Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sensors and Actuators A: Physical

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sna

Bi-bellows: Pneumatic bending actuator

Yoel Shapiro a, , Alon Wolf a , Kosa Gabor b
a
Technion, Faculty Mechanical Engineering, Haifa, 32000, Israel
b
Tel Aviv University, School of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: We present a compliant single degree-of-freedom pneumatic actuator with large bending capabilities.
Received 20 September 2010 Several actuator designs are compared and validated against the suggested actuation model. Repeatabil-
Received in revised form 2 March 2011 ity, some dynamic properties and the affect of external loads are examined as well.
Accepted 3 March 2011
2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Available online 10 March 2011

Keywords:
Hyper-redundant robot
Continuum robot
Pneumatic actuator

1. Introduction
Fluidic actuators (hydraulic and pneumatic) hold typical advan-
tages over the more common electric actuators; they consist of
fewer parts and have a lower weight and lower cost. These charac-
teristics have drawn the attention of many researchers interested in
miniaturization [1], several of whom reported that, at micro scale,
uidic actuators hold an advantage over electric actuators thanks
to a higher force/volume ratio. Fluidic actuators are attractive for
medical devices [2], not only because of miniaturization capabilities
but also due to safety considerations, including high compliance
and low working-temperatures.
Power supply is still a limiting factor for uidic actuators. Com-
pact and portable uidic power sources are still exceptional, such
as the unique idea to use a hydrogen storage alloy [3]. Most uidic
actuators include compressors and bulky supply lines, which make
them cumbersome. Despite these difculties, several inatable bel-
lows actuators have been developed in the past. One of the earliest
works was that of McKibben [4] on articial muscles in the 1950s,
which opened the way to various applications [5] based on differ-
ent types of articial muscles, e.g., Yarllot muscle [6], Morin muscle
[7] and ROMAC micro actuator [8]. While a single articial-muscle
actuator only generates linear motion, other bellows actuators have
been designed to generate rotation or bending. Balloon rotary joints
Abbreviations: CAD, computer assisted design; COP, center of pressure; CSM,
continuum snakelike manipulators; UV, ultra violet.
Corresponding author. Tel.: +972 528695589; fax: +972 48295711.
E-mail addresses: yoelsh@tx.technion.ac.il (Y. Shapiro), alonw@tx.technion.ac.il
(A. Wolf), kosa@vision.ee.ethz.ch (K. Gabor).
usually have a limited working range but they have been used suc-
cessfully for nger-like apparatus, such as a hand-prosthesis [9] or
a micro-gripper [10].
Bending bellows actuators are usually long beam-like elements
where one side stretches in the longitudinal direction more than
the other, thus bending the actuator. Often hoops or spoke-like
restraining-beams are used to resist swelling of the bellows. One
concept used to achieve differential stretching is partitioning the
bellows into several compartments and applying different pres-
sures to each chamber. This approach introduces an additional
degree of freedom the pressure difference is attributed to bending
and the total pressure is attributed to elongation or stiffness. A bel-
lows with three compartments [11] has three degrees of freedom
(DOF) and a bellows with two compartments has two DOF the lat-
ter type was used to propel a manta-like swimming robot [12]. It
should be noted that, in comparison to most non-partitioned single
DOF bellows, multiple DOF bellows also have an increased range
of motion. Multiple DOF necessitate multiple pressure supplies,
valves and sensors as well as complicated manufacturing.
Single DOF bellows can generate bending if they are anchored
at each end to a exible non-extending backbone while being
constrained to the backbones proximity. A multi-segment hydro-
dynamic active catheter [13] utilized this concept where the supply
line served as a exible backbone. This active catheter is especially
noteworthy for its band-pass valves, which allow actuation of mul-
tiple segments with a single supply line. Other single DOF bellows
rely on a different principle asymmetrical proles are employed
to make one side more susceptible to longitudinal strain than the
other side, so that each side stretches to a different extent and the
bellows bends when the internal pressure changes. Most bellows
are actuated by increasing the internal pressure so that the bending

