Performance Study of an Innovative Collaborative Robot Gripper Design on Different Fabric Pick and Place Scenarios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Light-weighting fiber composite materials introduced to reduce vehicle mass and known as innovative materials research activities since they provide high specific stiffness and strength compared to contemporary engineering materials. Nonetheless, there are issues related automation strategies and handling methods. Material handling of flexible textile/fiber components is a process bottleneck and it is currently being performed by setting up multi-stage manual operations for hand layups. Consequently, the long-term research objective is to develop semi-automated pick and place processes for flexible materials utilizing collaborative robots within the process. The immediate research is to experimentally validate innovatively designed grippers for efficient material pick and place tasks. Pick and place experiments on a 0/90 plain woven carbon fiber fabric with an innovative gripper design is tested using a YuMi 14000 ABB collaborative robot to validate the new-designed gripper enhanced performance on the slippage and material wrinkling based on the previous research [20] for two gripping forces, and two travel speeds. Also, different double arm pick and place scenarios are sought to achieve an acceptable approach through which fabric wrinkling and placement accuracy are improved. It is shown that using modified 2nd generation silicone gloves, material slippage is completely prevented. In addition, it is figured out that double arm pick and place scenarios performed on fabrics pre-folded 2cm in each side, represents the enhanced wrinkling and placing accuracy over all other scenarios examined.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".