MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415385725 · doi:10.1007/s44430-026-00019-3

A Highly-Geared Haptic Actuator using 3D Printed Magnetorheological Clutches

2025· preprint· en· W4415385725 on OpenAlexafffund
Pierre Lhommeau, Jean‐Sébastien Plante

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscover Robotics · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration Control and Rheological Fluids
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsMagnetorheological fluidClutchActuatorHaptic technologyTorqueRobotInertiaHumanoid robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<title>Abstract</title> Advanced robotic systems such as humanoid robots need actuators with high torque density but yet, with good haptic abilities, in order to interact transparently with people. Combining these two requirements presents an important challenge for conventional gearmotors due to a gearing design conflict where gearing increases torque density but only at the cost of reduced haptic performance. Recent research suggests that magnetorheological (MR) actuators have the potential to greatly reduce the gearing design conflict by introducing a small fluidic clutch between the “gear” and the “motor” which allows maintaining excellent haptic performance at high gearing. Fully extracting the benefits of MR actuators requires pushing gearing ratios above 100:1 in combination with miniature low friction and inertia clutches which presents serious manufacturing challenges. This paper presents a manufacturing solution for such miniature, low friction and inertia, 3D printed MR clutch design and integration in an actuator with 120:1 gearing ratio. An extensive experimental characterisation is conducted on a fully-functional actuator showing excellent backdrivability and frequency response even with such high gearing levels thus opening the door to a future generation of torque-dense, but yet haptic robot actuators.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscover RoboticsSame topicVibration Control and Rheological FluidsFrench-language works237,207