Robot Gripper Design Using Axiomatic Approach

International Journal of Conceptions on Mechanical and Civil Engineering
Vol. 1, Issue. 1, Dec 2013; ISSN: 2357 2760
Robot gripper design using axiomatic approach

Sadaf Alam and Prof. I A Khan
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering,
Jamia Millia Islamia Univerity,
New Delhi, India.
er.sadafalam@gmail.com and iakhanjmi@yahoo.co.in
Abstract Though there are many methods for product design

like, Hubka, Concurrent Engineering, Taguchi method, Triz..Etc.
In this paper we have studied axiomatic approach to product
design. The axiomatic design approach was proposed by N.P. Suh
.It consists of the Independence Axiom and the Information
Axiom. The Independence Axiom assists a designer in generating
good design alternatives by considering the relationships between
the functions and the physical product using a hierarchical
mapping procedure. The Information Axiom, which is related to
the probability of achieving the given functional requirements,
can be used as a criterion for the selection of the best solution
among the proposed alternatives in the conceptual or preliminary
design stage. this paper shows that how axiomatic approach is
helpful to the designers in comparison to other methodologies)
and what the benefits of this approach for product design are.
Engineering designs involving multiple factors that interact with
one another have drawn researchers attention for decades. In
todays competitive global market, which demands rapid
response to customer needs, speeding up the product
development process has become more crucial than ever.
Axiomatic Design (AD) is one design theory that provides a
systematic approach to engineering design. Based on the
independence axiom in AD, unacceptable solutions can be
identified in a domain mapping process during the early design
stage. As AD accepts only uncoupled and decoupled designs,
design solutions with interacting parameters are not considered
appropriate. However, many engineering designs do involve
couplings, especially for the design of large and complex system;
still these couplings may have various degrees of strength. This
paper includes Axiomatic Design, a recently developed, that
results in a new methodology for product design.
Keywords- Axiomatic Approach, Product Design.
I. INTRODUCTION
The engineering design is defined as the process of
devising a system, component or process to meet desired
needs. It is a decision-making process (often iterative), in
which the basic sciences, mathematics , and engineering
sciences are applied to convert resources optimally to meet a
stated objective. Among the fundamental elements of the
design process are the establishment of objectives and criteria,
synthesis, analysis, construction, testing, and evaluation.
A. Design product should be:

Functional: satisfy the intended need and customer
expectation.
Safe: not hazardous to the user, bystanders, or surrounding
property with appropriate directions or warnings provided.
Reliable: perform its intended function satisfactorily or
without failure at a given age.
Competitive: product survival.
Usable: user friendly product.
Manufacturability: suited to mass production with a
minimum number of parts (or information).
Marketable: purchasable with repair available.
B. PHASES OF DESIGN PROCESS
i.
Identify Customer Needs.
ii.
Plan for the Design Process.
iii.
Develop Engineering Requirements.
iv.
Concept Generation and Evaluation.
v.
Develop Product / Prototype.
In the 1990s, two logical methods for developing concepts

evolved.
a)
TRIZ
b) AXIOMATIC APPROACH.
a)
TRIZ The Theory of Inventive Machines.
The method makes use of CONTRADICTIONS and

INVENTIVE PRINCIPLES. Contradictions are engineering
trade-offs when something gets better, forcing something
else to get worse. Using the TRIZ method, the goal is to find
the major contradiction that is making the problem hard to
solve. Then use TRIZs 40 inventive principles to generate
ideas for overcoming the contradictions. Altshuller [2] found
that there are 40 inventive principles underlying all patents.
b)
Axiomatic Design
Axiomatic design was developed by Professor Nam Suh

[1] of MIT in an effort to make the design process logical.
Axiomatic design is based on the relationships between 4
design domains: Customer, Function, Physical, and Process.
Axiomatic Design depends on two axioms. The basic goal of
128 | 1 3 3

the axiomatic approach is to establish a scientific foundation
for the design field, so as to provide a fundamental basis for
the creation of products, process, systems, software and
organizations.
Axiomatic design provides a thinking process to create a
new design and/or to improve the existing design. It is useful to
apply the methodology in such a conceptual stage. The case
study in this paper explains how the axiomatic design approach
can fit into the Robot Gripper design area.
II.
AXIOMATIC DESIGN
Design Axioms consist of the following two basic axioms.

A.
the probability of success of achieving the specified FRs (in

the case of product design) or the specified DPs (in the case of
process design). The probability of success of a given design
Endeavour is obtained by considering the entire FRs to be
satisfied in the case of FR/DP mapping or all the DPs to be
satisfied in the case of DP/PV mapping (PV = process
variables). Then, the total information content is obtained by
summing up individual is corresponding to a set of FRs or DPs
to be satisfied. The probability of success of individual FRs is
governed by how well the designer specified FR is satisfied by
the product, whereas in the case of process it is determined by
how well the designer specified DP is satisfied by the process.
This can be graphically illustrated as follows:
Axiom 1 The Independence Axiom
Maintain the independence of FRs

The first axiom is the independent axiom, and it focus on
the nature of the mapping between what is required (FRs)
and how to achieve it (DPs). It states that a good design
maintains the independence of the functional requirements.
The relationship between {FRs} and {DPs} can be written
as
{FRs}= [A] {DPs}
Where FR = Functional Requirement
Figure 1.
DP= Design Parameter.