0924-4247/$ see front matter 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.sna.2011.03.008
 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494
Fig. 1. Typical Bi-bellows cut section; (a) frontal view (b) side view with pressure-driven loads. (COP center of pressure).
is towards the stiffer side. A few examples use negative pressure for
actuation, such as a hydraulic catheter [14] consisting of an asym-
metrical silicon tube and an asymmetrical elastic support which
bends towards its weaker side. A hydraulic forceps [15] consist-
ing of a bending bellows was designed by making incisions on the
outer side of the curved actuator but a exible outer sheath had
to be added to retain the driving uid. Instead of weakening the
outer side, the inner side could be more resilient. This idea was
exploited in a gripper for picking up wafers [16]. The ngers con-
sisted of a bellows with one wall thicker than the other walls, so
that the bellows bends towards the thick side when inated. The
bending capability was increased with the assistance of grooves
on the outside of the thicker wall, acting somewhat like nger
joints.
Several research groups incorporated a kinematic constraint
to generate bending motion. Hirai et al. [17] explored different
arrangements of bers embedded within the bellows-wall. Brett
et al. [18] used a spring-metal cantilever to enforce bending while
Zhang et al. [19] used a thin cantilever and a chain to dictate the
actuators motion. Bretts and Zhangs groups employed a nave
kinematic model i.e. the bellows always bends along a perfect arc.
Both groups focused on static aspects; Zhang et al. [19] were inter-
ested in the force exerted by the actuator (for gripping applications)
while Brett et al. [18] deployed strain gauges along the cantilever
in order to determine external forces acting on the actuator (gen-
erating a sensitized end effector).
In this report we will review our initial work on a new concept
for a bending inatable bellows actuator. Our concept is inspired by
Fig. 2. Notation for beam deection along arc.
485
bi-metallic strips; an actuator made of two materials with slightly
different shear modules. By applying pressure inside the bellows,
each of the materials would tend to deform according to its stiff-
ness while maintaining boundary constraints imposed by the other
half. The bimetallic problem was solved by Timoshenko [20]. In this
report we will use a simpler model comprising the same mechanical
principles, with an asymmetrical actuator replacing the composite
bellows.
We will present a theoretical model used to describe the actu-
ator deection. We will also present a validation of the model
through experiments that provided both the mechanical proper-
ties of the device and its kinematics. Without loss of generality,
this work used rapid-prototype polymer tubes, but the same con-
cept and methodologies can be applied to actuators manufactured
by different means from other materials.
2. Theory
The suggested Bi-bellows is an elastic tube with one half thicker
than the other, giving it a plane-symmetrical cross section instead
of an axis-symmetrical cut section; see Fig. 1. Increasing the internal
pressure P applies a tensile force T = PAin , where Ain is the internal
cavitys area as opposed to Aout which will be used later to denote
the area of the cross-section wall. Because the cut-section is not
axis-symmetrical, its centroid is slightly removed from the center
of pressure (COP) by a small distance Cy ; this results in a bending
moment M = PAin Cy (see Fig. 1(b)).
A simple EulerBernoulli beam model is suggested for model-
ing the bellows bending under quasi-static loading. The following
Fig. 3. Shape coefcient for a bent beam moment of inertia.
486 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494

Fig. 4. A silicone rubber actuator in initial (a) and pressurized (b) positions accompanied by swelling.

