effector
of the driven helical gear, the gear is fully engaged with to perform planar grasping of tiny objects. Each finger
the driver helical gear. When the finger is in contact with is actuated through the breakaway clutch mechanism, dis-
an object the worm movement is fixed, however actua- cussed in Section 3, containing a worm wheel that enables
tor still continues to move resulting axial thrust force to self-locking property of each finger in their closing and
push the driven helical gear against the spring along its opening sequence when the actuator is powered off [11].
axis. This disengages two helical gears, so the driver he- The CAD model of the proposed robotic end effector
lical gear won’t transfer any torque to move the finger. and its 3D printed assembled prototype are presented in
Any sliding mechanism can be used for facilitating verti- Fig. 6. The prototype main structures are manufactured
cal smooth motion of the driven helical gear. using the UP Plus 3D printer [f] with acrylonitrile buta-
Analyzing forces acting on a helical gear, shown in diene styrene (ABS) plastic, whereas soft rubber printing
Fig. 5(b), it can be seen that axial thrust force Fx acts material are used for producing fingertip, phalange and
in the tangential plane parallel to the axis of the shaft car- palm covers. ABS is a strong, durable production-grade
rying the helical gear. thermoplastic used across many industries, and it is an
The axial force, Fx tends to push the mating gear along

Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.27 No.5, 2015 499

Telegenov, K. et al.

ing transmitted torque T as follows:

ζ1 ◦ ξ1 − ζ2 ◦ ξ2 2T Δθ2 θ˙2
Ta = + tan ψ . . . (12)
θ˙1 D x θ˙1
Thus, using Eqs. (11) and (12) the end effector design
parameters can be determined providing the desired actu-
ation wrench and the torque applied from the output shaft
of the actuator are known.
In the robotic end effector prototype the output shaft of
the Dynamixel actuator is directly connected to an eigh-
teen teeth helical gear with 1.5 inches pitch diameter,
which drives three smaller ten teeth helical gears, with
0.833 inches pitch diameters, one for each finger mech-
anism. The three helical gears rotate together with three
worms having one thread and 0.8 module parameters. Fi-
nally, the three worms transfer rotational motion to three
twenty teeth worm wheels with 0.62 inches pitch diame-
ters, which are connected to the finger mechanism.

4. Results and Discussions

4.1. Simulation Results
Simulation analysis of the end effector grasping per-
formance is done using the ADAMS mechanical system
modeling software. The prototype geometrical parame-
ters are set in the program, according to the chosen fin-
ger design dimensions, whereas mass properties are de-
Fig. 6. 3D CAD model and prototype of a three-finger
robotic end effector. fined by setting the model material density as ABS plastic
used for the prototype 3D printing. The two-phalanx fin-
ger linkage system is pivotally connected to a fixed point
on the origin of a working grid; other joints can revolute
unless otherwise stated.
ideal material for conceptual prototyping [g]. An addi-
For motion simulation shown the finger actuation
tional off-the-shelf component, a Dynamixel MX-28 ser-
torque is applied to link 1 around pivot point O1 as shown
vomotor [h], is used as an actuator for the end effector
in Fig. 3. To provide actuation to the second DOF for the
prototype that eliminates necessity for complex electronic
finger an extension spring is placed between links 1 and
circuits and encoders implementing motor position con-
2. Actuation torque is calculated according to character-
trol. Control of the servomotor can be performed directly
istics of the chosen actuator. All gear ratios are calculated
from MATLAB or C/ C++ programming environments
and included in simulation. Fig. 7 illustrates the simula-
as well as using the Robot Operating System (ROS) [i],
tion results of the finger grasping sequence that correlate
that provide easy and straightforward integration of the
well with the theoretical grasping sequence of an under-
gripper with other robotic research and educational se-
actuated finger linkage mechanism described in Section 2.
tups. The output torque of the servomotor is 2.5 Nm at
The ball shape in the figure represents a grasping object
12 V power supply voltage.
and is fixed to the workspace. The gravity is taken into
Combining the finger and the breakaway clutch mech-
account and applied in the vertical direction downwards.
anisms into a single system requires selecting appropriate
parameters for the springs in the clutch and finger mecha-
nisms. For proper grasping of an object each finger mech-
anism should perform the closing sequence to a full possi-
4.2. Experimental Results
ble extent independently of each other. This is achieved in The main grasping patterns of the robotic gripper can
the case when stiffness of the spring in the clutch is larger be summarized to three main configurations: cylindrical,
than stiffness of the spring in the finger as shown below spherical and planar [22], as illustrated in Fig. 8. All three
fingers of the robotic gripper are pivoted to the palm in
K1 ≤ K2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (11)
a way that allows executing the grasping configurations
In the proposed gripper design actuation wrench Ta is without changing orientations of the finger bases. This
applied to the pivot point of the finger, transferring rota- feature greatly simplifies the end effector design.
tional motion. Having one actuator and three fingers the Figure 9 illustrates the performance of the proposed
actuation wrench of each finger can be calculated know- robotic end effector while grasping a number of objects

