and an air density of 1.

2kg/m3, it was found

that a take-off velocity of 3.2m/s was required
for a jump distance of 1m, with various
trajectories displayed in appendix figure 2.
Using this information, it was possible to
determine an initial kinetic energy of 256mJ
being required for take-off. As also seen in the
figure, a 45 take off trajectory corresponds to
the furthest jump for a given kinetic energy.

Miniature Jumping Robot

Jumping as a mode of transport is extremely
useful when applied to small robots. This
paper presents a 24.55g remote controlled
jumping robot. The design uses a four bar
linkage mechanism and preloaded torsional
springs that are charged and released by a
snail cam. The final prototype is capable of
jumping a horizontal distance of 12cm at a
time.

Jumping Mechanism
Several mechanism options were considered,
including spring, piston and torque based
designs. Due to the severe weight constraint,
a spring-based design was selected. The
advantage of the spring system is that it is
simple, lightweight and can implement a slow
charge, quick release cycle, meaning lower
power requirements. These springs were
preloaded by 90 to improve the energy output
of the jump. The mechanism chosen draws on
a similar miniature robot as seen in [1].
Jumping is achieved using the 4 bar linkage
shown in figure 1. The main leg is rotated
relative to the body plates, which charges a
torsional spring. This is then quickly released
to power the jump. Torsional springs were
selected due to being far less susceptible to
early take-off, with linear springs more likely to
lose a large proportion of its initial energy
stored when losing contact with the ground.
The launch angle of the robot is controlled by
the length of the feet [distance (e) in Figure 5],
the acceleration time by adjustment of
distances (a) and (c) and the trajectory of the
foot tip P by adjustment of the ratio (b)/(d);
where b/d was chosen to be 1. These lengths
were chosen to give our desired launch angle
of 45.

Figure 1 - Final Robot Build

Introduction
The aim of this assignment is to design and
build a robot capable of jumping as far as
possible relative to its own size. It must be
remote controlled, capable of multiple jumps
without manual loading and less than 20cm in
size and 30g in weight.
Design Process
We set a target jump of 1m, and a weight of
25g. The energy required to achieve the target
distance can be calculated by modelling the
robot as a point mass, with a safety factor of
two assumed due to inefficiencies in the
system. Prior to this, however, it was
necessary to model the trajectory. A 4th order
Runge-Kutta solver was implemented in order
to solve the following non-linear second order
differential equations, derived using a drag
prediction and equations of motion of the
robot.
=
=

1
()
! cos
2
()

1
()
2 + ! sin
2
()

()! + ()!
()! + ()!

By assuming a CD value of 1.3, akin to that of

similar geometries, a frontal area of 0.005m2,

Charging Mechanism

(1)
(2)

To charge the spring, a snail cam is used to

rotate the leg relative to the body plate. The
cam is attached to an electric motor via a
bespoke gearbox operating at a ratio of 30:1.
The system, as shown in appendix figure 3,
works by the transmission of the motor torque
through a compound gear connected to a
lightweight 60-tooth gear on the same shaft as
the cam. Throughout, spur gears are used
due to their high transmission efficiency, lack
of slip and compact nature. The motor
produced a 3mN input torque that is translated

to a 90mN output torque using a bespoke

gearbox.
Controller Design
The purpose of the electronics on-board our
robot was to allow for remote control of the
charging and release mechanism. An infrared
receiver and circuit board obtained from a
remote controlled helicopter were installed on
our initial prototypes. After testing, this circuit
board became faulty, and was replaced with a
more compact circuit board with an inbuilt
radio receiver. The circuit board received an
input voltage of 3V from two LR44 batteries
and was connected to a single motor with a
voltage rating of 3V.
Initial Problems and Optimisation

Results
In final testing of the robot, it consistently
jumped a distance of 12cm with no problems
or mechanical failures encountered during a
testing cycle of around 30 jumps. Due to the
robot being fitted with a power switch and
having a short charge cycle, the lifecycle of
the battery was found to exceed expectations.
It was also observed during testing that the
robot was able to jump its full distance and
remain upright, enabling a second jump to
occur immediately with no third party
interaction. As a result of this, the robot
mechanism has very interesting potential
within the field of autonomous exploration.
Future Development

The initial prototype had several issues that

prevented it from jumping. Principally, there
was far too much friction on the axles. This
was solved by installing bearing on the body
plate. It was apparent that a lot of the body
plate structure was redundant. A large
proportion of the plate material was removed
between the first and final prototypes, as
shown in appendix figure 4.
Several parts were slightly redesigned to
improve the fit and alignment, and a new,
larger front hinge was printed as the original
was too weak to withstand the stresses it was
subjected to. Rubber feet were also printed to
improve the robots grip to the jumping surface
and prevent it slipping when jumping.
Due to errors in the initial CAD design, it was
necessary to alter the angle of the cam
discharge as well as shorten the leg at the
point of contact with the cam. This alleviated
the problem of a very slow discharge as
observed in initial tests. This was due to the
leg moving along the abrupt cam edge as
opposed to bypassing it entirely, which would
lead to instant discharge.
In initial testing the robot compressed fully
very easily. It was clear that much more
powerful springs could be used to achieve a
greater jumping distance. These were
purchased and added to the robot, and
increased the jumping distance by 30% from
9cm to 12cm.

Better performance of the robot can come

from several sources: further increasing the
stiffness of the springs to over 200Nmm per
turn; using a larger cam in order to get a
larger amount of compression and further
weight reduction from lighter batteries and
shaving off unnecessary structural weight.
As seen in slow motion release footage, the
springs are seen to discharge in 3 stages. The
first two stages are due to the circular radius
of the leg at the point of contact with the cam,
causing slip as the cam nears its break point.
Whilst the rotation of the springs here is
minimal and the vast majority of the discharge
happens during the jump cycle, alleviating this
problem is crucial in maximising the range of
the robot in future.
Conclusion
Initial jumping tests of the robot are very
encouraging, which through refinement by
implementing the improvements presented in
this report, a much larger jumping distance
could be achieved with relative ease.
As shown in table 1, the cost of the robot
production came to 118.48. We exceeded
the initial budget of 70 partly due to the
circuit board replacement as mentioned.
Throughout the process, delivery costs were a
hindrance in achieving a cost efficient
solution.

Appendix

Figure 2 - Runge-Kutta Trajectories

Table 1 - Costing Table

Figure 4 - Gearing System

Figure 3 - Initial Prototype

Figure 5 Sketch of four bar linkage design

Figure 6 Final CAD Design

Bibliography
[1]

M. F. A. . e. G. J.-C. Z. D. F. Mirko Kovac, "A miniature 7g jumping robot," Ecole Polytechnique

Fed erale de Lausanne (EPFL) , Lausanne, 2008.