Fig. 5. Actuator cut-section and isometric view. (a) Square (b) Stamp, body yellow, hoops green, markers red, inlet blue. (For interpretation of the references to color in this
sentence, the reader is referred to the web version of the article.)

assumptions were used for the bending model: angle is equal to the beam length divided by the bending radius;
= L/Rc .
i. The cross-section does not change along the actuator. Hooks law dictates a linear relation between P and the beams
ii. Clamping effects are neglected. change of length LC , while EulerBernoullis law dictates a linear
iii. The Young modulus of the material, E, remains constant during relation between P and C . We dene two spring coefcients in (1)
actuation. and (2):

P Aout
A moment applied to the free end of a beam induces a constant kL = = E (1)
LC Ain L0
internal bending moment, deecting the beam along a circular arc
(constant curvature). The bending curvature is dened according P ICS
kk = = E (2)
to the bending radius, C = 1/RC . According to the EulerBernoulli kC Ain Cy
model C = M/EIcs where M is the external bending moment, E is
LC denotes the length of the neutral axis and L0 its initial length.
the young modulus, and ICS is the cross sections inertia moment
Since = L/Rc , we can write a second order polynomial for the bend-
in the appropriate direction. The subscript C is used to point out
ing angle in (3):
that the curvature being considered is that of the neutral axis
which passes through the cross sections centroids. The angle P
 P 
(P) = + L0 (3)
between the beams ends and the oor is equal to the cen- k kL
tral angle the beam lies on, as shown in Fig. 2. The bending

Fig. 6. Pressure control loop implemented in Labview. (a) front panel and (b) block diagram; the PI controller sends digital commands to the valves.
 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494 487

Fig. 7. Fitting a circle through the markers.

Fig. 10. Bending angle repeatability.

at s1 (s2 > s1 ) equal to (4):

dmS1 (S2 ) = q0 RC [sin (S2 ) sin (S1 )]ds2 (4)

Replacing s1 with s and integrating s2 over [s,1] yields (5) the

internal bending moment along the arc:
 
q0 LC cos() cos(s )
m(s, ) = (s 1) sin(s ) + (5)

where RC is replaced by LC /. The (negative) contribution to the

bending angle is given in (6):
 1  
LC q0 LC2 1 2 sin()
= m(s, )ds = 2 1 + cos() (6)
E ICS s=0
E ICS

If we wish to consider an upright beam bending in agreement

Fig. 8. Maximal bending angle. depicted in red, marker centroids in green, Taubin- with the gravitational force, then we can return to (4) and replace
tted circle in blue. On the top-right we show the actuation pressure, bending the sine functions with cosine functions and repeat the two integra-
parametes and circle-tting factor (Q). (For interpretation of the references to color tion steps. Notice that for the simple straight beam ( 0, RC )
in this sentence, the reader is referred to the web version of the article.)
(4) does not hold and (5) and (6) suffer from singularity.
The dynamic behavior of the Square model was examined under
External forces may also be taken into consideration in bend- sinusoidal actuation at different frequencies. We compare these to
ing angle predictions. Gravity acts as a distributed load and causes the SquareIn model, to demonstrate the signicant difference. Mod-
self-loading proportional to the actuators weight. If the actuator eling the beams deection as a mass-spring system allows making
tip moves across a surface instead of being suspended in the air, a crude estimation1 of its peak response frequency, f. Denoting the
friction forces arise. Friction forces are practically more challeng- beams inertia moment around an axis going through its base as Ib ,
ing to consider, without having direct sensing of their magnitude f can be derived from (7):
and direction. If the beam depicted in Fig. 2 bends upwards (against
a gravity eld), then integrating over the beam can yield the beam + Ics E = Cy Ain P
Ib (7)
deection as follows; If s is the arc length variable (s [0,1]), then a L0
force element of magnitude q0 at point s2 applies a bending moment So a rough estimation of the peak response frequency f can be
given in (8):

Ics E
f = (8)
Ib L0

It should be noted that Ib was taken to be constant but, in fact, it

diminishes as the actuator bends. Consider a 1D beam; the inertia
moment taken from its clamped edge is L2 /3. If the beam is curved,
then its moment of inertia is give by (9):
 L 2  sin ()

Ib () = 2 1 (9)

