arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2012.14286

Six Degree of Freedom Robotic Arm with Mimicking Mechanism

Param Kothari
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Multi-degree of freedom robots are playing very important role in different applications of automation. They are providing much more accuracy in carrying out a typical procedure as compared to the manual work done by human. In recent years the design, fabrication and development of robotic arms have been active research areas in robotics all around the world. This project describe a mechanical system, design concept and prototype implementation of a 6 DOF robotic arm, which should perform industrial task such as pick and place of fragile objects operation. This robot arm being controlled by micro-controller has base, shoulder, elbow, wrist rotation and a functional gripper. Gripper has been built as end-effector and is capable of grasping diverse objects within own workspace of the arm possible. I made an effort to endeavour one of the best model possible out of the three concepts tried. The three concepts that I undertook were dependent on the type of mechanism used to provide the movement. The first concept was to provide the movement with the help of Pneumatics. The idea of pneumatics did provide a feasible movement but I had to overcome the barrier of the weight as the weight of either the storage of gas or the air compressor would have affected the usage evidently. Similarly, in the second concept, I dealt with the forces of Hydraulics. The forces exerted by hydraulics, not only restricted the movement, but also annexed a certain amount of delay in the time period in which the movement had to be done. In, the third concept, I tried to provide the necessary movement with the help of Servo Motors. The results achieved with servo motors in replacement of pneumatics and hydraulics were impeccable. The motors not only provided the movement with minimal lag but also did not impede the movement of the hand.

Explore related subjects

cs.RO

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Param Kothari. 2020-11-06. Six Degree of Freedom Robotic Arm with Mimicking Mechanism. https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.14286

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO↗
arXiv2026

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO↗
arXiv2026

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO↗