Composite Structures 140 (2016) 344–350

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Carbon/epoxy composite foot structure for biped robots

Jinyi Lee a, Dongyoung Lee a, Jongwon Park b, Ilbeom Choi c, Jun Woo Lim d, Soohyun Kim a, Dai Gil Lee a,⇑
a
School of Mechanical, Aerospace & Systems Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 291, Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 34141, Republic of Korea
b
Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 111, Deadeok-daero 989 beon-gil, Daejeon 34057, Republic of Korea
c
Agency for Defense Development, P.O. Box 35, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 34060, Republic of Korea
d
LANL-CBNU Engineering Institute Korea, Chonbuk National University, 567 Baekje-daero, Deokjin-gu, Jeonju-si, Jeollabuk-do 54596, Republic of Korea

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

Article history: Although aluminum structures are generally used for robot structures due to their high specific strength,
Available online 7 January 2016 aluminum feet for fast running biped robots are vulnerable to fatigue failure due to the low fatigue limit
and low vibration damping of aluminum structures under repeated impact loadings on the feet. On the
Keywords: other hand, carbon/epoxy composites not only have a much higher specific fatigue limit but also have a
Carbon composite higher material damping than that of aluminum.
Fast running robot leg In this study, a carbon/epoxy composite foot structure of a biped robot was developed. The composite
Impact
foot structure was designed for optimum performances such as weight saving, natural frequency,
Damping
Fatigue
damping, and compliance for vibration isolation. Then its performances were analytically and experi-
mentally obtained and compared with those of an aluminum foot structure. Finally, an optimum con-
figuration of the composite foot structure was suggested for the reliable dynamic performance of the
biped robot.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction minimize leg inertia, several techniques have been used, such as
under-actuated legs [2,3], locating the actuators closer to the body
The ability of fast and agile robotic locomotion is crucial issue in [4], cable driven structures [5], or applying high specific strength
dangerous situations, such as natural disasters, huge plant acci- materials [6,7]. In addition, series-elastic actuation methods or
dents, and reconnaissance in war scenarios that consist of environ- mechanical suspensions have been used to obtain compliance
ments with various obstacles. A fast legged robotic platform can be [1]. Despite recent advances in robot technologies, the realization
an ideal solution for rescuing or finding enemies on rough and of agile dynamic movement still remains a difficult problem
complex terrain. Over the past several decades, many researchers because of these design trade-offs.
have developed various types of legged robots due to their poten- The raptor robot was developed for agile dynamic locomotion
tial for rough terrain mobility compared with wheeled vehicles [1]. on irregular terrain at high speed [3]. For fast running, aluminum
There are two approaches to increase the speed of the legged structures are generally adopted due to their low density com-
robot: increasing the actuator capacity and decreasing the leg iner- pared with steel. The raptor robot is composed of the under-
tia. Since increasing the actuator capacity causes higher actuator actuated 9-bar linkage structure, which is driven by a single elec-
mass that correspondingly requires the increased leg strength trical actuator, as shown in Fig. 1(a), whose specifications are
and leg mass, decreasing the total inertia of the leg structure might shown in Table 1. An Achilles tendon made of butyl rubber, which
be a more practical solution. However, the design of robot leg with acts as spring and damper, was adopted to reduce ground impact
low inertia but high strength to withstand large ground impacts and achieve efficient movement. The robot has reasonable dynamic
during high speed running is coupled. properties, such as being light weight and having a small moment
The distal part of robot leg is more critical due to its larger con- of inertia, for achieving high speed running at 27 km/h. Due to the
tribution to rotational inertia. Therefore, there have been some low resilience of aluminum (yield strain 0.2%), a rib structure is
attempts to reduce leg inertia and apply compliance to distal parts required for the foot, as shown in Fig. 1(b). Because such a stiff foot
by decreasing the load transmissibility of the robot body. To structure transmits a large impact load to the robot body, damping
materials were attached at the foot for protection of the body, as
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 42 350 3221; fax: +82 42 350 5221. shown in Fig. 1(a). In spite of the damping materials, failure
E-mail address: [email protected] (D.G. Lee). occurred at the body under repeated impact loading when the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.01.022
0263-8223/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 140 (2016) 344–350 345

Fig. 1. Fast biped raptor robot: (a) raptor robot with a conventional aluminum foot and damping materials; (b) rib structure of the aluminum foot; (c) fractured components
of the robot body during the running test.