500 Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.27 No.5, 2015

 Design and Analysis of 3-Finger Underactuated Adaptive End Effector

Fig. 7. Simulation carried out on ADAMS showing grasping sequence.

Fig. 8. Grasping configurations of the end effector.

Fig. 10. The relationship of the grasping force versus input

torque.

it. Planar grasping is performed at tip phalanxes using all

three fingers, while fingertip grasp uses only two fingers
for picking up small objects. The video of the gripper
performance is available at www.alaris.kz.
The relationship of the gripping force vs. input torque
of the designed robotic end effector is theoretically sim-
ulated and experimentally obtained using a force gauge
measuring applied gripping force at fingertips as shown in
Fig. 10. It can be clearly seen that there is a slight differ-
ence of the gripping force between simulated and exper-
imental results which might be attributed to energy loss
between moving parts of the end effector prototype. The
maximum gripping force of the robotic end effector pro-
Fig. 9. Grasping of different objects by the robotic end ef-
totype was experimentally estimated as 15 N. However,
fector prototype: (a) cylindrical grasp. (b) Spherical grasp.
(c) Planar grasp. (d) Fingertip grasp. (e) High payload, large due to non-backdrivability of the end effector actuating
shape grasp. (f) Low payload, small shape grasp. mechanism, the fingers may resist much larger forces that
they actually exert [11].
A comparison of the proposed robotic end effector with
widely applied three-finger robotic end effectors is pre-
with different shapes. It can be seen that the end effec- sented in Table 1. The end effectors have been devel-
tor fingers are able to adapt to the shapes of the grasped oped for different (e.g., industrial: Barrett Hand, Robo-
objects. For instance, the cylindrical grasping pattern is tiq, Schunk SDH Hand, or service: Kinova JACO, i-HY
achieved by holding an object with two fingers situated Hand) applications. The number of utilized actuators is
opposite to each other, whereas the third finger ensures used as one of the comparative parameters due to its ef-
the grasp stability. This prevents unstable grasps and al- fect on the overall cost and power requirements for a
lows gripping cylindrical objects without prior knowledge robotic end effector [31]. As clear from Table 1 the de-
of their center of mass. During spherical grasping fin- signed robotic end effector in this paper rovides compa-
gers adapt to the shape of the object and fully envelope rable gripping force characteristics and available types of

Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.27 No.5, 2015 501

Telegenov, K. et al.

References:
Table 1. Comparison of three-finger robotic end effectors. [1] S. Jacobsen, E. Iversen, D. Knutti, R. Johnson, and K. Biggers, “De-
sign of the Utah/M.I.T. Dextrous Hand,” Proc. of the 1986 IEEE Int.
Type of No. of Gripping Conf. on Robotics and Automation, pp. 1520-1532, 1986.
Hand [2] M. Baril, T. Laliberte, C. Gosselin, and F. Routhier, “On the
grasping actuators force [N] Design of a Mechanically Programmable Underactuated Anthro-
Barrett Hand CS 4 15 pomorphic Prosthetic Gripper,” ASME J. of Mechanical Design,
Vol.135, No.12, p. 121008, 2013.
Robotiq CSP 2 15–60 [3] T. Laliberte, L. Birglen, and C. Gosselin, “Underactuation in robotic
Schunk SDH Hand CSP 7 – grasping hands, Machine Intelligence & Robotic Control,” Vol.4,
No.3, pp. 1-11, 2002.
Kinova JACO CSP 3 – [4] Y. Ando, “Microgripper,” J. of Robotics and Mechatronics, Vol.2,
SDM Hand CS 1 10 No.3, pp. 214-216, 1990.
[5] F. Chen, K. Sekiyama, B. Sun, P. Di, J. Huang, H. Sasaki, and T.
Presented Fukuda, “Design and Application of an Intelligent Robotic Grip-
CSP 1 10–15 per for Accurate and Tolerant Electronic Connector Mating,” J. of
End effector Robotics and Mechatronics, Vol.24, No.3, pp. 441-451, 2012.
[6] S. Bachche and K. Oka, “Design, Modeling and Performance Test-
ing of End-Effector for Sweet Pepper Harvesting Robot Hand,” J.
of Robotics and Mechatronics, Vol.25, No.4, pp. 705-717, 2013.
[7] G. Figliolini and M. Sorli, “Open-Loop Force Control of a
grasping, i.e., cylindrical (C), spherical (S) and planar (P) Three-Finger Gripper Through PWM Modulated Pneumatic Digital
Valves,” J. of Robotics and Mechatronics, Vol.12, No.4, pp. 480-
grasps (Fig. 8), with respect to the commercially available 493, 2000.
robotic devices. In addition, the use of minimum num- [8] A. Namiki, Y. Imai, M. Kaneko, and M. Ishikawa, “Development
ber of actuators and the 3D printing technology makes of a High-Speed Multifingered Hand System,” Proc. of the 2003
IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 2666-
the proposed design potentially preferable in terms of the 2671, 2004.
cost to payload ratio. [9] W. Townsend, “The Barret Hand grasper - programmably flexible
part handling and assembly,” Industrial Robot, Vol.27, pp. 181-188,
2000.
[10] L. U. Odhner et al., “A compliant, underactuated hand for robust
5. Conclusions manipulation,” Int. J. of Robotics Research, Vol.33, No.5, pp. 736-
752, 2014.
[11] S. J. Bartholet, “Reconfigurable end effector,” U.S. Patent
This paper presents authors’ preliminary work on the No:5108140, 1992.
design of an underactuated robotic end effector with a [12] C. Gosselin, “Adaptive Robotic Mechanical Systems: A Design
Paradigm,” ASME J. of Mechanical Design, Vol.128, No.1, pp. 192-
breakaway clutch mechanism. A novel application of a 198, 2005.
breakaway clutch mechanism using helical gears is pre- [13] C. Beyer, “Strategic implications of current trends in additive man-
sented. This mechanism provides independent movement ufacturing,” ASME J. of Manufacturing Science and Engineering,
Vol.136, No.6, p. 064701, 2014.
of the fingers actuated by a single actuator. The end effec- [14] R. R. Ma, L. U. Odhner, and A. M. Dollar, “A modular, open-source