1
A high enough damping coefcient can shift the peak-response-frequency sig-
Fig. 9. Actuation parameters under quasi-static loading. nicantly downwards.
488 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494
Table 1
Model properties.
L0 [mm] Cy [mm] My [mm] Aout [mm2 ]
Square 124 1.2 2.8 55.85
Stamp 124 2.2 6.5 61.66
Fig. 11. Segment lengths (a) and %Strain (b) as a function of pressure.
The expression for Ib () can be broken up into L2 times Cs , a
non-dimensional shape coefcient, displayed in Fig. 3:
The formula for Cs agrees with the simple cases of a straight
beam ( = 0, Cs = 1/3) and a circle ( = 2, Cs = 1/22 ). If we re-
estimate the peak response frequency f with a mean Ib instead of
just using a constant value, then f would increase. For example, if
is in the range [0,], f would increase by 15%.
3. Methods
Several models of bi-bellows actuators were designed and man-
ufactured using a rapid prototype machine. The 3D printer uses
tiny droplets of resin to create a slice of the CAD model, cures this
slice with UV light and then prints the next slice on top. Several
types of resin can be used; structural materials with different prop-
erties and also support material which is washed away later-on,
leaving cavities. Each model consisted of a exible body and sev-
eral rigid components; inlet, hoops, markers. The exible body is
plane-symmetrical and resembles a Square or Stamp, as shown in
Fig. 5. The internal cavity of each model is 7 mm in diameter and
120 mm long, while the top half has a 10 mm external diameter.
Preliminary experiments were conducted with a silicone rubber
tube, where one side was reinforced by gluing half a tube to it.
Signicant swelling was noticed with the silicone actuator (up to
32% change in diameter) as shown in Fig. 4. The swelling was not
uniform, displaying kinks.
Rigid hoops (green elements in Fig. 5) were used to resist
swelling of the rapid prototype models. The signicant difference
in Young modules2 (Tango Black 0.45 MPa for the bellows, Tango
Black + 3.5 MPa for the hoops) is sufcient for the hoops to serve
as rigid constraints. Each hoops diameter is 1 mm, and they are
spaced along the bellows with a 4 mm distance between centers,
2
Results of tensile test courtesy of OBJETTM .
Ics [mm4 ] W [g] Ib [kg mm2 ] kL [N/mm3 ] kk [N/mm3 ] f [Hz]
3
607.55 10 55.71 5.27 10 5.729 0.2
933.59 11 80.15 5.81 103 4.985 0.2
as demonstrated in Fig. 5. Other rigid elements include an inlet and
markers; 15 small markers, 1.5 mm and 0.5 mm high, are equally
spaced along each side of the actuator. The rigid inlets were used
for anchoring the bellows.
Two other models, SquareIn and StampIn , were also used; they
were similar to the Square and Stamp models but with smaller
hoops buried inside the bodys wall (imitating the technique
described in [11,12]). Both had a shorter effective length (75%) and
recurrent end effects so they were soon abandoned, but we will use
some results to demonstrate qualitative phenomena in the results
section. Features of the Square and Stamp models are summarized
in Table 1.
The symbols in Table 1 stand for; L0 initial length, Cy centroid-
COP distance (Fig. 1) My centroid-marker distance, Aout cut-section
wall area, Ics cut-section inertia moment round centroid in y direc-
tion (see Fig. 1), W actuators weight (excluding the inlets weight,
2 g), Ib actuator inertia moment round clamped edge at = 0, kL
and k effective spring coefcients ((1) and (2)), f approximated
peak response frequency (8).
The pressure control loop and image storing were implemented
in LabVIEW. The actuators were tested under two modes; cyclic
loading (sine wave) or quasi-static loading (pyramid step function).
Only positive pressure was used for actuation, i.e., the sine wave
was biased instead of having a zero mean. An Intersema MS54XX
Fig. 12. Markers against the end cap (a) and inlet (b) (hoops not shown).
 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494 489

Table 2
Repeatability: errors of observations vs. tted curves.