Table 1 2. Design of the composite foot structure

Specification of the biped robot with the aluminum foot structure.

Specification
2.1. Design of a composite foot model using the strain energy method
Total height (mm) 500
Mass (kg) 2.5
The composite foot of the raptor robot has a curvilinear shape,
Max. speed (km/h) 27 with a cantilever beam joined to a semicircular beam, as shown
Body material Aluminum 7075 in Fig. 2(a). The cantilever beam of the foot structure is connected
Leg material Aluminum 7075 to the aluminum foot connector using screw bolts. To design the
composite foot, a cantilever model and a simple curved beam
model were used, as shown in Fig. 2(b). Table 2 describes the
parameters and values used in the formulations. The subscripts c
speed of the robot increased to over 27 km/h, as shown in Fig. 1(c). and s are indicated curved beam and straight beam (cantilever
Therefore, attaching damping materials was not an appropriate beam), respectively. The vertical deflection at the ground contact
solution for protection of the body. point of the foot B is caused by the axial force, shear force and
Carbon composites have high specific strength, high damping, bending moment. However, the contributions of the axial load
high failure strain, and low coefficient of thermal expansion and shear are negligible when the radius to thickness ratio (r=h)
(CTE) [8]. Because of their excellent properties, carbon compos- is larger than 10 [19]. Therefore, the strain energy that was due
ites have been widely used in robot structures as well as in
aircraft and spacecraft structures, machines, automotive struc-
tures, and prosthetic structures for amputees [6,8–18]. Therefore,
it might be possible to design a simple and compliant foot
structure to reduce the transmitted load from impact and the
moment of inertia using composite materials. Moreover,
additional damping materials are unnecessary due to the
compliance of the foot.
The purpose of this study is to develop a carbon/epoxy foot
structure for a biped raptor robot to improve the running perfor-
mance and life cycles of the robot. The composite foot structure
is designed considering its levels of performance, such as weight
saving, natural frequency, and damping and compliance for vibra-
tion isolation. For the design of optimum configuration of the com-
posite foot, strain energy method and the maximum strain failure
criterion was selected. Its performances were analytically and
experimentally obtained and compared with those of the alu-
minum foot structure. Finally, the developed composite foot struc-
ture was experimentally verified for the reliable dynamic Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of composite foot structure: (a) curvilinear shape of the
performance and life cycles of biped robot. composite foot structure; (b) free body diagram.
346 J. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 140 (2016) 344–350

Table 2 E  ½h ¼ Q
¼Q  ½h ð8Þ
11 11
Design parameters of the composite foot structure.
 ½h is expressed as a function
The transformed reduced stiffness Q
Symbol Values 11
of stacking angle h.
Radius of the curved beam (mm) r 75
Width of the beam (mm) b 14
 
