See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264037742

Behaviour of Foldable Tensegrity Structures

Conference Paper · August 2005

CITATIONS READS
2 341

3 authors:

Narender Kumar Gupta Ramakanta Panigrahi

Bhabha Atomic Research Centre 20 PUBLICATIONS   86 CITATIONS   
124 PUBLICATIONS   603 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Suresh Bhalla
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
217 PUBLICATIONS   2,304 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Non bonded piezo sensor (NBPS) configuration for EMI signature of bio-medical subjects View project

Laser Plasma Interaction and Shock Experiments View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ramakanta Panigrahi on 09 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 BEHAVIOUR OF FOLDABLE TENSEGRITY STRUCTURES

Ashok Gupta, Ramakanta Panigrahi and Suresh Bhalla

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi (IITD), Hauz Khas, New Delhi110016, India

Abstract
This paper summarizes various potential applications of tensegrity structures and presents a new method
of their construction and deployment in field. A prototype module of a tensegrity structure (a half-
cuboctahedron) is constructed using commercially available materials in the market as per Indian
Standards. A new method of deployment is introduced for easy folding. The deflection behaviour and load
carrying capacity of a single module is also investigated and the results are presented in the paper.
Keywords: Tensegrity, Deflection, Half-cuboctahedron, Load test.
1.Introduction
Tensegrity is a relatively new concept in structural engineering. Structures constructed based on this
concept are called as tensegrity structures. A tensegrity structure consists of a set of discontinuous
compression members tied together by continuous tensile members, generally steel cables. The concept
can be explained by considering the example of a balloon. In a balloon, the skin is the tensile component,
while the molecules of air inside the balloon supply the compressive force components. The skin of the
balloon consists of molecules of polymer, which are continuously linked to each other, while the
molecules of air are highly discontinuous. If the balloon is pressed with a finger, it does not crack; the
continuous, flexible netting formed by the balloon’s skin distributes this force throughout the structure.
When the external load is removed, the balloon returns back to its original shape. This resilience is a
distinguishing characteristic of tensegrity structures, which is due to the flexible linking of tensile
components. When the tensile elements are rigidly interconnected, they lose their ability to transmit
forces throughout the structure.
The origin of tensegrity can be pointed to the sculpture made by Karl Loganson with three struts and eight
cables, presented during an exhibition held in Moscow, in 1921[1]. The notion “Tensegrity” was
introduced by Fuller [2] as a contraction of the two words “tension” and “integrity”, which has been
patented in U.S.A. The tension elements provide the structure with a lightweight appearance. Therefore,
Fuller characterized these systems as “small islands of compression in a sea of tension”. Considering all
the patents, the definition by Motro [3] can be stated as, “Tensegrity systems are spatial reticulate
systems in a state of self stress. All their elements have a straight middle fibre and are equivalent size.
Tensioned elements have no rigidity in compression and constitute a continuous set. Compressed
elements constitute a discontinuous set. Each node receives one and only one compressed element”.
Pugh [4] defined, “Tensegrity system is established when a set of discontinuous compression
components interact with a set of continuous tensile components to define a stable volume in space”. The
most recent definition of tensegrity structure is given by Motro [3] as, “A tensegrity system is a system in a
stable self-equilibrated state comprising a discontinuous set of compressed components inside a
continuum of tensioned components.”
The basic issues related in a tensegrity structures are form finding, analysis and deployment A key step in
the design of tensegrity structures is the determination of their geometrical configuration, known as form
finding. Form finding is a basic problem for tensegrity systems, since both shape and geometry must fulfil
certain stability requirements. A form finding method is characterised by a priority devoted to geometry or
to mechanics. Varsat and Motro [5] reported multi parametered form finding method for tensegrity
structures using force density coefficients and considered two sets of form finding parameters i.e.,
prestress (or self stress) coefficients of members and co-ordinates or redundant nodes. Tibert and
Pellegrino [6] reviewed different available form finding techniques and compared and discussed few
potential shortcomings. They suggested that force density method is best suited for searching their new
configurations, but affords no control over the lengths of the elements. Masic et al. [7] also found the
force density method as the best method for form finding of large-scale tensegrity structures. They also
observed that the force-density method allows for a comprehensive formulation and treatment of shape
constraints at no additional expense as this method does not require unknown knowledge about the
structure being designed a priori. The simplest tensegrity module is the one having four struts. When the
topside is inscribed in the bottom sides, it is called a half cuboctahedron since the nodes are the apices of
the half of a cuboctahedron. As the geometry is predefined in case of half-cuboctahedron, the form
finding is not a constraint.
Considering the structural mechanics of assemblies of bars and pin joints, where they are simultaneously
statically and kinematically indeterminate, Pellegrino and Calladine [8] developed an algorithm for any
states of self-stress and modes of inextensional deformation, which such an assembly may possess.
