US researchers delve further into soft robotics, outlining their findings in the recently published ‘Soft Somatosensitive Actuators via Embedded 3D Printing.’ Developing a new method relying on soft somatosensitive actuators (SSAs) embedded in 3D printed structures, the researchers focus on an effective way to combine conductive features with elastomeric matrices.
Today, 3D printing, soft robotics, and sensors often seem to accompany one another—and in this study, the scientists combined three SSAs within a gripper, allowing them to show proprioceptive and haptic feedback via embedded features such as curvature, inflation, and contact sensors.
“Harnessing the temperature-dependent ionic conductivity of the SSAs’ contact sensors coupled with our free-form fabrication process, we also created SSAs with temperature and deep-versus-fine touch contact sensing, respectively, which have not yet been realized by other soft robotic actuators,” stated the researchers.
Conductive inks are printed within three matrices:
- Anterior matrix
With those materials loaded, the researchers could print the following:
- Curvature sensor in the dorsal matrix
- FEA features (including actuator spacers and bladder network) and inflation sensor in the actuator matrix
- Contact sensor in the anterior matrix
Upon completion of printing and curing, SSAs are removed from their molds. From there, ‘fugitive ink is evacuated,’ leaving behind empty channels for electrical leads to be inserted. Success is based on each elastomeric matrix demonstrating suitable rheological properties. The SSAs must be able to bend correctly, with all sensors able to deform as well as increase when faced with resistance.
Made up of an organic ionic liquid (1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium ethyl sulfate (EMIM-ES) filled with fumed silica particles), the sensor ink used in this study is a rheology modifier, offering the following benefits:
- Low vapor pressure
- Nonpermeability through elastomeric matrices
- Suitable resistivity for sensing applications
“Each sensor consists of a resistive strain gauge whose electrical resistance is given by R = ρL/A, where ρ is the resistivity, L is the length, and A is the cross-sectional area of the printed ionogel features,” explained the researchers. “The change in resistance, ΔR, during operation is given by ΔR = R − R0, where R0 is the initial resistance.”
As the three SSAs were combined in creating the soft robotic gripper for this study, the researchers noted that as the device was used to reach out for various balls, each SSA inflated—and all in an identical manner, with sensory feedback received from the center SSA.
“We clearly observe the kinesthetic nature of the inflation sensor by removing the ball from the inflated gripper, as ΔRinflation remains somewhat constant. R for all sensors returned to ≈R0 once the SSAs were deflated,” explained the researchers.
In experimenting with temperature, they noted the following:
“When grabbing the RT ball at 165 kPa, ΔRcontact is ≈9 kΩ greater than that for when the gripper holds nothing at 165 kPa. When grabbing the hot ball, ΔRcontact decreases noticeably, even becoming negative, due to the local increase in the contact sensor’s conductivity where the distal meander made contact with the ball. Finally, when grabbing the cold ball, a clear increase in ΔRcontact is observed that exceeds the value of ΔRcontact for the same ball held at RT. When the gripper releases the hot and cold balls, ΔRcontact does not immediately return to the value of 0 kΩ measured at RT.”
Ultimately, the team realized that for this sample, the SSAs were not capable of handling contact pressure and temperature of objects in a ‘straightforward’ way, leading them to note that for the future they would need to create additional sensors with different materials, or incorporate machine learning methods.
They created fine and deep contact sensors too, made up of different receptive fields—like fingers. During experimentation, the research team arranged for a soft foam ball to be ‘grabbed’ during three different levels of inflation.
“For each inflation pressure, ΔRfine is negative or ≈0 kΩ when the gripper grabs nothing and increases noticeably when grabbing the ball. The deep contact sensor is less sensitive, but ΔRdeep is still ≈8, 10, and 12 kΩ greater when grabbing the ball at P1, P2, and P3, respectively, than when grabbing nothing,” stated the researchers.
In conclusion, the authors state that their study represents a ‘foundational advance’ to be used for applications such as soft robotics, wearable, and haptic devices. This is an area of study being pursued by researchers around the world, tackling projects to include 3D printed biomimetic devices, 4D printed soft robotics, new metamaterials, and a variety of different sensors.
What do you think of this news? Let us know your thoughts; join the discussion of this and other 3D printing topics at 3DPrintBoard.com.[Source / Images: ‘Soft Somatosensitive Actuators via Embedded 3D Printing’]
You May Also Like
3D Printing Webinar and Virtual Event Roundup, August 9, 2020
We’ve only got four online events to tell you about this week—a summit and a few webinars, one of which is on-demand. Read on to learn more! AM Industry Virtual...
Additive Manufacturing Strategies 2021 Moves Online, Adds Extra 3D Printing Vertical
Additive Manufacturing Strategies (AMS), the annual summit co-hosted by 3DPrint.com and SmarTech Analysis, is a conference focused on business intelligence for the additive manufacturing industry. The first year, AMS was...
3DEXPERIENCE: A Virtual Journey, Part 1
Due to the ongoing COVID-19 crisis, this year’s 3DEXPERIENCE Forum by Dassault Systèmes had to be re-imagined as a virtual event, just like so many other conferences. At 1 pm...
3D Printing Webinar and Virtual Event Roundup, August 2, 2020
It’s another busy week in the 3D printing industry that’s packed full of webinars and virtual events, ranging in topics from medical materials and flexible electronics to polypropylene and market...
View our broad assortment of in house and third party products.