 ½h ¼ E1 m12 E2 2
Length of the cantilever beam (mm) l 43 Q cos4 h þ 2 þ 2G12 cos2 h  sin h
Maximum axial load (N) F max 88
11
1  m12 m21 1  m12 m21
Thickness of the beam h To be determined E2 4
Stacking angle h 0 6 h 6 90 þ sin h ð9Þ
1  m12 m21
Number of symmetry plies n 1 6 n 6 10
Finally, Eq. (6) can be expressed as follows:
3   
bh E1 m12 E2
k¼ cos 4
h þ 2 þ 2G12
only to bending was used to calculate the deflection of the beam in 3ð4l þ prÞr 2 1  m12 m21 1  m12 m21
this study. 
2 E 2 4
Since the bending moment M s of the straight part of the beam is cos2 h  sin h þ sin h ð10Þ
1  m12 m21
the product of the axial force F at the contact point B and the radius
r of the curved beam (Ms ¼ F  r), which is constant, the strain Eq. (10) gives the design criteria with respect to thickness h and
energy of the straight part, U s is expressed as follows: stacking angle h when the foot width b is constant; the magnitude
of b is generally determined empirically to avoid the tilting of the
1 M 2s l 1 ðFrÞ2 l foot from the ground. The formulas can be used to optimize the
Us ¼  ¼ 2 EI  ð1Þ
2 EI foot structure for minimum spring constant and weight.
where E  is the longitudinal Young’s modulus of the composite foot,
2.2. Optimization of composite foot structure
and I and l are the moment of inertia and length of the straight part
of the foot, respectively. The bending moment M c of curved beam
In Fig. 2(a), neglecting the stress concentration effect due to the
part is expressed as follows:
curvature of the semicircle part when r=h > 10, the maximum lam-
M c ¼ Fr sin / ð2Þ inate tensile stress occurs at the outer side of the straight part of
the foot (A) as follows:
where / is the angle between the force and point P as shown in
Fig. 2(b). Thus, the strain energy, U c of the curved beam part is F max r h F max r
expressed as follows: r½h
x ¼  ¼6 2
ð11Þ
I 2 bh
Z p=2 2 2 2
F r sin / p F 2 r3 Thus, the ply stresses are expressed as follows [12]:
Uc ¼  r d/ ¼  ð3Þ
2EI 8 EI
0
r1 ¼ cos2 h  r½h
x ð12Þ
Thus, the total strain energy U of the composite foot is
expressed as follows: r2 ¼ sin2 h  r½h ð13Þ
x
2 2 2 3 2 2
F r l pF r ð4l þ prÞF r
U ¼ Us þ Uc ¼  þ  ¼  ð4Þ r6 ¼  cos h  sin h  r½h ð14Þ
2EI 8 EI 8EI x

The vertical deflection d of the foot at the contact point B is To design the composite foot structure, the maximum strain
expressed as follows: failure criterion was used because it yielded an analytical solution,
and was generally used for the design of dynamic structures such
@U ð4l þ prÞFr2 as aircraft composite structures [21]. The design condition for the
d¼ ¼  ð5Þ
@F 4EI maximum strain failure criterion for each ply [12], is expressed
as follows:
And the spring constant k of the foot at the contact point B is
expressed as follows: Xc Xt
2
< r½h
x < 2
ð15Þ
F 
4EI  3
Ebh cos2 h  m12 sin h cos2 h  m12 sin h
k¼ ¼ ¼ ð6Þ
d ð4l þ prÞr 2 3ð4l þ prÞr 2
Yc Yt
The moment of inertia of the foot structure I is expressed as 2
< r½h
x < 2
ð16Þ
sin h  m21 cos2 h sin h  m21 cos2 h
follows:
3 S S
bh  < r½h
x < ð17Þ
I¼ ð7Þ sin h cos h sin h cos h
12
The failure index f , which should be less than 1, is expressed as
where b and h represent the width and thickness of the composite
follows:
foot, respectively. One of the main objectives of the composite foot
8 9
is to reduce the magnitude of k to enable the robot to jump up >
> rx ðcos2 hm12 sin2 hÞ >
>
higher, stride farther, and reduce the impact from the ground when
>
< X t >
=
stress
f ¼ ¼ rx ðsin hmt 21 cos2 hÞ < 1 ð18Þ
2
the running frequency is lower than the fundamental natural fre- strength > >
>
>
Y >
quency of the foot [20]. The high damping of the composite foot will : rx ðcos h sin hÞ > ;
S
decrease the impact load transmissibility. For the ease of manufac-
turing the composite foot structure, the ply stacking sequence of t t
where X , Y , S and m12 are the longitudinal strength, transverse
½hns was chosen. Then, for the wide rectangular beam, the longitu- strength, shear strength, and Poisson’s ratio of unidirectional com-
dinal Young’s modulus E  is expressed as the transformed reduced posite, respectively. In this study, the design objective is to mini-
stiffness as follows [12]: mize the magnitude of k in Eq. (10) while satisfying the constraint
 J. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 140 (2016) 344–350 347

of Eq. (18). The stacking angle and thickness of the composite foot Failure index
10 5.0
were determined by calculating the above formulations to optimize
the stacking sequence. The design parameter and its values are 1.0