Hanaor [9] has classified tensegrity structures into two classes. Class I tensegrity structures are
geometrically rigid and statically indeterminate structures. Class II tensegrity structures are statically and
kinematically indeterminate structures with infinitesimal mechanisms. Murkami and Nishimura [10]
presented analytical expressions for initial geometry and associated pre-stress modes for cyclic frustum
tensegrity modules with an arbitrary number of stages with m (  3) bars at each stage. Cesar [11]
determined the equilibrium position of a tensegrity structure subjected to external forces and external
moments by static analysis. Tran [12] analysed tensegrity structures considering three of the side ties to
be composed of a compliant and a noncompliant segment in series.
Ironically, major investigations on tensegrity structures have been carried out only recently, nearly fifty
years after their origin. Their dynamic behaviour is much less understood than their static behaviour.
Current research on tensegrity structures is mainly focused on their dynamics and control, as they are
excellent as controllable structures, since actuators and sensors can be easily embedded into them.
Dynamics related research on tensegrity structures was pioneered by Motro et al. [13]. Further, Murakami
[14] derived a set of equations for static and dynamic analysis of tensegrity structures using equations of
motion for spatial trusses, developed within the framework of three-dimensional theory of elasticity for
large deformations. Sultan et al. [15] also derived linear models for two classes of tensegrity structures
describing their approximate dynamics in the neighbourhood of equilibrium reference solutions. It has
been found that the modal dynamic range generally increases with pretension whereas the modal
damping range increases with structural damping. Oppenheim and Williams [16,17] derived force-
displacement relationship for tensegrity structures in analytical form and examined non-linear vibrations
for a particular tensegrity geometry. Using these, they found interesting properties of vibration and
damping associated with tensegrity structures. Skeleton et al. [18] developed an analytical model for non-
linear dynamics of a class of tensegrity structures, composed of rigid rods connected by a continuous
network of elastic cables. The kinematics was described by positions and velocities of the ends of the
rigid rods, hence, eliminating the use of angular velocities. Quirant et al. [19] designed tensegrity systems
2
capable of supporting loads up to 18kg/m using half-cuboctahedron modules as per Euro codes. Furuya
[20] examined deployment of tensegrity structures, however only at the conceptual level. Sultan and
Skelton [21] analysed the deployment of tensegrity structures using tendon control and proposed a new
deployment procedure. Tibert and Pellegrino [22] developed a new procedure, which used telescopic
struts for deployment of a tensegrity antenna. Sultan and Skeleton [23] formulated a new strategy for
deployment of tensegrity structures using a certain set of equilibrium to which the undeployed and
deployed configurations belong. The deployment was conducted such that the deployment trajectory is
close to the equilibrium manifold. Stern [24] conducted static analysis on n-strut tensegrity systems,
identified patterns throughout all the systems and developed generic design equations for self-deployable
systems.
In this paper, the potential applications of tensegrity structures are summarized. A new method of
construction and deployment procedure of a half-cuboctahedron has been described in detail. Further,
the experimental behaviour of the structure developed in laboratory under loading and unloading has
been investigated.
2. Applications of tensegrity structures
Recently, research on tensegrity in fields such as astronomy, atomic physics, mechanics, biology,
inorganic chemistry, biomechanics and especially, in anatomy is very popular. Due to their lightweight,
easy deployment and self-stability, tensegrity structures are widely used for various purposes in different
forms i.e. as domes, as towers, and as roofs etc. as reported by Jauregui [25]. Described below are few
prominent application of the tensegrity structures.
2.1. Tensegrity Domes
Tensegrity domes are widely used for following purposes due to improved rigidity, extreme resilience,
lightness, simple joints and use of equal length of struts.
a) Superstructures for embedded substructures in order to escape terrestrial confines where
this is convenient (e.g. in congested or dangerous areas, urban areas, flood plains or
irregular, delicate or rugged terrains).
b) Economic large-scale protection for storage, archaeological, agricultural, construction,
electrical or electromagnetic shielding or other delicate sites.
c) Refugee or hiking shelters.
d) Frames over cities for environmental control, energy transformation and food production.
e) Exclusion or containment of flying animals or other objects.
f) Earthquake-resistant buildings, bridges, shelters, etc. As these structures are lightweight and
extremely resilient and they could withstand large structural shocks like earthquakes. Thus,
they would likely be desirable in areas where earthquakes are a problem.
g) Low-environmental-impact shells for musical performances, indoor/outdoor pavilions for
expositions, fairs, trade shows, entrances to events, etc.
h) Supports to hold sunscreen protection for vulnerable amphibians.
i) Watersheds to keep rainwater from percolating through contaminated soils into groundwater,
perhaps temporarily during in-situ remediation.
j) Micro-meteorite protection, sun-shielding for Martian colonies or spherical superstructures for
space stations.
k) Some other interventions in a smaller scale, such as frames for hanging plants or other
objects to dry, pergola, trellis, or topiary framework.
l) Portable and foldable structures. Due to the particular characteristics of tensegrity, domes
using this principle could be very useful in:

