Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T22:52:02.327Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A class of spatial remote center-of-motion mechanisms and its forward kinematics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2022

Yuan Bian ,
Jianchang Zhao Open the ORCID record for Jianchang Zhao [Opens in a new window] ,
Jinhua Li ,
Guowu Wei Open the ORCID record for Guowu Wei [Opens in a new window]  and
Jianmin Li
Yuan Bian
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, China
Jianchang Zhao
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, China Institute of Medical Robotics and Intelligent Systems of Tianjin University, Tianjin, China
Jinhua Li
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, China Institute of Medical Robotics and Intelligent Systems of Tianjin University, Tianjin, China
Guowu Wei
Affiliation:
School of Science, Engineering, and Environment, University of Salford, Salford, UK
Jianmin Li*
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Mechanism Theory and Equipment Design, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, China Institute of Medical Robotics and Intelligent Systems of Tianjin University, Tianjin, China
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: mjli@tju.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has shown tremendous advances over the traditional technique. A crucial challenge for developing a MIS robot is the kinematic design of the remote center-of-motion (RCM) mechanism. In this paper, a class of spatial RCM mechanism is analyzed. They are obtained by generating virtual parallelograms. The main process is to construct a line that passes through a fixed point under the mechanical constraint. The axis of the surgical tool is then constrained to parallel with that line. Hence, due to the geometrical feature of the parallel lines, the axis of the surgical tool will always pass through a fixed point, i.e., the RCM point. Due to the specially designed structure, the fixed point does not need to be physically belonging to the mechanism. The geometrical analysis method is employed to obtain the closed-form solution of the forward kinematics of the proposed mechanisms. Due to the high load capacity of parallel mechanism, the robots based on the proposed RCM mechanisms have promising applications as an external positioner to be used in robotic single-port surgeries.