[ ] L0  %Strain

Mean 1.43 0.028 0.45

Std 1.51 0.031 0.54
Max 5.88 0.178 2.07

pressure sensor was used to read the actual pressure inside the
bellows, relative to atmospheric pressure.
A PI controller calculates the pressure error between the sen-
sor reading and the set point. A single supply/release valve is
opened when the error exceeded 0.01 MPa (0.1 bar); when the error
exceeds 0.02 MPa (0.2 bar), two valves are opened, as shown in
Fig. 6. A simple USB camera is used to take photographs of the bel-
lows and all the relevant information (iteration, pressure reading,
and pressure command) is stored in the le name.
The bending radius, bending angle and strain are calculated by
post processing each image. Once the markers are identied, the
Taubin algorithm [21] is used to t a circle passing through their
centroids, as shown in Fig. 7. The bending angle is computed accord-
ing to the two extreme markers. Strain is derived by comparing the Fig. 13. Non-uniform curvature, due to gravity.
arc length to its minimal value; arc length is calculated using the
product of the circle radius and the bending angle.
A slight adaptation was made to Chernovs version [22] of the
4. Results
Taubin algorithm in order to include Q, a quality estimator dened
in (10):
The actuator is able to achieve bending angles greater than 180
at moderate pressures, as demonstrated in Fig. 8 for a Stamp model.
max{||Pi PC ||} RM Strain was measured by tracking the markers centers so it rep-
Q = (10)
RM resents the strain on that ber; other bers experienced greater
strain. For example, the strain on the neutral axis can be calculated
Pi is a vector to the centroid of marker i, PC is a vector to the cir- according to (11):
cle center and RM is the radius of the circle passing through the
My Cy
markers. The non-dimensional quality estimator Q normalizes the C = M + (11)
2L0
distance of a marker from the circles circumference by its radius.
Exceedingly high Q values allow automatic detection of marker Strain values, even on the outer most ber, remained under 20%
misidentication. strain.

Fig. 14. Friction vs. gravity: (a)  pressure, (b)  S.

490 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494

Fig. 15. Bending angles of two different actuator models actuated at 0.25 Hz against gravity: (a) Square model, (b) Stamp model. The full line shows the nave prediction, the
dotted line shows the gravity-corrected prediction.

No hysteresis was detected under quasi-static loading, as
demonstrated in Fig. 9 for a StampIn model actuated against grav-
ity (hence the negative initial bending angle). However, even under
very slow cyclic loading of 0.25 Hz, hysteresis was detected for all
the observed parameters; , RM and %Strain.
Actuator repeatability was examined more closely on a SquareIn
model under quasi static loading, actuated against a frictional force.
Fourteen repetitions of a step function were used and a total of 870
frames were analyzed. Results for the bending angle are shown
in Fig. 10. Errors (distances along the y axis) between the mea-