i) Devastated areas (disaster relief)

ii) Shelters for Nomadic people
iii) Field hospitals
2.2. Tensigrity Towers
Tensegrity towers have several potential applications, such as in the following cases
a) Lightning conductors: As it is not required to have these elements in a completely static
situation, and tensegrity structures tolerate certain small movements, they could serve
perfectly for this application.
b) Communications: In situations where the margin of displacements is not very strict,
tensegrity towers can be employed to support antennas, receptors, radio transmitters, mobile
telephone transmitters, etc.
c) Wind parks: Even if it seems unfeasible, there should be some study to analyse the effects
of turbines installed on the top of a single or a group of tensegrity towers. The lightness of
these structures could minimize the visual impact of these energetic installations.
 2.3. Other Applications
a) Roof structures for temporary shelter purpose and expositions
b) Tent like structures and shadow roofs
c) Furniture: Chairs, tables, lamps, and ornaments are some examples of attractive
applications.
d) Foldable reflector antennas and masts for large retractable appendages in spacecraft.
e) Tensegrity arches
f) Submarines: To reduce the skin friction drag induced by turbulent flow.
g) Footbridges, by assembling several simplex along their main axis

3. Construction and deployment of tensegrity module

Fig.1 shows the perspective view and top view of a tensegrity structure i.e. half-cuboctahedron module,
including the spatial co-ordinates. A deployable tensegrity structure module with this configuration was
fabricated in the workshop of the Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
(IITD), using commercially available materials as per Indian standards code of practice. In this module,
2
15.9 mm inner diameter GI pipes having cross sectional area 160.284mm were used as compression
members and 6x19 stranded 4mm diameter steel wire ropes were used as tension members. The length
of the bottom cables was 1 m and that of top and side cables was 0.707m. The struts were 1.224m in
length. All the lengths were measured from centre to centre of joints. At joints, 12 mm eyebolts were used
for connecting the cables and the strut member. At joints, the cables were tightened using ferrule A  4.5
(IS 10942) by means of hydraulic press in such a manner that there was no slip in the cables. The ends
of the pipes were plugged up to 50mm length and then 12 mm hole was drilled so as to make easy for
pipes to be put in tight position at the joints. A special arrangement was made in one pipe for folding and
unfolding of the structure. This pipe was made of three parts. Two parts were of 15.9 inner diameter mm
G.I pipe having lengths of 47 cm and 27.5cm respectively and the third part was of 25 mm inner diameter
GI pipe having 30cm length. A solid rod of 20 cm length was welded to the pipe of 27.5 cm length with 15
cm projecting outside of the pipe and then the projected portion of the solid rod was threaded. At one end
of the 25 mm pipe, 25 mm socket was fitted and a bush of 1’’-1/2’’ was attached to the socket so that the
threaded portion of the rod could move inside and outside for length adjustment. The other end of the 25
mm pipe was welded with a solid iron rod of 35 mm diameter of 50 mm length and 16 mm hole was made
so that 15.9 mm diameter pipe can be easily fitted to it. The different stages of constructed half-
cuboctahedron prototype are shown in Fig. (2-6).
4 7
7(0.5,1,0.5)
6(0,1,0)
8(1,1,0)

2 5

4(0,0.5,0.5) 5(1,0.5,0.5)

1 8 1(0,0,0) 3(1,0,0)

3 2(0.5,0,0.5)

Perspective view Top view

Fig.1 Schematic view of tensegrity structure module developed at IITD
 Fig. 2 Stage 1 Fig. 3 Stage 2

