Contact Dynamics Experiment Modelling

A Report Submitted in Partial Fulllment of the Requirements for SYDE 652

Mike Boos

Faculty of Engineering Department of Systems Design Engineering

April 16, 2009 Course Instructor: Professor John McPhee

Abstract
A contact dynamics model has been proposed that uses the properties of the volume of interference between to solid geometries to determine contact forces and torque. A series of potential experiments are described for measuring the contact normal and friction model parameters and for model validation. The experimental apparatus are simulated using the volumetric model and results are compared with simulations in ADAMS, where possible.

Contents
Abstract Contents List of Tables List of Figures 1 Introduction 1.1 Contact model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i iii iv v 1 2 3 4 4 4 5 6 7 7 8 8 8 8 9

2 Experiments 2.1 Contact normal experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volumetric stiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Friction experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translational motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rotational motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation and rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Modelling 3.1 Payload geometries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spherical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cylindrical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Contact normal experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

3.3

Friction experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation and rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9 10 10 11 11 12 12 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 17 19

3.4

ADAMS models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4 Simulation results 4.1 Contact normal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Quasi-static loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Friction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translation and rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Conclusions Appendix A - Friction model Appendix B - Model parameters

iii

List of Tables
1.1 Model parameters requiring experimental identication. . . . . . . . . 2

iv

List of Figures
2.1 2.2 2.3 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 Experimental apparatus for measuring displacement and contact force. Apparatus for friction experiments, viewed in plane of motion. . . . . Apparatus for friction experiments, viewed o-angle. . . . . . . . . . Displacements for a constant loading rate of 1 N/s. . . . . . . . . . . Results of damping experiments for x 0 = 0 and Factuator = 20. . . . . Results of damping experiments for x 0 = 0.02 and Factuator = 20. . . . Results of friction in pure translation experiments. . . . . . . . . . . . Results of friction in pure rotation experiments. . . . . . . . . . . . . Results of combined translation and rotation experiments. . . . . . . 4 5 5 12 13 13 13 14 14

1 Introduction
A exible volumetric contact dynamics model has been proposed for the purpose of generating reliable simulations of space-based manipulator contact dynamics rapidly [1]. In this model, forces and moments between two bodies in contact can be expressed in terms of the volume of interference between the undeformed shapes of the bodies. This model is to be validated experimentally for hard-on-hard (i.e.: metal on metal) contact. Additionally, in order to use the model to simulate actual contact scenarios, model parameters must be determined experimentally. A series of contact experiments have been proposed. These experiments include contact normal measurements to estimate and validate stiness and damping parameters, as well as experiments involving tangential and rotational motion to nd friction forces and spinning resistance torque. It is the purpose of this work to present dynamic models of these experiments in order to later validate the volumetric contact model against experimental results. The experimental apparatus for these experiments are pending construction, so the models have yet to be validated empirically. However, the experiments have been modelled in ADAMS, where possible, and compared with the simulation results from the mathematical models.

1.1

Contact model

The volumetric model presented by Gonthier [1] is briey described below. In this model, the contact normal force is related directly to the size of the volume of interference, V , through a volumetric stiness kV , given in units of force per unit volume. The magnitude of the normal force is then given by FN = kV V (1 + avcn ) (1)

where vcn is the speed of the centroid of the volume in the normal direction and a is damping parameter determined by the coecient of restitution and the initial impact velocity. Friction is modelled through a bristle friction force model. In addition, friction torque that resists spinning in the normal direction is also modelled. The model also attempts to account for the Contensou eect, where tangential friction eects can be diminished when there is spinning motion in the normal direction. Details of this friction model are included in Appendix A. Parameters for the model requiring experimental identication are listed in Table 1.1. Table 1.1: Model parameters requiring experimental identication. Parameter Description kV eef f vsmall S C 0 1 2 vS dw Volumetric stiness Coecient of restitution Minimum damping velocity threshold Stiction friction coefcient (static friction) Coulomb friction coefcient (kinetic friction) Load-dependent bristle stiness Load-dependent bristle damping coefcient Load dependent viscous damping coefcient Stribeck velocity Dwell-time dynamics time constant

2 Experiments
The purpose of the proposed experiments is to determine parameters for the volumetric contact model and validate that model. Parameters to be determined include a volumetric stiness constant, damping parameters, and friction parameters. Of interest for validation are the volume-normal force relationship, bristle-friction model, spinning friction torque model, and the Contensou eect. This chapter describes the proposed physical experimental apparatus for parameter identication and validation, as well as the procedure for driving the bodies in the experiments. For the contact normal force model, measurements of the displacement and forces in the normal direction are desired. For tangential friction, the contact translational displacement and friction forces must be measured, and for spinning friction, the normal angular velocity and spinning friction torque must be measured. Ideally, one should control and measure all these displacements and forces directly and simultaneously. To accomplish this, three actuators would be required. However, the experiments can be divided into two types, contact normal and friction. This reduces the number of actuators required at any given time to one and two respectively. Additionally, identifying model parameters is easier if each set of parameters can be measured independently. Two dierent contact payloads are proposed. The rst is spherical, and the results from volumetric contact simulation can be compared directly with those from Hertz theory. The second is cylindrical, with a at end forming one of the contact surfaces 3

with the opposing plane. This payload does not satisfy the assumptions in Hertz theory of a small contact patch and non-conforming geometries, which allows testing of the volumetric model in cases where Hertz theory does not apply.

2.1

Contact normal experiments

The contact normal experiments will be controlled with a single ball screw-type linear actuator (which allows for some back-driving). The contact payload will be mounted rigidly onto the actuator carriage and driven into a metal plate, as shown in Figure 2.1. One or more normal force sensors mounted behind the plate will measure the reaction force, while the encoders of the motor driving the linear actuator will determine the displacement of the payload. Figure 2.1: Experimental apparatus for measuring displacement and contact force.

Volumetric stiness
Starting from rest, with the payload touching the contact surface with no forces between them, the force driving the payload will gradually be increased from zero so that the force sensors are loaded quasi-statically. The increase in displacement should be gradual such that the eect of damping is negligible. The measured displacement can be used to nd the volume of interference, so that a volumetric stiness constant, kV , can be estimated through a linear t of force to volume measurements.

Damping
i Damping depends on the initial normal velocity at impact, vn , as well as a coecient

of restitution, eef f . With a known volumetric stiness and measured displacements, velocities, and forces, the coecient of restitution can be estimated. The coecient should be estimated using a variety of higher initial impact velocities and driving forces. In addition, the payload should be driven at lower impact 4

velocities in order to estimate vsmall , the minimal velocity threshold. The system could be driven with a near-zero initial impact velocity to estimate vsmall or a series of experiments could be conducted starting from a near-zero initial velocity and increasing the initial velocity until the measured damping parameter a changes. If back-driving of the ball screw is possible, the initial and nal impact velocities should be compared with the coecient of restitution.

2.2

Friction experiments

The friction experiments require an apparatus that controls both tangential motion and normal rotation, in addition to applying a contact normal force. The apparatus depicted in Figures 2.2 and 2.3 has been designed to accommodate this. A linear actuator (consisting of a DC brushless motor connected to a ball screw) drives the translational motion, while a small brushless DC motor drives rotation. The payload is mounted to the shaft of the small motor, the frame of which is mounted through a vertical linear guide to the carriage of the linear actuator to permit free motion in the normal direction. As the system is under gravity, the normal force on the payload is dened by the masses of the motor and payload. Since the stiness constant is estimated from the contact normal experiments, the properties of the volume of interference can be determined. Two 3-DOF (x,y,z) force sensors beneath the contact plate connect it to the ground. These are aligned so that the sensors are centred in the plane of motion of the payload. The normal force can be measured through the sum of the y -forces, the tangential friction force through the sum of the x-forces, and the spinning friction torque through the dierence of the z -forces multiplied by the distance between them. Figure 2.2: Apparatus for friction experiments, viewed in plane of motion.

Figure 2.3: Apparatus for friction experiments, viewed o-angle.

Alternative designs were considered. A four-axis CNC would enable the desired motion, however, concerns over control and real-time position measurement made such a choice unfeasible. In addition, many CNC designs would require the contact plate to be moved to enable relative motion with respect to the payload, which would register on the force sensors. Parallel manipulators were also considered, but were considered to be limited in their range of motion.