No. symmetry ply (n)

shown in Table 2. 8 4.0
In this work, a high strength carbon/epoxy prepreg (USN150, SK
Chemicals, Korea) was used for the foot structure whose material 3.0
6
properties are shown in Table 3. The maximum axial force on each
leg is known to be approximately 3 times the body weight [22].
2.0
Preliminary running test results with aluminum feet also showed 4
similar trend (F max ¼ 68 N at 27 km/h). A safety factor (SF) of 1.2
was applied for optimization. Therefore, the maximum applied 1.0

load was 88 N (F max ¼ 3mg  SF). 2

To solve optimization problems, design parameters of the foot 0.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
structures (h, n) were increased from 0 to 90 degree by 5 degree
and 1–10 plies by 1 symmetry plies, respectively. Firstly, searching stacking angle (θ)
the failure index f under 1 with respect to the stacking angles and (a)
number of symmetry plies as shown in Fig. 3(a) with labeled f ¼ 1. 16 5
With these results, the local minimum spring constants in the mul- Spring constant

Spring constant (N/mm)

Failure index
tiple stacking angles with same symmetry plies were organized as 12.1 4
12

Failure index (f)

shown in Fig. 3(b), which were selected to satisfy the failure index 11.1
10.6
9.65
less than 1 (f < 1). The results of the 0 degree cases were neglected 8.68 3
due to the splitting problem although it gave the lowest spring 8 6.86
constant. Therefore, the optimum stacking sequence was chosen 2
as ½54s , whose spring constant and failure index were 3.66 N/ 4 3.66
mm, and 0.61, respectively. 1.57 1
0.46
0
3. Experimental 0
[0]2s [0]3s [±5]4s [±10]5s [±15]6s [±30]7s [±45]8s [±50]9s [±60]10s
Stacking sequence
3.1. Specimen fabrication
(b)
The composite foot specimens were fabricated using a high
Fig. 3. Analysis results: (a) contour map of the failure index; (b) spring constants of
strength unidirectional carbon/epoxy prepreg (USN150, SK Chem- selected stacking sequences under f < 1.
icals, Korea) to verify the design optimization results, ½54s . The
configuration and dimensions of the specimens are shown in
the Section 2.2. The failure load of the composite feet was 184 N. In
Fig. 4. The prepreg were stacked with a stacking sequence of
addition, the compression test of the aluminum foot was per-
½54s on a curvilinear shape mold. The mold was polished and
formed in the load range of 0–88 N. Table 4 shows the compression
treated with a liquid-type mold release (Safelease30, Air tech, Uni-
test results of both foot structures. The spring constant and mass of
ted States) for easy demolding. The stacked composite specimen
the composite foot structure were 55 times and 3 times lower than
was cured by the autoclave vacuum bag degassing method at
the corresponding conventional aluminum foot, respectively.
125 °C and 0.6 MPa for 2 h.
Using composite materials, the spring constant, mass and moment
of inertia of the whole leg structure reduced significantly.
3.2. Compression test of the composite foot structure
3.3. Vibration test of the specimen
Compression tests were performed using a universal testing
machine (Instron 4469, Instron Corporation, United States) at
Vibration tests were performed with respect to the stacking
25 °C to evaluate the mechanical properties of the fabricated com-
sequence to measure the natural frequency and damping ratio of
posite foot and the conventional aluminum foot structure. The
the composite foot structure. Before the tests, composite foot spec-
experimental setup is shown in Fig. 5(a). The composite foot spec-
imens were fabricated with respect to the stacking sequences of
imen was clamped by a jig, and then a load was applied by a lubri-
½54s ; ½104s ; ½204s ; ½304s ; and ½354s to investigate vibration
cated flat plate with a crosshead speed of 2 mm/min. The spring
characteristics of the composite foot with respect to the stacking
constant of the composite foot structure (½54s ) was 3.75 N/mm,
angles. The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 5(b). A strain gauge
which was well matched to the analytical model (3.66 N/mm) from
was attached at the curved part of the composite foot. A dummy
mass, which had the same mass as the robot (2.5 kg), was hung
Table 3 at the end of the foot. The vibration of the feet was generated by
Material properties of the high strength carbon/epoxy composite (USN 150). pulling down 10 mm and then releasing the dummy mass. A low
pass filter was used to remove the high frequency noise. Fast Four-
Material properties Symbol Values
ier Transform (FFT) was performed to obtain the natural frequency
Longitudinal modulus E1 (GPa) 131
of the composite foots and to calculate the damping ratio using the
Transverse modulus E2 (GPa) 10.8
Shear modulus G12 (GPa) 5.65
logarithmic decrement method [23]. The natural frequency and
Longitudinal tensile strength X t (MPa) 2000 damping ratio of the composite foot structures with respect to
Transverse tensile strength Y t (MPa) 61 the stacking sequences were measured and calculated as shown
Shear strength S (MPa) 70 in Table 5. The natural frequencies of the composite feet were sig-
Poisson’s ratio m12 0.28 nificantly lower than those of the conventional aluminum foot; in
Density q (kg/m3) 1540
particular, the ½54s foot (5.59 Hz) was 88% lower than aluminum
Thickness tply (mm) 0.15
foot (45.8 Hz). The damping ratio of the ½54s composite foot
348 J. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 140 (2016) 344–350