Fig.4 Stage 3 Fig. 5 Stage 4

 GI
Pipe Cabl
e

Fig 6. Picture of prototype tensegrity structure fabricated at IIITD

4. Behaviour of prototype tensegrity structure under loading
The prototype half-cuboctahedron structure was tested in the laboratory under different loading. The
experimental set-up is shown in Fig 7. Since the load capacity of the structure was not known, initially the
structure was loaded by an iron plate of size800  800  19 mm, weighing 100 kg. The plate was placed
on the structure through a hydraulic jack system. At one joint, linear variable displacement transducer
(LVDT) was fixed and connected to the data logger fixed on the computer system for recording the
displacements. In the computer, Strain Smart Data System, version 3.1 [26] was used for monitoring the
displacements at different loads. The deflection was found to be 48.977mm. The structure was kept under
load for a period of 18 hours and after unloading, the recovery was found to be 47.842mm. Hence, the
structure was not damaged under this loading and regained back its original configuration gradually. This
clearly indicates the flexibility of the tensegrity structure. During this experiment, a plumb bob was also
used to measure the deflection at different nodes. The deflection at the joint i.e. connected to LVDT was
found to be 47mm and at other joints, it was found 47,45and 49 mm respectively. Thus the average value
found to be 47 mm. The error with respect to LVDT is nearly 4% only. This indicates that during large
deflection, one can use traditional instrument i.e. plumb bob instead of using LVDT.
The structure was then reloaded by replacing this load by wooden plate of same size, weighing 6.25 kg,
and was gradually placed on the structure .The load was increased in 0.5 kg intervals up to 18 kg and the
corresponding displacements were recorded. Further, the structure was unloaded in the similar way and
the recovery in the displacements was measured. The plot of load and deflection for both loading and
unloading is shown in fig 8. The plot indicates that the behaviour of load deflection is linear and after
removal of the entire load, only small residual displacement i.e. 0.253 mm remains on the structure, which
is negligible. The deflections found in both cases are not proportionate though the structure regained its
original position in both cases. This indicates that the stiffness of the structure increase as applied load is
increased.
5.Conclusions
This paper has presented a review of tensegrity structures, their applications and the construction of a
tensegrity structure module (a half-cuboctahedron) using commercially available materials and a new
method of deployment has been introduced for easy folding and unfolding. The loading- unloading
behaviours, covering both small and large loads, were investigated. The load deflection variation was
found to be linear on small loads. Further, it was found that the structure returns back to its original
position without any appreciable residual displacement. This shows the flexibility of the structure. The
structure was capable of taking more loads without damage even at large deflections and stiffness of the
structure increases with increase in applied load. Active research is currently underway at IIT Delhi to
develop better joint mechanism for connecting modules with each other. Further, studies are underway to
use different sensors i.e. piezo-transducers, accelerometers, strain gauges etc for monitoring the
members of the tensegrity structures as well as to study the overall static and dynamic behaviour of the
structure.
 Plate

Tensegrity
structure
Hydraulic
jack

Fig.7 Experimental set up for load test of tensegrity structure

18
16 Loading
14 Unloading
12
Load in Kg

10
8
6
4
2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Deflection in mm

Fig.8 Load Deflection Curve

 References
1. M. Gough, In the laboratory of constructivism: Karl Loganson’s cold structures, October, 1998,
90-117.
2. R. B. Fuller, Tensile integrity structures, United States Patent, 3, 063,521,1962.
3. R. Motro, Tensegrity structural systems for the future, Kogan Page Science, UK, London, 2003.
4. A. Pugh, An introduction to tensegrity, University of California press, Berkley, CA, USA, 1976.
5. N. Vassart, R. Motro, Multi parametered form finding method application to tensegrity systems,
International Journal of Space Structures, 1999, 147-154.
6. A. G. Tibert, and S. Pellegrino, Review of form-finding methods for tensegrity structures,
International Journal of Space Structures, 2003,209-223.
7. M. Masic, R. E. Skeleton, and P. E. Gill, Algebraic tensegrity form finding, International journal of
solids and structures, 2005, 4833-4858.
8. S. Pelligrino, C. R. Calladine, Matrix analysis of statically and kinematically indetermined frame
works, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 1986, 409-428.
9. A. Hanor, Prestressed pin-jointed structures- flexibility analysis and prestress design, Computers
of Structures, 1988, 757-769.
10. H. Murakami, Y. Nishimura, Initial shape finding and modal analyses of cyclic right-cylindrical
tensegrity modules, Computers and Structures, 2001, 891-917.
11. C. J. Cesar, Static analysis of tensegrity structures, M. S. Thesis, University of Florida, 2001.
12. T. M. Tran, Reverse displacement analysis for tensegrity structures, M.S. Thesis, University of
Florida, 2002.
13. R. Motro, S. Najari, P. Jouanna, Static and dynamic analysis of tensegrity systems, In:
Proceedings of the ASCE International Symposium on Shell and Spatial Structures,
Computational Aspects, Springer Veralag, New York, 1986,270-279.
14. H. Murakami, Static and dynamic analyses of tensegrity structures, Part-I: Nonlinear equations of
motion, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2001,3599-3613.
15. C. Sultan, M. Corless, R. E. Skelton, Linear dynamics of tensegrity structures, