TY - GEN
T1 - Exploring Effective Approaches to the Modelling of Lattice-based Structures for Soft Robots
AU - Nardin, Anderson B.
AU - Joe, Seonggun
AU - Bliah, Ouriel
AU - Magdassi, Shlomo
AU - Beccai, Lucia
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2025 IEEE.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Accurate simulation of complex lattice structures is essential for advancing their application in soft robotics, where deformation control and adaptability are critical. This study recurs to Finite Element Analysis (FEA) to compare three simulation methodologies for a pneumatic elastic lattice actuator: Method 0, which uses the detailed geometry of the lattice-based structure of the actuator, Method 1, a traditional homogenized model, and Method H, an approach incorporating hyperelastic material behavior. Method 0 captures detailed geometry but suffers from computational inefficiency and high error rates, with discrepancies exceeding 20% in some regimes. Method 1 simplifies the geometry, significantly improving simulation speed by 35 times and reducing errors with peaks around 15%, though it remains limited in broader pressure domains. Method H offers a balance between speed (up to 11 FPS) and accuracy, by better capturing nonlinear behaviors, achieving mean errors below 10% for all regimes. This study provides insights into selecting appropriate simulation methods for tessellated soft actuators, as well as passive lattice structures.
AB - Accurate simulation of complex lattice structures is essential for advancing their application in soft robotics, where deformation control and adaptability are critical. This study recurs to Finite Element Analysis (FEA) to compare three simulation methodologies for a pneumatic elastic lattice actuator: Method 0, which uses the detailed geometry of the lattice-based structure of the actuator, Method 1, a traditional homogenized model, and Method H, an approach incorporating hyperelastic material behavior. Method 0 captures detailed geometry but suffers from computational inefficiency and high error rates, with discrepancies exceeding 20% in some regimes. Method 1 simplifies the geometry, significantly improving simulation speed by 35 times and reducing errors with peaks around 15%, though it remains limited in broader pressure domains. Method H offers a balance between speed (up to 11 FPS) and accuracy, by better capturing nonlinear behaviors, achieving mean errors below 10% for all regimes. This study provides insights into selecting appropriate simulation methods for tessellated soft actuators, as well as passive lattice structures.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105008419186&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/robosoft63089.2025.11020867
DO - 10.1109/robosoft63089.2025.11020867
M3 - منشور من مؤتمر
T3 - 2025 IEEE 8th International Conference on Soft Robotics, RoboSoft 2025
BT - 2025 IEEE 8th International Conference on Soft Robotics, RoboSoft 2025
PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
T2 - 8th IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics, RoboSoft 2025
Y2 - 22 April 2025 through 26 April 2025
ER -