Penalty approximation of unilateral contact
ID: penalty-approximation-of-unilateral-contact
A penalty approximation of unilateral contact allows a small modeled overlap and uses a stiff restoring force instead of enforcing an exact rigid nonpenetration constraint. With signed gap , positive in separation, a simple nonadhesive law isAn open or just-touching contact has zero force in this spring law; a sustained compressive load requires negative . Thus it approximates unilateral contact rather than satisfying its rigid gap condition exactly. Tedrake's primary compliant-contact treatment uses stiff springs and damping to resist penetration and explains the resulting numerical stiffness.[ref]
For an original gravity-supported example, a mass with no other vertical load has . With , its static overlap is . Increasing by a factor of 100 reduces that overlap to , but also makes the contact dynamics faster.
While the contact stays compressed, linearization about equilibrium givesThe normal contact penalty time scale is therefore proportional to . For the first stiffness above, ; after increasing stiffness it is ten times larger. At fixed numerical step size, a smaller overlap error need not mean a more accurate trajectory.
For example, the Forward Euler method applied to this undamped oscillator has amplification factors , whose magnitudes exceed one for every positive step. Merely shrinking the step does not make that method asymptotically stable for indefinite undamped oscillation, although it can reduce error on a finite interval. A suitable integration method, damping model and convergence check must be chosen. The source notes specifically identify stiff differential equations as a challenge for compliant contact simulation.[ref]
Underactuated Robotics by Russ Tedrake. Multi-Body Dynamics, Compliant Contact Models, numerical integration discussion
New to topics? Read the docs here!