Bipedal Vehicle Leg Control for Rough Terrain Stability

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing land vehicles, particularly wheeled and tracked vehicles, struggle with navigating rough terrain effectively, and there is a need for improved mobility and stability in such environments.

Innovation Solution

A bipedal vehicle design featuring extendible output legs with powered actuators and a control system that includes knee and hip sub-systems for controlled movement, providing position and force-feedback mechanisms to enhance stability and mobility.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If wheeled or tracked vehicles are used for rough terrain, then they have limited adaptability to different terrains, but they maintain simpler structure and easier operation

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadaptability to rough terrainVSAvoidvehicle structure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The vehicle employs dynamically adjustable bipedal legs with extendible segments and articulated joints that can adapt their configuration to different terrain conditions. The legs transition between extended and retracted states, and adjust their articulation angles to navigate rough terrain effectively, providing high adaptability while maintaining a relatively compact structure when not in use.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The vehicle's support structure is divided into multiple segmented legs with distinct segments (thigh, shin, foot portions) that can move independently. This segmentation allows each leg to adapt to terrain variations while maintaining overall vehicle stability, and the segmented design enables compact storage when the legs are retracted.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Adaptability or versatility

If quadruped or multi-legged mechanisms are used for rough terrain, then they improve terrain adaptability, but they increase device complexity and operational difficulty

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveterrain adaptabilityVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The vehicle incorporates feedback mechanisms including position sensors on the input and output legs, and force sensors that provide real-time information to the control system. This feedback enables the control system to adjust leg movements dynamically, maintaining balance and adapting to terrain changes without requiring complex manual control, thereby reducing operational difficulty.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The control system operates autonomously using feedback from sensors to self-adjust the leg positions and movements. The system self-corrects balance deviations and terrain adaptations without operator intervention, eliminating the operational complexity experienced by operators of manually controlled multi-legged vehicles.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Adaptability or versatility

If extendible output legs with powered actuators are used, then mobility and stability on rough terrain are enhanced, but weight and device complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemobility on rough terrainVSAvoidvehicle weight
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The vehicle extracts only the essential powered actuation components needed for leg extension and articulation, rather than fully powered joints throughout. The actuators are strategically placed to provide necessary movement while minimizing weight, and non-essential components are omitted to reduce overall vehicle weight while maintaining rough terrain mobility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

4Measurement precision

If position and force-feedback mechanisms are implemented, then control precision and stability are improved, but device complexity and manufacturing cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveleg position control precisionVSAvoidfeedback system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The feedback mechanisms serve multiple functions: position sensors provide both location information for control and data for balance maintenance, while force sensors simultaneously measure ground reaction forces and provide stability information. This multi-functionality reduces the need for separate specialized sensors, thereby limiting the increase in device complexity while maintaining high measurement precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS12522307B2Vehicle
Publication Date: 2026.01.13 RI&D PTY LTD
  • US12522307B2 patent drawing
  • US12522307B2 patent drawing
  • US12522307B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A bipedal vehicle 1 comprising two extendible output legs 5L, 5R (to support the vehicle), two foot holds 59L, 59R (to accept input movement from an operator) and a control system 253 comprising powered actuators to move the output legs in relation to the input movement to produce output movement.