tor design model and its experimental prototype are in- 3D printed underactuated hand,” Proc. of the 2013 IEEE Int. Conf.
on Robotics and Automation, pp. 2737-2743, 2013.
troduced and discussed in detail. It is shown that the the [15] Z. Kappassov, Y. Khassanov, A. Saudabayev, A. Shintemirov, and
presented robotic end effector with one actuator meets the H. A. Varol, “Semi-anthropomorphic 3D printed multigrasp hand
design objectives in terms of: for industrial and service robots,” Proc. of the 2013 IEEE Int. Conf.
on Mechatronics and Automation, pp. 1697-1702, 2013.
[16] Y. Tlegenov, K. Telegenov, and A. Shintemirov, “An open-source
• simple mechanical structure of the end effector due 3D printed underactuated robotic gripper,” Proc. of the 10th
to usage of a four-bar linkage system; IEEE/ASME Int. Conf. on Mechatronic and Embedded Systems
and Applications, pp. 1-6, 2014.
• a low cost due to usage of a single actuator, 3D print- [17] C. Chen, “Mechatronics Design of Multi-Finger Robot Hand,” 12th
Int. Conf. on Control, Automation and Systems, pp. 1491-1496,
ing prototyping technology and off-the-shelf compo- 2012.
nents; [18] C. Liu, H. Qiao, J. Su, and P. Zhang, “Vision-based 3-D grasping
of 3-D objects with a simple 2-D gripper,” IEEE Trans. on Systems,
Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, Vol.44, pp. 605-620, 2014.
• relatively high payload comparable with currently
[19] J. M. Romano, K. Hsiao, G. Niemeyer, S. Chitta, and K. J. Kuchen-
available robotic end effectors. becker, “Human-inspired robotic grasp control with tactile sensing,”
IEEE Trans. on Robotics, Vol.27, pp. 1067-1079, 2011.
In overall, the proposed end effector design can be po- [20] T. Laliberte and C. Gosselin, “Actuation system for highly underac-
tentially preferable in terms of cost to payload ratio. tuated gripping mechanism,” U.S. Patent No:6505870, 2003.
[21] L. J. Caron and C. Deguire, “Mechanical Finger,” PCT Patent
Future work includes design and implementation of WO2010/142043 A1, 2010.
proposed end effector prototype with embedded sensing [22] T. Laliberte and C. Gosselin, “Underactuation in space robotic
elements such as tactile sensors for force feedback capa- hands,” Int. Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Au-
tomation in Space, pp. 18-21, 2001.
bilities and depth camera for object recognition to per- [23] S. Montambault and C. Gosselin, “Analysis of Underactuated Me-
form autonomous grasping performance. The end effector chanical Grippers,” ASME J. of Mechanical Design, Vol.123, No.3,
pp. 367-374, 2001.
prototype will be mounted on an industrial manipulator
[24] L. Birglen and C. Gosselin, “Geometric design of three-phalanx
for evaluating grasping performance in real-life scenarios. underactuated fingers,” ASME J. of Mechanical Design, Vol.128,
No.2, pp. 356-364, 2005.
[25] L. Birglen and C. Gosselin, “Kinetostatic analysis of underactuated
fingers,” IEEE Trans. on Robotics and Automation, Vol.20, No.2,
pp. 211-221, 2004.
[26] I. A. Bonev, D. Zlatanov, and C. Gosselin, “Singularity Analysis of
3-DOF Planar Parallel Mechanisms via Screw Theory,” ASME J. of
Mechanical Design, Vol.125, No.3, p. 537-581, 2003.

