skip to main content
10.1145/3491102.3501818acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Roman: Making Everyday Objects Robotically Manipulable with 3D-Printable Add-on Mechanisms

Authors Info & Claims
Published:29 April 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

One important vision of robotics is to provide physical assistance by manipulating different everyday objects, e.g., hand tools, kitchen utensils. However, many objects designed for dexterous hand-control are not easily manipulable by a single robotic arm with a generic parallel gripper. Complementary to existing research on developing grippers and control algorithms, we present Roman, a suite of hardware design and software tool support for robotic engineers to create 3D printable mechanisms attached to everyday handheld objects, making them easier to be manipulated by conventional robotic arms. The Roman hardware comes with a versatile magnetic gripper that can snap on/off handheld objects and drive add-on mechanisms to perform tasks. Roman also provides software support to register and author control programs. To validate our approach, we designed and fabricated Roman mechanisms for 14 everyday objects/tasks presented within a design space and conducted expert interviews with robotic engineers indicating that Roman serves as a practical alternative for enabling robotic manipulation of everyday objects.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3491102.3501818-video-figure.mp4

mp4

67.5 MB

References

  1. OpenAI: Marcin Andrychowicz, Bowen Baker, Maciek Chociej, Rafal Jozefowicz, Bob McGrew, Jakub Pachocki, Arthur Petron, Matthias Plappert, Glenn Powell, Alex Ray, 2020. Learning dexterous in-hand manipulation. The International Journal of Robotics Research 39, 1 (2020), 3–20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Vincent Babin and Clément Gosselin. 2018. Picking, grasping, or scooping small objects lying on flat surfaces: A design approach. The International Journal of Robotics Research 37, 12 (2018), 1484–1499.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Vincent Babin and Clément Gosselin. 2020. Mechanisms for Robotic Grasping and Manipulation. Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems 4 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Vincent Babin, David St-Onge, and Clément Gosselin. 2019. Stable and repeatable grasping of flat objects on hard surfaces using passive and epicyclic mechanisms. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 55 (2019), 1–10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Ron Berenstein, Averell Wallach, Pelagie Elimbi Moudio, Peter Cuellar, and Ken Goldberg. 2018. An open-access passive modular tool changing system for mobile manipulation robots. In 2018 IEEE 14th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE). IEEE, 592–598.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Xiang’Anthony’ Chen. 2016. Making Fabrication Real. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 17–20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Xiang’Anthony’ Chen, Stelian Coros, and Scott E Hudson. 2018. Medley: A library of embeddables to explore rich material properties for 3D printed objects. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Xiang’Anthony’ Chen, Jeeeun Kim, Jennifer Mankoff, Tovi Grossman, Stelian Coros, and Scott E Hudson. 2016. Reprise: A design tool for specifying, generating, and customizing 3D printable adaptations on everyday objects. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 29–39.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Xiang ’Anthony’ Chen, Jeeeun Kim, Jennifer Mankoff, Tovi Grossman, Stelian Coros, and Scott E. Hudson. 2016. Reprise: A Design Tool for Specifying, Generating, and Customizing 3D Printable Adaptations on Everyday Objects. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Tokyo, Japan) (UIST ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/2984511.2984512Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Andrea S Ciullo, Janne M Veerbeek, Eveline Temperli, Andreas R Luft, Frederik J Tonis, Claudia JW Haarman, Arash Ajoudani, Manuel G Catalano, Jeremia PO Held, and Antonio Bicchi. 2020. A novel soft robotic supernumerary hand for severely affected stroke patients. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering 28, 5(2020), 1168–1177.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Stelian Coros, Bernhard Thomaszewski, Gioacchino Noris, Shinjiro Sueda, Moira Forberg, Robert W Sumner, Wojciech Matusik, and Bernd Bickel. 2013. Computational design of mechanical characters. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 32, 4 (2013), 1–12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Scott Davidoff, Nicolas Villar, Alex S Taylor, and Shahram Izadi. 2011. Mechanical hijacking: how robots can accelerate UbiComp deployments. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Ubiquitous computing. 267–270.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Mark Edmonds, Feng Gao, Xu Xie, Hangxin Liu, Siyuan Qi, Yixin Zhu, Brandon Rothrock, and Song-Chun Zhu. 2017. Feeling the force: Integrating force and pose for fluent discovery through imitation learning to open medicine bottles. In 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 3530–3537.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Alberto Elfes. 1989. Using occupancy grids for mobile robot perception and navigation. Computer 22, 6 (1989), 46–57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Erik D Engeberg, Nancy Pollard, Maximo Roa, and Zeyang Xia. 2018. Robotic grasping and manipulation competition: task pool. Robotic Grasping and Manipulation: First Robotic Grasping and Manipulation Challenge, RGMC 2016, Held in Conjunction with IROS 2016, Daejeon, South Korea, October 10–12, 2016, Revised Papers 816 (2018), 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. T. Feix, J. Romero, H. B. Schmiedmayer, A. M. Dollar, and D. Kragic. 2016. The GRASP Taxonomy of Human Grasp Types. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems 46, 1 (2016), 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2015.2470657Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. David Fischinger, Peter Einramhof, Konstantinos Papoutsakis, Walter Wohlkinger, Peter Mayer, Paul Panek, Stefan Hofmann, Tobias Koertner, Astrid Weiss, Antonis Argyros, 2016. Hobbit, a care robot supporting independent living at home: First prototype and lessons learned. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 75 (2016), 60–78.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Andreas Geiger, Philip Lenz, Christoph Stiller, and Raquel Urtasun. 2013. Vision meets robotics: The kitti dataset. The International Journal of Robotics Research 32, 11 (2013), 1231–1237.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Yoav Golan, Amir Shapiro, and Elon Rimon. 2020. Jamming-free immobilizing grasps using dual-friction robotic fingertips. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 5, 2 (2020), 2889–2896.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. David Gyimothy and Andras Toth. 2011. Experimental evaluation of a novel automatic service robot tool changer. In 2011 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM). IEEE, 1046–1051.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Sehoon Ha, Stelian Coros, Alexander Alspach, James M Bern, Joohyung Kim, and Katsu Yamane. 2018. Computational design of robotic devices from high-level motion specifications. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 34, 5 (2018), 1240–1251.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Alaa Hassan and Mouhammad Abomoharam. 2014. Design of a single DOF gripper based on four-bar and slider-crank mechanism for educational purposes. Procedia CIRP 21(2014), 379–384.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Zhengtao Hu, Weiwei Wan, and Kensuke Harada. 2019. Designing a mechanical tool for robots with two-finger parallel grippers. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 4, 3 (2019), 2981–2988.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Shohei Katakura, Yuto Kuroki, and Keita Watanabe. 2019. A 3D printer head as a robotic manipulator. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 535–548.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Shohei Katakura and Keita Watanabe. 2018. Printmotion: Actuating printed objects using actuators equipped in a 3D printer. In The 31st Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology Adjunct Proceedings. 137–139.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Charles C Kemp, Aaron Edsinger, and Eduardo Torres-Jara. 2007. Challenges for robot manipulation in human environments [grand challenges of robotics]. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 14, 1 (2007), 20–29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Frank Klassner and Scott D Anderson. 2003. Lego MindStorms: Not just for K-12 anymore. IEEE robotics & automation magazine 10, 2 (2003), 12–18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Hikmet Kocabas. 2009. Gripper design with spherical parallelogram mechanism. Journal of Mechanical Design 131, 7 (2009).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Ioannis Kostavelis, Dimitrios Giakoumis, Georgia Peleka, Andreas Kargakos, Evangelos Skartados, Manolis Vasileiadis, and Dimitrios Tzovaras. 2018. RAMCIP robot: a personal robotic assistant; demonstration of a complete framework. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) Workshops. 0–0.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Eric Krotkov, Douglas Hackett, Larry Jackel, Michael Perschbacher, James Pippine, Jesse Strauss, Gill Pratt, and Christopher Orlowski. 2017. The darpa robotics challenge finals: Results and perspectives. Journal of Field Robotics 34, 2 (2017), 229–240.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Kiju Lee, Yanzhou Wang, and Chuanqi Zheng. 2020. Twister hand: Underactuated robotic gripper inspired by origami twisted tower. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 36, 2 (2020), 488–500.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Jiahao Li, Meilin Cui, Jeeeun Kim, and Xiang’Anthony’ Chen. 2020. Romeo: A Design Tool for Embedding Transformable Parts in 3D Models to Robotically Augment Default Functionalities. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 897–911.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Jiahao Li, Jeeeun Kim, and Xiang’Anthony’ Chen. 2019. Robiot: A Design Tool for Actuating Everyday Objects with Automatically Generated 3D Printable Mechanisms. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 673–685.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Nianlong Li, Han-Jong Kim, LuYao Shen, Feng Tian, Teng Han, Xing-Dong Yang, and Tek-Jin Nam. 2020. HapLinkage: Prototyping Haptic Proxies for Virtual Hand Tools Using Linkage Mechanism. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 1261–1274.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Z-C Lia and C-H Menq. 1988. The dexterous workspace of simple manipulators. IEEE journal on Robotics and Automation 4, 1 (1988), 99–103.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Chih-Hsing Liu, Ta-Lun Chen, Chen-Hua Chiu, Mao-Cheng Hsu, Yang Chen, Tzu-Yang Pai, Wei-Geng Peng, and Yen-Pin Chiang. 2018. Optimal design of a soft robotic gripper for grasping unknown objects. Soft robotics 5, 4 (2018), 452–465.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Hangxin Liu, Chi Zhang, Yixin Zhu, Chenfanfu Jiang, and Song-Chun Zhu. 2019. Mirroring without overimitation: Learning functionally equivalent manipulation actions. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 33. 8025–8033.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Lucas Manuelli, Wei Gao, Peter Florence, and Russ Tedrake. 2019. kpam: Keypoint affordances for category-level robotic manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.06684(2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. R. Mutlu, G. Alici, M. in het Panhuis, and G. Spinks. 2015. Effect of flexure hinge type on a 3D printed fully compliant prosthetic finger. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM). 790–795. https://doi.org/10.1109/AIM.2015.7222634Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Ken Nakagaki, Joanne Leong, Jordan L Tappa, João Wilbert, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2020. HERMITS: Dynamically Reconfiguring the Interactivity of Self-Propelled TUIs with Mechanical Shell Add-ons. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 882–896.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Ken Nakagaki, Yingda Liu, Chloe Nelson-Arzuaga, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2020. TRANS-DOCK: Expanding the Interactivity of Pin-based Shape Displays by Docking Mechanical Transducers. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction. 131–142.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Kento Nakayama, Weiwei Wan, and Kensuke Harada. 2019. Designing grasping tools for robotic assembly based on shape analysis of parts. In 2019 IEEE-RAS 19th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids). IEEE, 1–7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Francesca Negrello, Werner Friedl, Giorgio Grioli, Manolo Garabini, Oliver Brock, Antonio Bicchi, Máximo A Roa, and Manuel G Catalano. 2020. Benchmarking hand and grasp resilience to dynamic loads. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 5, 2 (2020), 1780–1787.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. H. Nishimura, A. Kakogawa, and S. Ma. 2012. Development of an underactuated robot gripper capable of retracting motion. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO). 2161–2166. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBIO.2012.6491289Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Allison M Okamura, Niels Smaby, and Mark R Cutkosky. 2000. An overview of dexterous manipulation. In Proceedings 2000 ICRA. Millennium Conference. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Symposia Proceedings (Cat. No. 00CH37065), Vol. 1. IEEE, 255–262.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Adam Pettinger, Conner Dimoush, and Mitch Pryor. 2019. Passive tool changer development for an elastic and compliant manipulator. In 2019 IEEE 15th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE). IEEE, 1200–1205.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Raf Ramakers, Fraser Anderson, Tovi Grossman, and George Fitzmaurice. 2016. Retrofab: A design tool for retrofitting physical interfaces using actuators, sensors and 3d printing. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 409–419.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Iason Sarantopoulos, Yannis Koveos, and Zoe Doulgeri. 2018. Grasping flat objects by exploiting non-convexity of the object and support surface. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 5606–5611.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Ashutosh Saxena, Justin Driemeyer, and Andrew Y Ng. 2008. Robotic grasping of novel objects using vision. The International Journal of Robotics Research 27, 2 (2008), 157–173.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Philipp Schoessler, Daniel Windham, Daniel Leithinger, Sean Follmer, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2015. Kinetic blocks: Actuated constructive assembly for interaction and display. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology. 341–349.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Takeshi Takaki and Toru Omata. 2006. 100g-100N finger joint with load-sensitive continuously variable transmission. In Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006. IEEE, 976–981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Jun Ueda, Masahiro Kondo, and Tsukasa Ogasawara. 2010. The multifingered NAIST hand system for robot in-hand manipulation. Mechanism and Machine Theory 45, 2 (2010), 224–238.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Chen Wang, Daniel Freer, Jindong Liu, and Guang-Zhong Yang. 2019. Vision-based Automatic Control of a 5-Fingered Assistive Robotic Manipulator for Activities of Daily Living. In 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 627–633.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Zeli Wang, Heng Li, and Xintao Yang. 2020. Vision-based robotic system for on-site construction and demolition waste sorting and recycling. Journal of Building Engineering 32 (2020), 101769.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Jingren Xu, Weiwei Wan, Keisuke Koyama, Yukiyasu Domae, and Kensuke Harada. 2021. Selecting and designing grippers for an assembly task in a structured approach. Advanced Robotics (2021), 1–17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Simon Zimmermann, Ghazal Hakimifard, Miguel Zamora, Roi Poranne, and Stelian Coros. 2020. A multi-level optimization framework for simultaneous grasping and motion planning. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 5, 2 (2020), 2966–2972.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Roman: Making Everyday Objects Robotically Manipulable with 3D-Printable Add-on Mechanisms
          Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
            April 2022
            10459 pages
            ISBN:9781450391573
            DOI:10.1145/3491102

            Copyright © 2022 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 29 April 2022

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

            Upcoming Conference

            CHI PLAY '24
            The Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play
            October 14 - 17, 2024
            Tampere , Finland

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format