Fig. 4. Configuration of the composite foot specimen.

Fig. 5. Experimental setup (a) compression and dynamic loading test; (b) vibration test.

Table 4
Compression test results.

Foot structure Materials Spring constant, k (N/mm) Mass (g) Thickness (mm)
Composite foot ½54s Carbon/epoxy composite (USN 150) 3.75 8.5 2.4
Aluminum foot Aluminum 7075 207 25.0 N/A

Table 5
Vibration test results.

½54s ½104s ½204s ½304s ½354s Aluminum

Spring constant, k (N/mm) 3.75 3.51 2.98 2.26 1.88 207

Natural frequency (Hz) 5.59 4.97 3.94 3.18 2.90 45.8
Damping ratio (f) 0.029 0.015 0.009 0.008 0.014 0.0016

(0.029) was 18 times higher than aluminum foot (0.0016). Fig. 6 0.030 Damping ratio
shows the damping ratio and spring constant of the composite foot Stiffness
3
Damping ratio ( )

Stiffness (N/mm)

structures with respect to the stacking sequence. The highest 0.025

damping ratio occurred at ½54s ; which was different from the 0.020
trend of tensile specimen where the highest damping occurred at 2
0.015
higher stacking angles. These results may be caused by the low
angled fibers that suppressed the bending motion of the foot struc- 0.010
1
ture, which induced the interlaminar shear deformation.
0.005

3.4. Life cycles of the composite foot structure 0.000

[±5]4s [±10]4s [±20]4s [±30]4s [±35]4s
0

The dynamic loading tests were performed to measure the life Stacking sequence
cycles of the developed composite foot structure using a dynamic Fig. 6. Vibration test results with respect to the stacking sequence.
materials testing machine (Instron 8801, Instron Corporation, Uni-
ted States) at 25 °C. The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 5(a).
The composite foot was clamped by the jig, and the dynamic load of 3 Hz, which is same as the leg rotating frequency. Load was
was applied via a lubricated flat plate using a crosshead frequency applied in one direction only with a stress ratio, R ¼ 0. The dis-
 J. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 140 (2016) 344–350 349

Table 6 30
Dynamic test results after 105 cycles. 24.9
Before dynamic test After dynamic test 25