Fig. 16. Bending with (upright starting position) or against (horizontal starting position) gravity.
 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494
Fig. 17. Pressure control loop delity at different frequencies.
surements and the tted-curve pair are summarized in Table 2 for
bending angle, bending radius and strain.
Examining the strain of each segment along the actuator is
another way to assess its shape. In order to give a clear visualiza-
tion of segment length, second order regression curves are used in
Fig. 11(a). The regression curve is used to calculate segment strain,
shown in Fig. 11(b), where the intercept of each curve in Fig. 11(a)
is taken as the initial length of each segment.
The results in Fig. 11 were taken from a SquareIn actuator, bend-
ing against gravity from a horizontal beginning position, under
quasi-static actuation. The bending angle was in the range [10 ,
+60 ]. The reduced strain of segments 1 and 14 can be explained
by the actuators design near the inlet and end-cap, as shown in
Fig. 12.
A slight decay in strain can be noticed in Fig. 11(b) when moving
across segments 2-13 from base to tip. Recall that a ber under-
neath the neutral axis undergoes compression under bending, so
the lower strain of the upper half could be attributed to greater
bending. The distributed gravitational load is responsible for this
phenomenon; it induces a bending moment which opposes the
actuating moment and its magnitude grows towards the actua-
tors base. An example from a Square model is used to validate
this claim; Fig. 13 shows an actuator with a blue circle tted by the
Taubin method [21] through all markers (Q = 0.026), and two circles
tted manually: yellow to the top half and red to the lower half;
it is evident that the curvature increases towards the actuators
tip.
Results from a SquareIn model under quasi-static actuation
demonstrate how the strain-pressure curves alternate under dif-
491
ferent external loads. Fig. 14 shows  against pressure (a) and
S (b);  is the angle change and S is the strain change from
ambient pressure (P = 0).
One of the ideas for the future is to incorporate PVDF as a strain
sensor in order to measure the bending angle. The results displayed
in Fig. 14 imply that measuring the overall actuator strain in order
to estimate cannot produce an injective relation, not even approx-
imately. This might be overcome by separate strain measurements
of several segments along the actuator or by placing additional
force-sensors along the actuator.
Quantitative comparison of the Square and Stamp models is
given in Fig. 15. Both models were examined under a 0.25 Hz sinu-
soidal actuation, bending against gravity from a horizontal starting
position. The solid lines depict the prediction of according to (3)
and the dotted lines depict the gravity correction of according to
(6). Notice that correcting according to gravity requires previous
knowledge of the actuators alignment. The Stamp model displays
more, probably because of faster changes. As predicted, the Stamp
model is superior to the Square model. The gravity compensation
corresponds to observation.
In Fig. 14 we appended two predictions; the traditional nave
pressure-bending prediction and a prediction that considers grav-
ity. Apparently in both cases the theory does not describe the
Square models behavior very well. In Fig. 16 we add a comparison
of the Square model bending with or against gravity to demon-
strate that this discrepancy is consistent. Results are shown in
Fig. 16 as a blue or red scatter plot, against the nave prediction
(black dotted line) and the gravity corrected predictions (red or
blue, respectively).
492 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494

Fig. 18. State domain pressure loops at six different frequencies.

The dynamic behavior of the Square model was examined under
sinusoidal actuation at different frequencies. We compare these to
the SquareIn model, to demonstrate the signicant difference. In
order to estimate the ability of the pressure-control loop to carry
out sinusoidal commands at different frequencies we replaced the
actuator with a small dead volume (cap) and compared the mea-
sured pressure (P) against the pressure set-point (SP). Examining
the results displayed in Fig. 17 we decided to examine the actuator
only up to 4 Hz, because of the control loops limitations.
Fig. 18 displays state domain loops of measured pressure (P) vs.
the set point (SP); blue dots were taken from the cap and red dots
were taken from a Square model with an upright starting posi-
tion. Evidently, the actuator does not affect the pressure prole
signicantly.
Next we show the bending angle of the SquareIn actuator is
against the measured pressure in Fig. 19, and the strain in Fig. 20.
The regression curves are used to capture the loops main axis.
Recall that the sine wave is biased: the regression curves rotate
(increasing phase) approximately around the middle of s range
and slightly off center of the strain-percentage range, approxi-
mately around the rst quarter.
Using regression curves helps in depicting the actuators
response and comparing it at different actuation frequencies. The
slopes of the regression curves were used to generate amplication
functions and to compare the models against each other; ampli-