And A= Design Matrix
B.
Axiom 2 The Information Axiom
Minimize the information content of the design.

Alternative statement: Among all proposed DPs. The
design process thus involves relating these FRs of the
functional domain and the DPs in the physical domain in a
logical way.
The second Axiom refers to the minimization of some
parameter called information. More specifically, it states that
among all the designs that satisfy functional independence, the
one that possesses the least information is best.
Information content I is defined in terms of the
probability of satisfying a given FR.
I =log 1/P = log P

2
Design Range, System Range, and Common Range in a

plot of the probability density function (PDF) of a functional
requirement. The deviation from the mean is equal to the
square root of the variance. The design range is assumed to
have a uniform probability distribution in determining the
common range.
The figure1 defines the design range, which is the
tolerance associated with the DP specified by the designer,
and the system range, which is the capability of the
manufacturing system given in terms of tolerances. When
these two ranges overlap, the outcome is determined by the
amount of the overlap. Then the definition for the information
content given by equation (1.2) can be rewritten as:
I = log (system range/ common range)
III.
FR1: Type of grasping.

FR2: Where it is being used.
i 1
n
log 1/Pi
2
FR4: D.O.F, Weight, Size, Etc
= log Pi
i 1
FR3: Control and feed back.
(1.1)
FR5: All general attributes required
(1.2)
Where, P is the probability of successfully satisfying the

functional requirements. Information content is the measure of
Corresponding Design parameters will be:
129 | 1 3 3
(1.3)
APPLICATION OF DESIGN AXIOM FOR ROBOT GRIPPER
A. APPLICATION OF FIRST AXIOM

FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
(1)
In the general case of n FRs for an uncoupled design, I may be

expressed as
I=
Probability distribution of a system parameter.

DP33: Grasping Force.
DP34: Feed back
DP35: Working Speed.
DP36: Working Range.
DESIGN PARAMETERS:
DP1: Class of grippers.
DP2: Application of gripper.
DP3: Performance.
DP4: Physical Attributes.
DP5: General Characteristics.
Its matrix will be:

FR31 X
FR32 0

FR33 0
FR34 0
FR35 0

FR36 0
So its Design matrix will be:

FR1 X
FR 2 0

FR3 0

FR 4 0
FR5 0
X
0
0
0
X
0
0
0
X
0 DP1
0 DP 2
0 DP3
0 DP 4
X DP5
Now, as we can observe that; the functional requirement FR2

is linked with many things; so it can further be decomposed
as:
DP21: Industry Type.

DP22: Characteristic.
DP23: Speed.
DP24: Environment of working.
0 DP21
0 DP 22
0 DP23
X DP 24
X
0
X
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
0
0 DP31
0 DP32
0 DP33
0 DP34
0 DP35
X DP36
B. APPLICATION OF SECOND AXIOM

Among these attributes we have selected some attributes
according to the customers requirement to design the
optimum gripper. Attributes which are considered are as
follows:
TABLE I.
SYSTEM RANGE AND DESIGN RANGE FOR GRIPPERS.
Grippers Evaluated.
1) Gripper A
2) Gripper B
3) Gripper C
4) Gripper D
1) 10 20
2) 12 38
b) Working Range (mm).
3) 5 10
4) 10 15
1) 100 300
2) 200 540
c) Grasping Force (N).
3) 150 200
4) 200 300
1) 0 4
3) 1 5
4) 5 10
3) 1 3
4) 2 4
3) 50 100
4) 60 100
a) Maximum Load (kg).
The functional requirement FR3 has a next level, which is

decomposed to:
FR31: To provide the sense of feed back.
FR32: The Load to be handled.
FR33: Force required for the given load.
FR34: Type of feed back loop.
FR35: Time involved in process.
FR36: Maximum range in all direction.
0
0
The information content is determined by establishing the

system range for each of the FRs and by determining the
overlap between the system range and the design range (i.e.,
the designer specified range).The system range for each of the
gripper is listed in the following table:
Its matrix will be:
0
0
0
0
These functions are evaluated for the following types of

gripper: i) Soft gripper ii) Oil pressure hand for cylindrical
steel material morol company ltd. iii) simple gripper iv) hand
for carrying copper pipes shinko electric co. ltd. taken from
page no. 116 [3], 118 [3], 117 [3]and 109 [3] respectively.
Let us denote gripper A, gripper B, gripper C and gripper D
for the above types of grippers respectively.
Corresponding design parameters will be:
0
X
0
X
1) Maximum load 2) working range 3) Grasping

Force 4) Degree of freedom 5) Weight of the gripper.
FR21: Type of industrial application.