Keywords

minimally invasive surgical robotremote center-of-motion mechanismforward kinematics
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , March 2023 , pp. 885 - 899
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Dai, J. S., “Surgical robotics and its development and progress,” Robotica 28, 161 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guthart, G. S. and Salisbury, J. K. Jr., “The Intuitive Telesurgery System: Overview and Application,” In: Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Francisco, CA (2000) pp. 618–621.Google Scholar
Li, J. M., Zhang, G. K., Xing, Y., Liu, H. B. and Wang, S. X., “A class of 2-degree-of-freedom planar remote center-of-motion mechanisms based on virtual parallelograms,” Trans. ASME J. Mech. Robot. 6(3), 031014 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagn, U., Konietschke, R., Tobergte, A., Nickl, M., Jörg, S., Kübler, B., Passig, G., Gröger, M., Fröhlich, F., Seibold, U., Le-Tien, L., Albu-Schäffer, A., Nothhelfer, A., Hacker, F., Grebenstein, M. and Hirzinger, G., “DLR MiroSurge - A versatile system for research in endoscopic telesurgery,” Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 5(2), 183–193 (2010).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pisla, D., Szilaghyi, A., Waida, C. and Plitea, N., “Kinematics and workspace modeling of a new hybrid robot used in minimally invasive surgery,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 29(2), 463–474 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pisla, D., Gherman, B., Vaida, C., Suciu, M. and Plitea, N., “An active hybrid parallel robot for minimally invasive surgery,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 29(4), 203–221 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gherman, B., Pisla, D., Vaida, C. and Plitea, N., “Development of inverse dynamic model for a surgical hybrid parallel robot with equivalent lumped masses,” Robot Comput. Integr. Manuf. 28(3), 402–415 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghodoussi, M., Butner, S. E. and Wang, Y. L., “Robotic Surgery - The Transatlantic Case,” In: Proceedings 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington, DC (2002) pp. 1882–1888.Google Scholar
Wang, W., Li, J. and Wang, S., “System design and animal experiment study of a novel minimally invasive surgical robot,” Int. J. Med. Robot. Comput. Assist. Surg. 12(1), 73–84 (2016).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Locke, R. C. O. and Patel, R. V., “Optimal Remote Center-of-Motion Location for Robotics-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Rome, Italy (2007) pp. 1900–1905.Google Scholar
Taylor, R. H. and Stoianovici, D., “Medical robotics in computer-integrated surgery,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 19(5), 765–781 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolzenburg, J-U., Kallidonis, P., Minh, D., Dietel, A., Häfner, T., Dimitriou, D., Al-Aown, A., Kyriazis, I. and Liatsikos, E. N., “Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: Evolution of the technique and experience with 2400 cases,” J. Endourol. 23(9), 1467–1472 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Voros, S., Haber, G. P., Menudet, J. F., Long, J. A. and Cinquin, P., “ViKY robotic scope holder: Initial clinical experience and preliminary results using instrument tracking,” IEEE ASME Trans. Mechatron. 15(6), 879–886 (2010).Google Scholar
Zhang, X. L. and Nelson, C. A., “Kinematic analysis and optimization of a novel robot for surgical tool manipulation,” ASME J. Med. Dev. 2(2), 021003 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nabil, Z. and Guillaume, M., “Mechatronic design of a new robot for force control in minimally invasive surgery,” IEEE ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2(2), 143–153 (2007).Google Scholar
Shi, J. R., Pascal, M., Viviane, P., Guillaume, M. and Wang, S. X., “Preliminary Results on the Design of a Novel Laparoscopic Manipulator,” In: Proceedings of the 11th World Congress in Mechanisms and Machine Science, Tianjin, China (2003) pp. 1811–1815.Google Scholar
Lum, M. J. H., Friedman, D. C. W., Sankaranarayanan, G., King, H., Fodero, K., Leuschke, R., Hannaford, B., Rosen, J. and Sinanan, M. N., “The RAVEN: Design and validation of a telesurgery system,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 28(9), 1183–1197 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zoppi, M., Zlatanov, D. and Gosselin, C. M., “Analytical kinematics models and special geometries of a class of 4-DOF parallel mechanisms,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21(6), 1046–1055 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, R. H., Funda, J., Eldridge, B., Gomory, S., Gruben, K., LaRose, D., Talamini, M., Kavoussi, L. and Anderson, J., “A telerobotic assistant for laparoscopic surgery,” Eng. Med. Biol. Mag. 14(3), 279–288 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nawrat, Z. and Kostka, P., “Polish cardio-robot ‘RobIn Heart’. System, description and technical evaluation,” Int. J. Med. Robot. Comput. Assist. Surg. 2, 36–44 (2006).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosen, J., Brown, J. D., Chang, L., Barreca, M., Sinanan, M. and Hannaford, B., “The BlueDRAGON – A system for Measuring the Kinematics and the Dynamics of Minimally Invasive Surgical Tools In-Vivo,” In: Internaitonal Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington, DC (2002) pp. 1876–1881.Google Scholar
Taylor, R. H., Jensen, P., Whitcomb, L., Barnes, A., Kumar, R., Stoianovici, D., Gupta, P., Wang, Z. X., de Juan, E. and Kavoussi, L., “A Steady-Hand Robotic System for Microsurgical Augmentation,” In: The Second International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Cambridge, UK, vol. 1679 (1999) pp. 1031–1041.Google Scholar
Nowlin, W. C., Guthart, G. S., Salisbury, J. K. and Niemeyer, G. D., “Repositioning and Reorientation of Master/Slave Relationship in Minimally Invasive Telesurgery,” U. S. Patent No. US7087049B2 (2006).Google Scholar
Zhou, N. X., Zhu, Z. Y., Chen, J. Z., Liu, Q. D., Zhang, T. and Chen, Z. F., “Delayed right hemihepatectomy followed by right-hepatic vascular control both by da Vinci robotic surgery to a patient of HilarCholangiocarcinoma with deep jaundice,” Robot. Surg. 1, 90–97 (2011).Google Scholar
Haber, G-P., White, M. A., Autorino, R., Escobar, P. F., Kroh, M. D., Chalikonda, S., Khanna, R., Forest, S., Yang, B., Altunrende, F., Stein, R. J. and Kaouk, J. H., “Novel robotic da Vinci instruments for laparoendoscopic single-site surgery,” Urology 76(6), 1279–1282 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanly, E. J. and Talamini, M. A., “Robotic abdominal surgery,” Am. J. Surg. 188(4), 19S–26S (2004).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zong, G. H., Pei, X., Yu, J. J. and Bi, S. S., “Classification and type synthesis of 1-DOF remote center of motion mechanisms,” Mech. Mach. Theory 43(12), 1585–1595 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, J. M., Wang, S. X., Wang, X. F. and He, C., “Optimization of a novel mechanism for a minimally invasive surgery robot,” Int. J. Med. Robot. Comput. Assist. Surg. 6, 83–90 (2010).Google ScholarPubMed
Li, J. M., Wang, S. X., Wang, X. F., He, C. and Zhang, L. A., “Development of a Novel Mechanism for Minimally Invasive Surgery,” In: International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, Tianjin, China (2010) pp. 1370–1375.Google Scholar
Kuo, C. H., Dai, J. S. and Pasgupta, P., “Kinematic design considerations for minimally invasive surgical robots: An overview,” Int. J. Med. Robot. Comput. Assist. Surg. 8(2), 127–145 (2012).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beira, R., Santos-Carreras, L., Sengül, A., Samur, E., Clavel, R. and Bleuler, H., “An external positioning mechanism for robotic surgery,” J. Syst. Des. Dyn. 5(5), 1094–1105 (2011).Google Scholar
Li, J. M., Zhang, G. K., Muller, A. and Wang, S. X., “A family of remote center of motion mechanisms based on intersecting motion planes,” Trans. ASME J. Mech. Des. 135(9), 091009 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuo, C. H. and Dai, J. S., “Kinematics of a fully decoupled remoter center-of-motion parallel manipulator for minimally invasive surgery,” Trans. ASME J. Med. Dev. 6(2), 021008 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, H., Yang, Y., Jingjing, X. and Peng, S., “Type synthesis of 1R1T remote center of motion mechanisms based on pantograph mechanisms,” J. Mech. Des. 138(1), 014501 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clavel, R., “Device for the Movement and Positioning of an Element in Space,” US Patent 4976582 (1990).Google Scholar
Ricardo, B., Laura, S. C., Ali, S., Evren, S., Reymand, C. and Hannes, B., “An external positioning mechanism for robotic surgery,” J. Syst. Des. Dyn. 5(5), 1094–1105 (2011).Google Scholar
Parikh, P. J. and Lam, S. S. Y., “A hybrid strategy to solve the forward kinematics problem in parallel manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21(1), 18–25 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, J. S., Huang, Z. and Lipkin, H., “Mobility of overconstrained parallel mechanisms,” Trans. ASME J. Mech. Des. 128(1), 220–229 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, G., Wang, J., Wang, H., Chen, C., Parenti-Castelli, V. and Angeles, J., “Design and validation of a spatial two-limb 3R1T parallel manipulator with remote center-of-motion,” Mech. Mach. Theory 149(2), 103807 (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar