Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Terence E. Wei

dblp:78/6220 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 1 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 3 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Legged, aerial and field robots · 94% Motion planning and robot control · 6%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots › field robotics
climbing robot
0.112007
Passive Foot Design and Contact Area Analysis for Climbing Mini-Whegs · ICRA 2007
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots
legged robots
0.012000
Design of a 5-cm Monopod Hopping Robot · ICRA 2000
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots › field robotics
wall-climbing robot
0.012007
Passive Foot Design and Contact Area Analysis for Climbing Mini-Whegs · ICRA 2007
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › locomotion control
passive dynamic stability
0.012000
Design of a 5-cm Monopod Hopping Robot · ICRA 2000

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

high-speed video analysis · 0.1contact area measurement · 0.1spring-mass resonance · 0.0simulation-based design · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2007 Passive Foot Design and Contact Area Analysis for Climbing Mini-Whegs
abstract
Abstract—Mini-Whegs™, a power-autonomous vehicle that uses multi-spoke wheel-legs for locomotion, is able to climb vertical glass surfaces with several different wheel-leg designs. Adhesion to the glass is achieved using pressure sensitive adhesives. In this paper, high-speed video is used to compare the performance and contact area during steps of five passive foot designs. The contact area, when normalized by the leg length, may help explain the differences in performance between several designs. C I.
Kathryn A. Daltorio, Terence E. Wei, Stanislav N. Gorb, Roy E. Ritzmann, Roger D. Quinn
ICRA2
2007 Mini-WhegSTM climbing steep surfaces with insect-inspired attachment mechanisms
abstract
We previously presented a remote-controlled robot, Climbing Mini-Whegstrade, which scales vertical glass walls using passive compliant feet on simple rotating wheel-legs [1]. With a single drive motor, the legs of the robot press the feet against the glass, then gradually peel them away, mimicking the foot motions observed in insects. With feet made of scotch tape, the robot was able to walk on glass walls and ceilings and transition between surfaces intersecting at interior angles. This paper demonstrates that using passively compliant feet on simple rotating wheel-legs a robot can apply adhesive feet, spines, and Velcro in order to climb various steep substrates.
Kathryn A. Daltorio, Terence E. Wei, Gregory D. Wile, Lori Southard, Luther R. Palmer, Stanislav N. Gorb, Roy E. Ritzmann, Roger D. Quinn
IROS2
2000 Design of a 5-cm Monopod Hopping Robot
abstract
The monopod hopper described fits into a cube that is 5 cm on a side, is autonomous, and is designed to be statically stable and passively dynamically stable. Hopping is achieved through the excitation of a spring-mass system at its resonant frequency. Simulations were extensively used to finalize the design, before construction of the robot. The hopper, although having no active directional control, is able to climb steps up to 1 mm, travel at a rate of 1.5 body lengths per second for an average of over 225 cm before deviating significantly from its original course, and can operate up to 45 min before depleting the energy stored in the batteries.
Terence E. Wei, Gabriel M. Nelson, Roger D. Quinn, Hiten Verma, Steven L. Garverick
ICRA1