Fig. 19. Bending angle at different actuation frequencies. Fig. 20. Strain at different actuation frequencies.
 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494
(a)
Square
Amplicaon [deg/bar]
Square In
Actuaon frequency [Hz]
Fig. 21. Bending angle amplication transfer function (a) , (b) %Strain.
cation functions of slope-values are depicted in Fig. 21(a) and (b).
Qualitatively, one can say that the actuators are over-damped, as
they do not vibrate at all when released from a large initial bending
angle.
The decay of Square and SquareIn in Fig. 21(a) is 4.1 and
12.8 dB/decade and in Fig. 21(b) it is 3.3 and 5.3 dB/decade, respec-
tively.
Further investigation is required to distinguish whether the
reduced strain of the markers ber (which is below the neu-
tral axis) corresponds to increased bending or to over-all actuator
reduced strain, e.g., by measuring strain on a ber above the neutral
axis.
5. Discussion
The bi-Bellows actuator can achieve large bending angles
(+180 ) at moderate pressures (<1.25 atm above ambient pressure).
The beam deection model is adequate for models with external
hoops. Inadequacy for models with internal hoops might be caused
by multiple end conditions recurring within the actuator.
Measuring strain can give an indication of the bending angle
but must be done carefully, i.e., in a combination of force sensors or
with sub-actuator resolution. Generally the predictions present a
weaker non-linearity than that observed. Further study is necessary
to reconcile these discrepancies but candidate factors may be:
i. out of plane bending caused by external forces (gravity, friction)
which are not traceable by the current measuring system and
were not accounted for in the current model
ii. swelling increases Cy , Ain , Ics ; reducing bending and also increas-
ing the weight of the second order term
iii. volume conservation under tension reduces Aout , increasing the
weight of the second order term
iv. stiffening of the polymer (strain induced increase of E) would
introduce variability into the weight of the second order term;
decreasing with strain
v. cross-sectional shape factors increasing stiffness and damping.
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank Mr. Zviki Kinstler for his contribution to
setting up the experimental system.
References
[1] M. De Volder, D. Reynaerts, Pneumatic and hydraulic microactuators: a review,
J. Micromech. Microeng. 20 (2010) 43001.
[2] A. De Greef, P. Lambert, A. Delchambre, Towards exible medical instruments:
review of exible uidic actuators, Precise Eng. 33 (2009) 311321.
[3] T. Fukuda, H. Hosokai, M. Uemura, Rubber gas actuator driven by hydrogen
storage alloy for in-pipe inspection mobile robot with exible structure, in:
493
(b)
Square In
Amplicaon [% strain/bar]
Square
Actuaon frequency [Hz]
Proceedings, 1989 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation,
vol. 3, 1989, pp. 18471852.
[4] H.F. Schulte, The characteristics of the McKibben articial muscle, 874,
Appendix H (1961) 94115.
[5] F. Daerden, D. Lefeber, Pneumatic articial muscles: actuators for robotics and
automation, Eur. J. Mech. Environ. Eng. 47 (2002) 1021.
[6] J.M. Yarlott, Fluid actuator-US Patent 3645173, (1969).
[7] H. Morin Alexandre, Elastic diaphragm-US Patent 2642091 (2010).
[8] G.B. Immega, ROMAC actuators for micro robots (1987).
[9] S. Schulz, C. Pylatiuk, G. Bretthauer, A new ultralight anthropomorphic hand,
in: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation,
ICRA, vol. 3, 2001, pp. 24372441.
[10] Y. Lu, C. Kim, Characterization of balloon-jointed micro-ngers, Conference
Proceedings, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Washington, DC,
United States, Vol. 5, pp. 311316, 2003.
[11] K. Suzumori, S. Iikura, H. Tanaka, Applying a exible microactuator to robotic
mechanisms. Control systems magazine, IEEE 12 (1992) 2127.
[12] K. Suzumori, S. Endo, T. Kanda, N. Kato, H. Suzuki, A bending pneumatic rubber
actuator realizing soft-bodied manta swimming robot, in: IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2007, pp. 49754980.