FR22: Size, shape, material of jaw.
FR23: time involved in gripping.
FR24: Space available, climatic conditions.
FR21 X
FR 22 0
FR23 0

FR 24 0
0
X
2) 1 4
d) Degree of Freedom.
1) 3 7
2) 0 4
e) Weight of the Gripper (kg).
Corresponding Design parameters are:
1) 45 70
DP31: Sensors displayed.

DP32: Maximum Load.
130 | 1 3 3
2) 30 70

a.
Maximum Load (kg).
3) Gripper C
1) Gripper A
Figure 4. Probability distribution as a function of maximum load (Gripper

C).
Figure 2. Probability distribution as a function of maximum load (kg)
(Gripper A)
As the system range is outside the design range so therefore

information content I = .
The information content for Maximum load of Gripper A is

4) Gripper D
obtained by the following equation:

I = ln(
20 10
) = 0.616
20 14.6
2) Gripper B
Figure 5. Probability distribution as a function of maximum load (Gripper

D).
Its Information content is given as:

Figure 3.
B).
15 10
) = 2.52
15 14.6
Probability distribution as a function of maximum load (Gripper
I = ln(
The information content for maximum load of Gripper B is

given by:
I=
ln(
38 12
)
38 14.6
= 0.10
b. Working Range (mm).

Our design range for this is 237.5. We want to design the
gripper whose working range should be more than this design
range. So the grippers working range, maximum than the
design range would come into satisfied design.
131 | 1 3 3

1) Gripper A
d. Degree of Freedom.
1) Gripper A
Figure 6. Probability distribution as a function of working range (Gripper

A).
Figure 8. Probability distribution as a function of Degree of freedom

(Gripper A)
Information content for this is given by:
In this case system range overlaps the design range so its

information content will be:
300 100
I = ln(
) = 1.16
300 237.5
I = 0.
Similarly, we do in the case of Gripper B, Gripper C and

Gripper D.
2) Gripper B
c. Grasping Force
1) Gripper A
Figure 9. Probability distribution as a function of degree of freedom

(Gripper B).
Figure 7. Probability distribution as a function of grasping force (N)

(Gripper A)
Information content is given as follows:
To design a gripper we want to have hard grasping force. So
I = ln(
we want to have grasping force more than our design range
40
) = 1.38
43
Similarly, we do in the case of Gripper C and Gripper D.
40
Information content I = ln(
) = 2.70.
4.3 3.75
Gripper D.
132 | 1 3 3

e. Weight of the Gripper (kg)
TABLE II.
INFORMATION CONTENT FOR ROBOT GRIPPER.
1) Gripper A
Maximum Load
(kg)
Working Range(
mm)
Grasping Force
(N)
Degree of
Freedom
Weight of the
Gripper(kg)
Total inf. content
Figure 10. Probability distribution as a function of Weight of the gripper (kg)
(Gripper A)
Weight of the gripper is to large extent responsible for the

speed and load carrying capacity of the gripper. However in
all cases the weight of the gripper should be kept as low as
possible.
So the information content is given by:
I = ln(
70 45
) = 0.22
65.6 45

Gripper D.
Summing up the information contents determined for
various FRs, the total information content can be determined
for the four grippers under consideration. Table: II gives the
information content for each criterion for each of the four
grippers and the total information content.
Gripper
A
Gripper
B
Gripper
C
Gripper
D
0.61
0.1
2.52
1.16
0.2
0.47
2.7
2.48
1.16
1.38
0.69
0.22
0.13
1.16
1.96
4.69
4.29
According to this analysis of the information contents, the

best Gripper to design is Gripper B followed by Gripper A.
However, Grippers C and D are not acceptable products. Both
has failed to meet some of the customer requirements.
IV. CONCLUSION
In this paper we have discussed Robot Gripper and their
various attributes. And according to these attributes we have
selected functional requirements and their corresponding
design parameters. Then the best design is chosen with the help
of 2nd Axiom. In this paper 4 types of Grippers are considered
for evaluation using Axiomatic Approach. According to this
analysis of the information contents It is found that the best
deign is of Gripper B followed by Gripper A. whereas Gripper
C and D has failed to meet the customer requirements .
Through two cases, it is identified that the information
axiom can be good way for a probabilistic estimation under the
uncertain conditions.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
133 | 1 3 3
Suh, N. (1990), The Principles of Design, Oxford University Press

Altshuller, G.S. (1988), Creativity as an Exact Science, Gordon and
Breach Science Publishers, New York, 1988
L D Albano and N P Suh (1994) Axiomatic design and Concurrent
Engineering. Computer Aided Design , 26(7), 499-504

Robot Gripper Design Using Axiomatic Approach

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Robot Gripper Design Using Axiomatic Approach

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Conceptions on Mechanical and Civil Engineering

Vol. 1, Issue. 1, Dec 2013; ISSN: 2357 2760