Acceleration (m/s2)
Spring constant (N/mm) 3.75 3.7
20
14.9
15
placement control was used, whose condition was set according to
the static compression test results at 0–90 N (0–20 mm). The max- 10
imum stress of the foot was approximately 500 MPa by Eq. (11).
Table 6 presents the spring constant of the composite foot 5
5
before and after dynamic loading test of 10 cycles, which was 0
equivalent of 14 km/h speed for 9 h. The spring constant did not Al foot Compostie foot ([±5]4s)
change without any damage of the composite foot structure. In
conclusion, the newly developed composite foot was very effective (a)
and promising for fast robot running.
15 14.1
3.5. Dynamic running test
11.4

Speed (km/h)
To verify the developed composite foot structure (½54s ),
10
dynamic running tests were performed. The raptor robot was
attached to the tethered boom, which realizes quasi-planar motion
on the treadmill, as shown in Fig. 7(a). The robot is composed of
the under-actuated 9-bar linkage structure, which is driven by a 5
single electrical actuator attached to the crank link. The leg struc-
ture of the raptor robot has one degree of freedom, and the foot tra-
jectory is generated by the crank. Fig. 7(b) describes the schematic 0
Al foot Compostie foot ([±5]4s)
diagram of the leg movement as the crank rotates. The leg trajec-
tory of the robot can be determined by the angular position of (b)
Fig. 8. Experimental results of the running test: (a) acceleration through feet; (b)
speed.

the crank (a). A magnetic rotary encoder (ML 512 CPT, Maxon
Motor Co., Switzerland) was used to measure the rotational speed
of crank. An incremental encoder (E30S, Autonics, Korea) was
installed at each revolute joint of the boom to measure the position
data of the robot. A 3-axis acceleration sensor (EBIMU-9DOFV2,
E2box, Korea) was installed at the center of the robot body to mea-
sure inertial force during running. The raptor robot was operated at
3 Hz for the corresponding aluminum and composite foot struc-
tures. The acceleration at the body through the composite foot
was 40% lower than that through the aluminum foot, as shown
in Fig. 8(a). This result indicated that the major parts of the robot
were effectively protected by the composite foot. The robot speed
with the composite foot (14.1 km/h) was 23.7% faster than that
with the aluminum foot (11.4 km/h), although the leg rotating fre-
quency was same as 3 Hz, as shown in Fig. 8(b). The composite foot
acted as a series spring linkage and increased the stride length,
which was the distance between two successive placements of
the same foot.

4. Conclusion

In this study, a novel composite foot structure was developed

for a dynamic biped raptor robot using carbon/epoxy composite
material due to its high specific strength, material damping capac-
ity and ease of spring constant control. For the stiffness model, the
strain energy method was used. The design optimization process
was performed with the maximum strain failure criterion to solve
analytically, from which an optimum stacking sequence of ½54s
was obtained.
The spring constant and mass of the composite foot were 55
times and 3 times lower than those of the conventional aluminum
Fig. 7. Experimental setup and leg configuration: (a) raptor robot with composite
foot, respectively. The natural frequencies of the composite feet
foot structure; (b) schematic diagram of the leg movement. were 88% lower than those of the conventional aluminum foot.
350 J. Lee et al. / Composite Structures 140 (2016) 344–350