[13] K. Ikuta, H. Ichikawa, K. Suzuki, Safety-active catheter with multiple-segments
driven by micro-hydraulic actuators, MICCAI 02, Proceedings of the 5th Inter-
national Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted
Intervention Part I, Springer-Verlag London, UK, pp. 182191, 2002.
[14] Y. Haga, Y. Muyari, T. Mineta, T. Matsunaga, H. Akahori, M. Esashi, Small diam-
eter hydraulic active bending catheter using laser processed super elastic alloy
and silicone rubber tube, in: 3rd Anual Int. IEEE EMBS Special Topic Conference
on Microtechnology in Medicine and Biology, 2005, pp. 245248.
[15] M. Lazeroms, A. La Haye, W. Sjoerdsma, W. Scheurs, W. Jongkind, G. Honderd,
C. Grimbergen, A hydraulic forceps with force-feedback for use in minimally
invasive surgery, Mechatronics 6 (1996) 437446.
[16] Y. Hayama, Flexible Actuator, 2002-351111 (2004).
[17] S. Hirai, T. Masui, S. Kawamur, Prototyping pneumatic group actuators
composed of multiple single-motion elastic tubes, in: Proceedings IEEE Inter-
national Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA, vol.4, 2001, pp.
38073812.
[18] P.N. Brett, Smart sensing systems for surgical tool-points, in: 15th International
Conference on Mechatronics and Machine Vision in Practice, M2VIP, 2008, pp.
159162.
[19] S. Qian, L. Zhang, Q. Yang, G. Bao, Z. Wang, L. Qi, Research on output force of
exible pneumatic bending joint, in: 10th International Conference on Control,
Automation, Robotics and Vision, ICARCV, 2008, pp. 144148.
[20] S. Timoshenko, Analysis of bi-metal thermostats, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 11 (1925) 233.
[21] G. Taubin, Estimation of planar curves, surfaces, and nonplanar space curves
dened by implicit equations with applications to edge and range image seg-
mentation, in: IEEE Transaction Pattern Analysis on Machine Intelligence, vol.
13, 1991, pp. 11151138.
[22] N. Chernov, Circle Fit (Taubin method), 2010.
Biographies
Yoel Shapiro was born in 1980 and received a B.Sc.
in biomedical engineering from Technion-I.I.T. in 2006
(summa cum laude). He completed a M.Sc. in 2009 on
haptic control for an orthopedic-surgery robot in the
Mechanical Engineering faculty, Technion-I.I.T. under the
supervision of Dr. Alon Wolf. He is currently a Ph.D. stu-
dent under Dr. Wolf.
494 Y. Shapiro et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 167 (2011) 484494
Alon Wolf earned all his academic degrees from
the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering at Technion-
I.I.T. In 2002 he joined the Robotics Institute of
Carnegie Mellon University and the Institute for Com-
puter Assisted Orthopedic Surgery as a member of
the research faculty. He was also an adjunct Assistant
Professor in the School of Medicine of the Univer-
sity of Pittsburgh. In 2006 Dr. Wolf joined the Faculty
of Mechanical Engineering at Technion, where he
founded the Biorobotics and Biomechanics Lab (BRML).
The scope of work done in the BRML provides the
framework for fundamental theories in kinematics,
biomechanics and mechanism design, with applications
in medical robotics, rehabilitation robotics, and biorobotics, such as snake
robots.
Gbor Ksa received his B.Sc. in mechanical engineering
from Technion-I.I.T. in 1995. He served in the IDF from
19951998 as a research engineer. In 2001 received a
M.Sc. on non-linear dynamics and control from Technion-
I.I.T. He was employed at RAFAEL as a MEMS R&D engineer
from 20002001. He received a Ph.D. on medical micro-
robots from Technion-I.I.T. in 2006. Since 2007, he has
been working as a post-doctoral fellow and biomedical
microsystems group leader in the Computer Vision Lab-
oratory in ETH Zurich, investigating novel force sensors
and swimming micro robots. Research interests include
modeling, designing, fabricating and testing of micro sys-
tems, micro uidics and medical robotics. He was recently
appointed as a lecturer in the School of Mechanical Engineering at Tel Aviv Univer-
sity.