Translational motion
The purpose of using pure translational motion is to determine the seven bristle friction model parameters and to validate that model for the surfaces in contact. To nd the coecient of static friction, s , the applied force can be increased until the payload begins to move. The coecient of static friction is the peak friction force measured at the instant before movement divided by the contact normal force. This should be performed at several dierent applied normal loads for a more reliable estimate [1]. The Coulomb friction coecient, c and viscous damping coecient, 2 can be determined through experiments where the payload is driven at various dierent constant velocities [1]. If dwell-time dependency is of interest, the payload must be allowed to come to a stop and allowed to dwell for a period of time and then be forced to move again. By varying the time that the payload dwells, the dwell-time dynamics time constant, dw , can be estimated. Gonthier [1] provides suggestions as to how to nd the bristle stiness and damping parameters, which may be dicult. These values, along with the Stribeck velocity will likely need to be determined through parameter tuning from experiments where the payload is forced to enter into slipping from rest.

Rotational motion
The spinning friction torque model uses the same parameters as those determined by the translational experiments. The main purpose of the rotational experiments is to validate this torque model. Thus, similar experiments can be applied where the payload is rotated instead of translated to determine if the model ts the data.

Translation and rotation

The purpose of these experiments are to validate the models description of the Contensou eect. One type of experiment would be to vary rotational speed while holding the tangential speed constant and measuring the resulting friction forces and torques. Conversely, rotational speed could be held constant with varying tangential speeds. The model Contensou factors could then be compared with the measured ones.

3 Modelling
3.1 Payload geometries

Spherical
Given a sphere-plane contact with a radius r, and a depth of penetration [2], the volume of interference is: 1 V = 2 (3r ) 3 and the volume moment of inertia about the normal axis [3] is
2 ) 2 2 (r )(r 2 JV,nn = V r2 + V 5 5 r2

(1)

(2)

The radius of the spherical payload was dened as 5 mm.

Cylindrical
Given a cylinder-plane contact with a radius r, and a depth of penetration , the volume of interference is: V = r2 (3)

and the volume moment of inertia about the normal axis is 1 JV,nn = r2 V 2 The radius of the cylindrical payload was dened as 5 mm. (4)

3.2

Contact normal experiments

The contact normal apparatus has one single degree of freedom, in x. The equation of motion is given by mx = Factuator FN = Factuator kV V (1 + ax ) The mass of the payload and carriage is 4.65 kg. For quasi-static stiness experiment, the payload begins at rest just touching the plate, and the applied force is increased at a constant rate from 0 to 30 N over 30 s. For the damping parameter estimation experiments, the payload begins just touching the plate with a given initial velocity and a constant applied force. Back-driving of the ball screw is permitted. Modelled are two examples having initial velocities of 0 and 20 mm/s, both with an applied force of 20 N. The system was simulated for 0.1 s. Simulation of equation (5b) was performed using the ode45 solver in MATLAB. (5a) (5b)

3.3

Friction experiments

The friction experiments have three degrees of freedom: the translation of the linear actuator in x, the vertical displacement of the payload in y , and the rotation of the payload about the y -axis. The equations of motion have been reduced to the

following three dierential equations: (mpayload + mmotor + mcarriage ) x = Ff + Factuator (mpayload + mmotor ) y = FN (mpayload + mmotor )g = Ts + Tmotor Ipayload Throughout the experiments, y is kept at equilibrium, so (7) becomes FN = (mpayload + mmotor )g (9) (6) (7) (8)

Also note that the friction model introduces three new state variables for translational and rotational bristle deformation and dwell time. Dierential equations for these variables and formulas for tangential friction and spinning resistance torque are given in Appendix A. To solve the six dierential equations, the ode15s solver in MATLAB was found to be necessary to simulate some of the experiments. Parameters used in the experiment models are listed in Appendix B.

Translation
The implemented simulations involve a constant tangential load being applied. Two dierent loads have been simulated, 10 N and 20 N, which lead to sticking and sliding respectively.

Rotation
The implemented simulations involve a constant rotational torque being applied. Two dierent loads have been simulated, 0.025 Nm and 0.075 Nm which lead to sticking and sliding respectively.

