ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2024
Investigating the performance of soft robotic adaptive feet with longitudinal and transverse arches.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biped robots usually adopt feet with a rigid structure that simplifies walking on flat grounds and yet hinders ground adaptation in unstructured environments, thus jeopardizing stability. We recently explored in the SoftFoot the idea of adapting a robotic foot to ground irregularities along the sagittal plane. Building on the previous results, we propose in this paper a novel robotic foot able to adapt both in the sagittal and frontal planes, similarly to the human foot. It features five parallel modules with intrinsic longitudinal adaptability that can be combined in many possible designs through optional rigid or elastic connections. By following a methodological design approach, we narrow down the design space to five candidate foot designs and implement them on a modular system. Prototypes are tested experimentally via controlled application of force, through a robotic arm, onto a sensorized plate endowed with different obstacles. Their performance is compared, using also a rigid foot and the previous SoftFoot as a baseline. Analysis of footprint stability shows that the introduction of the transverse arch, by elastically connecting the five parallel modules, is advantageous for obstacle negotiation, especially when obstacles are located under the forefoot. In addition to biped robots' locomotion, this finding might also benefit lower-limb prostheses design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.