502 Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.27 No.5, 2015

 Design and Analysis of 3-Finger Underactuated Adaptive End Effector

[27] L. Birglen and C. Gosselin, “Force analysis of connected differen-

tial mechanisms: application to grasping,” Int. J of Robotics Re- Name:
search, Vol.25, No.10, pp. 1033-1046, 2006. Yedige Tlegenov
[28] R. R. Ma, L. U. Odhner, and A. M. Dollar, “A modular, open-source
3D printed underactuated hand,” Proc. of the 2013 IEEE Int. Conf.
on Robotics and Automation, pp. 2737-2743, 2013. Affiliation:
[29] K. Telegenov, Y. Tlegenov, and A. Shintemirov, “An underactu- Department of Robotics and Mechatronics,
ated adaptive 3D printed robotic gripper,” Proc. of the 10th France- School of Science and Technology, Nazarbayev
Japan/8th Europe-Asia Congress on Mechatronics, pp. 110-115, University
2014. National University of Singapore
[30] N. T. Ulrich, “Methods and apparatus for mechanically intelligent
grasping,” U.S. Patent No:4957320, 1990.
[31] S. Hussain, Q. Xie, and P. K. Jamwal, “Control of a Robotic Or-
thosis for Gait Rehabilitation,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Address:
Vol.61. No.911-919, 2013. 53 Kabanbay Batyr Avenue, Astana, Kazakhstan
Brief Biographical History:
Supporting Online Materials: 2011 Received B.Sc. degree in Mechanics from Gumilyov Eurasian
[a] Shadow Dexterous Hand Technical Specification, 2013 National University
http://www.shadowrobot.com/wp-content/uploads/ 2013 Received M.Sc. degree from Anna University
shadow dexterous hand technical specification E1 20130101.pdf 2013- Ph.D. Student, National University of Singapore
[Accessed October 2, 2014] 2013- Department of Robotics and Mechatronics, Nazarbayev University
[b] Robotiq, Three-Finger Adaptive Robot Gripper Main Works:
http://robotiq.com/media/Robotiq-3-Finger-Adaptive-Robot- • parallel mechanisms, robot vehicles and industrial design
Gripper-Specifications.pdf [Accessed October 10, 2014]
[c] Schunk, Servo-Electric 3-Finger Gripping Hand SDH
http://www.schunk.com/schunk files/attachments/SDH DE EN.pdf
[Accessed November 2, 2014] Name:
Shahid Hussain
[d] Delft University of Technology, Delft Hand
http://www.3me.tudelft.nl/en/about-the-faculty/departments/
biomechanical-engineering/research/dbl-delft-biorobotics-lab/ Affiliation:
delft-arm-and-hand/ [Accessed October 15, 2014] School of Mechanical, Materials and Mecha-
[e] Kinova, JACO Research Edition tronics Engineering, University of Wollongong
http://kinovarobotics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/
kinova-jaco-spec-sheet.pdf [Accessed November 5, 2014]
[f] UP Plus 3D Printer, http://www.pp3dp.com/
[Accessed September 20, 2014]
[g] Stratasys ABS Material Properties Address:
http://www.nrri.umn.edu/NLTC/ABS07.pdf New South Wales 2522, Australia
[Accessed February 2, 2014] Brief Biographical History:
[h] Robotis, Dynamixel MX-28, http://support.robotis.com/en/product/ 2007 Received B.Sc. in Mechatronics and Control Engineering from
dynamixel/mx series/mx-28.htm [Accessed February 15, 2015] University of Engineering and Technology Lahore
[i] The Robot Operating System (ROS), http://www.ros.org 2009/2013 Received M.Sc. and Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from
[Accessed August 19, 2014] University of Auckland
2013- Lecturer, School of Mechanical, Materials and Mechatronics
Engineering, University of Wollongong
Main Works:
• robot compliant actuation, robot assisted rehabilitation, robust and
adaptive control of compliant robotic manipulators
Name:
Kuat Telegenov
Name:
Affiliation: Almas Shintemirov
Department of Robotics and Mechatronics,
School of Science and Technology, Nazarbayev
Affiliation:
University
Department of Robotics and Mechatronics,
School of Science and Technology, Nazarbayev
University

Address:
53 Kabanbay Batyr Avenue, Astana, Kazakhstan
Brief Biographical History: Address:
2012 Received B.Sc. degree in Mechanical Engineering (Aeronautics) 53 Kabanbay Batyr Avenue, Astana, Kazakhstan
from University Technology of Malaysia
Brief Biographical History:
2014 Received M.Sc. degree in Mechanics from Gumilyov Eurasian
2001 Received Engineer’s degree from Pavlodar State University
National University
2004 Received Candidate’s degree in Technical Sciences (Ph.D.) from
2015- Instructor, Department of Robotics and Mechatronics, Nazarbayev
Pavlodar State University
University
2009 Received Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering and Electronics from
Main Works: University of Liverpool
• robotics, mechanical design, underactuated mechanisms 2011- Assistant Professor, Department of Robotics and Mechatronics,
Nazarbayev University
Main Works:
• robotic/mechatronic system design and computation intelligence
Membership in Academic Societies:
• The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Robotics
and Automation Society

Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics Vol.27 No.5, 2015 503