journal article·2026-03-16Open access

Virtual Commissioning of Robotic Operations with Flexible Thin Sheet Metal Parts

Volodymyr Shramenko, Bernd Lüdemann-Ravit

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 6

Abstract

Vibrations of thin sheet-metal parts during robotic manipulation on a production line create a number of serious challenges for production process planning. Modeling the behavior of an elastic plate or shell as a function of the robot manipulator trajectory is typically performed using the finite element method (FEM) and requires significant computational effort. The time factor remains a key limitation for integrating operations involving flexible parts into the virtual commissioning process. In this work, a methodology is proposed that enables accurate real-time reproduction of the behavior of an elastic part during linear robotic manipulation. The approach is based on modeling the response of an elastic part to a prescribed base excitation using the FEM and on the development of a reduced model compliant with the FMI/FMU standard. This reduced model computes, in real time, the convolution of the precomputed base response with the acceleration profile corresponding to the robot TCP trajectory. This makes it possible to determine the total cycle duration, which consists of the part transfer time and the time required for vibration decay at the end of the trajectory down to an acceptable threshold, as well as to perform collision checking while accounting for the deformation of the flexible part. As a result, operations involving elastic parts can be integrated into the virtual commissioning process.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Dynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems · Robot Manipulation and Learning · Robotic Mechanisms and Dynamics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Institut für Produktion und Informatik, Hochschule Kempten, Bahnhofstraße 61, 87435 Kempten, Germany

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

References (29)

Show source-provided references
1. Survey on model-based manipulation planning of deformable objects10.1016/j.rcim.2011.08.002 ↗
2. Nadon, F., Valencia, A.J., and Payeur, P. (2018). Multi-Modal Sensing and Robotic Manipulation of Non-Rigid Objects: A Survey. Robotics, 7.10.3390/robotics7040074 ↗
3. Herguedas, R., Lopez-Nicolas, G., Aragues, R., and Sagues, C. (2019, January 10–13). Survey on multi-robot manipulation of deformable objects. Proceedings of the 24th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), Zaragoza, Spain.10.1109/ETFA.2019.8868987 ↗
4. Klare, S., Shramenko, V., Klingel, L., Lüdemann-Ravit, B., and Verl, A. (2025). Towards Automotive Manufacturing Efficiency: Enhanced Virtual Commissioning Simulation for Dynamic Sheet Metal Handling Optimization. Advances in Automotive Production Technology—Digital Product Development and Manufacturing. SCAP 2024. ARENA2036, Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-88831-1_6 ↗
5. Kaczor, D., Bensch, M., Schappler, M., and Ortmaier, T. (2020). Trajectory optimization for the handling of elastically coupled objects via reinforcement learning and flatness-based control. Annals of Scientific Society for Assembly, Handling and Industrial Robotics, Springer.10.1007/978-3-662-61755-7_29 ↗
6. Moallem, M., Patel, R.V., and Khorasani, K. (2000). Flexible-link Robot Manipulators. Control Techniques and Structural Design, Springer.
7. Flexible-link robots with combined trajectory tracking and vibration control10.1016/j.apm.2019.01.035 ↗
8. Sasaki, M., Muguro, J., Kitano, F., Njeri, W., Maeno, D., and Matsushita, K. (2023). Vibration and Position Control of a Two-Link Flexible Manipulator Using Reinforcement Learning. Machines, 11.10.3390/machines11070754 ↗
9. Macklin, M., Müller, M., and Chentanez, N. (2016, January 10–12). XPBD: Position-based simulation of compliant constrained dynamics. Proceedings of the MIG ’16: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Motion in Games, Burlingame, CA, USA.10.1145/2994258.2994272 ↗
10. Chapelle, D., and Bathe, K.-J. (2011). The Finite Element Analysis of Shells—Fundamentals. Computational Fluid and Solid Mechanics, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-16408-8 ↗
11. Optimal Trajectory Planning For Material Handling of Compliant Sheet Metal Parts10.1115/1.1463035 ↗
12. Quality and productivity driven trajectory optimisation for robotic handling of compliant sheet metal parts in multi-press stamping lines10.1016/j.rcim.2018.10.004 ↗
13. Recent advances and applications of surrogate models for finite element method computations: A review10.1007/s00500-022-07362-8 ↗
14. Hoffer, J.G., Geiger, B.C., Ofner, P., and Kern, R. (2021). Mesh-Free Surrogate Models for Structural Mechanic FEM Simulation: A Comparative Study of Approaches. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11209411 ↗
15. A review on the applications of artificial neural network techniques for accelerating finite element analysis in the civil engineering domain10.1016/j.compstruc.2025.107698 ↗
16. DeepFEA: Deep learning for prediction of transient finite element analysis solutions10.1016/j.eswa.2024.126343 ↗
17. Physics-Informed Neural Networks for shell structures10.1016/j.euromechsol.2022.104849 ↗
18. Li, T., and Xiao, T. (2025). Physics-Informed Neural Network-Based Input Shaping for Vibration Suppression of Flexible Single-Link Robots. Actuators, 14.10.3390/act14010014 ↗
19. Input shaping prefilter for vibration mitigation of distributed parameter system10.1016/j.mechatronics.2023.102992 ↗
20. Pfaff, T., Fortunato, M., Sanchez-Gonzalez, A., and Battaglia, P.W. (2020). Learning Mesh-Based Simulation with Graph Networks. arXiv.
21. Shivaditya, M.V., Alves, J., Bugiotti, F., and Magoulès, F. (2022, January 14–18). Graph Neural Network-based Surrogate Models for Finite Element Analysis. Proceedings of the 2022 21st International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications for Business Engineering and Science (DCABES), Chizhou, China.10.1109/DCABES57229.2022.00035 ↗
22. Graph Neural Network enhanced Finite Element modelling10.1002/pamm.202200306 ↗
23. Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) based accelerated numerical simulation10.1016/j.engappai.2023.106370 ↗
24. Heil, S., Klingel, L., Penter, L., Jaensch, F., Schenke, C., Ihlenfeldt, S., and Verl, A. (2021, January 5–7). Virtual Tool Commissioning Using LS-DYNA Functional Mock-Up Interface. Proceedings of the 13th European LS-DYNA Conference, Ulm, Germany. Available online: https://www.dynalook.com/conferences/13th-european-ls-dyna-conference-2021/simulation-methods/heiland_tu_dresden.pdf.
25. Pfeifer, D., Baumann, A., Giani, M., Scheifele, C., and Fehr, J. (2023). Hybrid Digital Twins Using FMUs to Increase the Validity and Domain of Virtual Commissioning Simulations. Advances in Automotive Production Technology—Towards Software-Defined Manufacturing and Resilient Supply Chains, ARENA2036, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-031-27933-1_19 ↗
26. Fehr, J., Grunert, D., Holzwarth, P., Fröhlich, B., Walker, N., and Eberhard, P. (2018). Morembs—A model order reduction package for elastic multibody systems and beyond. Reduced-Order Modeling (ROM) for Simulation and Optimization, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-75319-5_7 ↗
27. Capellari, G., Eftekhar Azam, S., and Mariani, S. (2016). Damage Detection in Flexible Plates through Reduced-Order Modeling and Hybrid Particle-Kalman Filtering. Sensors, 16.10.3390/s16010002 ↗
28. Modelica Association (2026, January 01). Functional Mock-Up Interface. Available online: https://www.fmi-standard.org.
29. Craig, R.R., and Kurdila, A.J. (2006). Fundamentals of Structural Dynamics, Wiley.