Moreover, the damping ratio of the composite foot was 18 times [7] Niiyama R, Nishikawa S, Kuniyoshi Y. Biomechanical approach to open-loop
bipedal running with a musculoskeletal athlete robot. Adv Rob
higher than that of the aluminum foot. At a leg rotating frequency
2012;26:383–98.
of 3 Hz, the impact load through the fabricated composite foot [8] Mallick PK. Fiber-reinforced composites: materials, manufacturing, and
reduced by 40% compared with the conventional aluminum foot design. CRC Press; 2007.
due to a lower spring constant and a higher damping ratio. More- [9] Choi I, Lee DG. Surface modification of carbon fiber/epoxy composites with
randomly oriented aramid fiber felt for adhesion strength enhancement.
over, the robot speed of the composite foot was 23.7% faster than Compos Part A May 2013;48:1–8.
that of the aluminum foot under the same rotating frequency of [10] Lee D, Lim JW, Nam S, Choi I, Lee DG. Gasket-integrated carbon/silicone
the leg. As a result, the proposed composite foot structure was very elastomer composite bipolar plate for high-temperature PEMFC. Compos
Struct 2015;128:284–90.
effective and represents a promising development in the realiza- [11] Lee DG, Lee CS, Lee HG, Hwang HY, Kim JW. Novel applications of composite
tion of a fast dynamic biped robot. structures to robots, machine tools and automobiles. Compos Struct Oct–Dec
2004;66:17–39.
[12] Lee DG, Suh NP. Axiomatic design and fabrication of composite structures-
Acknowledgements applications in robots, machine tools, and automobiles. vol. 1. 2005.
[13] Lim JW, Lee DG. Development of the hybrid insert for composite sandwich
This research was supported by the Climate Change Research satellite structures. Compos Part A Aug. 2011;42:1040–8.
[14] Nolan L. Carbon fibre prostheses and running in amputees: a review. Foot
Hub of KAIST – South Korea (Grant No. N01150036) and the UTRC Ankle Surg 2008;14:125–9.
(Unmanned Technology Research Center) at KAIST, originally [15] Galloway KC, Clark JE, Koditschek DE. Variable stiffness legs for robust,
funded by DAPA – South Korea, and ADD – South Korea (Grant efficient, and stable dynamic running. J Mech Rob-Trans ASME Feb 2013;5.
[16] Caprino G, Langella A. Optimization of robotic arms made of composite
No. N04130041). Their support is greatly appreciated.
materials for maximum fundamental frequency. Compos Struct 1995;31:1–8.
[17] Davoodi MM, Sapuan SM, Aidy A, Abu Osman NA, Oshkour AA, Abas WABA.
References Development process of new bumper beam for passenger car: a review. Mater
Des Sep 2012;40:304–13.
[1] Zhou X, Bi S. A survey of bio-inspired compliant legged robot designs. Bioinspir [18] Liu Q, Lin Y, Zong Z, Sun G, Li Q. Lightweight design of carbon twill weave
Biomim Dec. 2012;7. fabric composite body structure for electric vehicle. Compos Struct Mar
[2] Cotton S, Olaru IMC, Bellman M, Van der Ven T, Godowski J, Pratt J. Fastrunner: 2013;97:231–8.
a fast, efficient and robust bipedal robot. Concept and planar simulation. In: [19] Boresi AP, Schmidt RJ, Sidebottom OM. Advanced mechanics of materials,
Robotics and automation (ICRA), 2012 IEEE international conference on. 2012. 6. New York: Wiley; 1993.
p. 2358–2364. [20] Yang B. Stress, strain, and structural dynamics: an interactive handbook of
[3] Park J, Kim K-S, Kim S. Design of a cat-inspired robotic leg for fast running. Adv formulas, solutions, and MATLAB toolboxes, 1. Academic Press; 2005.
Rob 2014;28:1587–98. [21] Swanson SR. Introduction to design and analysis with advanced composite
[4] Ananthanarayanan A, Azadi M, Kim S. Towards a bio-inspired leg design for materials. Prentice-Hall; 1997.
high-speed running. Bioinspir Biomim Dec 2012;7. [22] Bobbert MF, Yeadon MR, Nigg BM. Mechanical analysis of the landing phase in
[5] Perreault S, Gosselin CM. Cable-driven parallel mechanisms: application to a heel toe running. J Biomech Mar 1992;25:223–34.
locomotion interface. J Mech Des Oct 2008;130. [23] Newland DE. Mechanical vibration analysis and computation. Courier
[6] Moore EZ. Leg design and stair climbing control for the rhex robotic Corporation; 2006.
hexapod. Montreal, Canada: McGill University; 2002.