10

Translation and rotation

The proposed experiments involve prescribed motions, so only the friction state dynamic equations need to be solved in order to determine the friction forces and torque. The rst simulation entails a constant tangential speed of 0.1 m/s and a rotational speed increasing at a constant rate from 0 to 200 rad/s over 5 s. The second has a constant rotational speed of 100 rad/s and a tangential speed increasing at a constant rate from 0 to 0.2 m/s over 5 s.

3.4

ADAMS models

The two experimental apparatus were constructed in ADAMS for comparison with the mathematical model. ADAMS was congured to use the IMPACT model, which treats contact like a non-linear spring-damper, based on depth and speed of penetration, and includes a Coulomb friction model. Contact parameters are listed in Appendix B. The GSTIFF solver was used for dynamic simulation. The contact stiness model required a stiness parameter and a force exponent to apply to the penetration. For the spherical payload, the contact stiness could be modelled after Hertz theory. For the cylindrical payload, a linear relationship was given for contact stiness, in keeping with the apparent linear relationship between normal force and penetration in the volumetric model. Contact damping parameters were more dicult to correlate with other theoretical models. A maximum damping value is required, as well as some penetration depth to apply it at. This is implemented using the cubic STEP function. An attempt was made have the damping/penetration prole be similar to that for the spherical payload at low impact velocities, however the shape of the STEP function makes for a poor t. This was found to lead to poor correlation in the results. IMPACT provided a simple Coulomb friction model for tangential friction only, where the coecient of friction is a function of slip velocity. The model does not account for spinning friction torque or the Contensou eect. Thus, for the friction models, only the translational friction experiments could be compared. 11

4 Simulation results
4.1 Contact normal

Quasi-static loading
Figure 4.1 shows displacements for the spherical and cylindrical payloads as the applied force is increased from 0 to 30 N. For the spherical payload, the volumetric models displacement prole diers from the Hertz theory model in ADAMS, as they have dierent ordered relationships between force and displacement. For the cylindrical payload, the volumetric and ADAMS models share the same force-displacement relationship. Figure 4.1: Displacements for a constant loading rate of 1 N/s.

Damping
Comparisons between the volumetric and ADAMS models for the damping parameter experiments are given in Figures 4.2 and 4.3. Note that back-driving of the linear actuator is allowed, permitting the oscillations shown. It is apparent that the dierence between the damping models in the volumetric models and ADAMS lead to signicant dierences in performance, especially for the cylindrical payload, which has an

12

initially steeper rate of loading. For higher velocity impacts shown in Figure 4.3, the damping has little eect on the ADAMS model. Figure 4.2: Results of damping experiments for x 0 = 0 and Factuator = 20.

Figure 4.3: Results of damping experiments for x 0 = 0.02 and Factuator = 20. Convergence of simulation results in the volumetric models were found using a relative solver tolerance of 1 106 , while convergence for the ADAMS model was found using tolerances around 1 104 and 1 1011 for the spherical and cylindrical payloads, respectively. The tolerance required for the cylindrical payload suggests that the equations of motion are very sti in ADAMS and that model could use additional damping to stabilize after impact.

4.2

Friction

Translation
For friction in pure translation, the model is identical for both payload geometries. Results from the two modelled experiments are given in Figure 4.4. The bristle friction model allows for greater displacement in static friction, through the bristle stiness, while the ADAMS model has some gradual creep since friction is a function of slip velocity, as shown by the 10 N case. From the 20 N case, the forces are great enough to overcome static friction and payload is in motion, so the friction force reaches a steady state. Convergence of simulation results for the volumetric model occurs Figure 4.4: Results of friction in pure translation experiments. for relative tolerances below 1 106 , while the ADAMS model converges around 1 104 . Note that very low stiction and friction transition velocities are required

13

Rotation
With rotation, the friction models for the payloads dier, as they depend on the properties of the volumes of interference. Results for applied torque of 0.025 N and 0.075 N are shown in Figure 4.5. For the sticking case, both payloads experience a slight initial impulse as the rotational bristles deform. For the sliding case, the spherical payload experiences greater friction torque as the normal pressure distribution is focused intensely around the point of contact, where the surface velocity is small. The cylindrical payload has a normal pressure distribution that is evenly distributed over a larger surface area, so there is less friction at the slow moving points toward the centre. Figure 4.5: Results of friction in pure rotation experiments.

Translation and rotation

Results from the combined translation and rotation experiments are shown in Figure 4.6. The left column has angular velocity increasing at a constant rate while the right column has tangential velocity increasing at a constant rate. Notice that the magnitude of the friction force decreases as the angular velocity increases, and the magnitude of the spinning friction torque decreases as tangential velocity is increased.

Figure 4.6: Results of combined translation and rotation experiments.

14

5 Conclusions
A series of experiments have been proposed for parameter identication and validation of a volumetric contact dynamics model. Two experimental apparatus are presented for measuring the contact normal parameters of volumetric stiness and damping, and friction model parameters. Friction experiments are divided into pure tangential translation, pure normal rotation, and combined translation and rotation. The experimental apparatus were modelled through dynamic equations. Simulations of these equations were compared with results from models of the experimental apparatus in ADAMS, using the built-in contact model. The ADAMS friction model was limited to translational friction, so simulations of experiments with rotational motion could not be compared with the ADAMS models. In addition, the damping model in ADAMS was radically dierent from that of the volumetric model, so it was dicult to compare the damping experiment simulations. The dynamic equations used to model the experimental apparatus will be useful in simulating the experiments for the identication of parameters and validation of the volumetric contact dynamics model.

15

References
[1] Y. Gonthier, Contact Dynamics Modelling for Robotic Task Simulation. PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, 2007. [2] E. W. Weisstein, Spherical cap. From MathWorld A Wolfram Web Resource. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SphericalCap.html. [3] D. Gauchez and J. Souchay, Simulation of post-impact rotational changes through multi-dimensional parametrization, Icarus, vol. 185, no. 1, pp. 83 96, 2006.

16

Appendix A - Friction model

A brief description of the equations for the friction model are described. For derivations, see [1]. For the bristle friction force model, a new state vector z is dened to represent bristle deformation. The bristle deformation rate is given by z = svsct + (1 s)( 0 1 c dir (vsct , v )Cv,s z) 1 1 (1)

where vsct is the tangential velocity at the centroid of the contact surface. The deformation rate is saturated, such that z = 1 0 sat(0 z + 1 z , max Cv,s ) z 1 1 (2)

The s value determines whether sticking is occurring and is dened by

2 vavg 2 vs

s=e where

(3)

2 vavg = vsct vsct + n

JV,nn n V

(4)

n is the angular velocity in the normal direction and JV,nn is the volume moment of inertia about the normal. Similarly, a bristle state n can be dened for rotation. The deformation rate is n = sn + (1 s)( c C,s sgn(n ) 0 n 1 rgyr 1 17 (5)

The spinning deformation rate is also saturated: 1 n , max C,s ) 0 n n = sat(0 n + 1 1 rgyr 1 The radius of gyration, rgyr is dened by
2 rgyr = JV,nn /V

(6)

(7)

The Contensou dimensionless factors Cv,s and C,s are given by Cv,s = s + (1 s) |vsct | vavg (8)

C,s = s + (1 s)

rgyr |n | vavg

(9)

A nal state variable, sdw is introduced to describe the dwell time of the system for the maximum stiction force
1 (s dw 0 1

s dw =

sdw )

s sdw 0, s sdw < 0

(10)

From this dwell time, the maximum coecient of friction can be determined: max = c + (s c )sdw (11)

Finally, the tangential friction force and the spinning friction torque are given by Ff = FN (sat(0 z + 1 z , max Cv,s ) + 2 vsct )
2 n , s = rgyr FN (sat(0 n + 1

(12) (13)

max C,s ) + 2 n )n rgyr

18

Appendix B - Model parameters

Table B.1 Mathematical model parameters. Parameter eef f vs v vsmall S C 0 1 2 dw g mpayload mmotor mcarriage Ipayload Value 0.85 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.8 0.4 105 105 0 0.75 9.81 0.083 2.88 6.62 6.45 Units mm/s mm/s mm/s 1/m s/m s/m s m/s2 kg kg kg kg mm2

19

Table B.2 ADAMS model parameters. Parameter k e Spherical d c k e Cylindrical d c 4.6 4.0 102 N/(mm/s) mm 4.6 4.0 102 9.82 104 1 N/(mm/s) mm N/mm Value 3.77 103 1.5 Units N/mm3/2 -

20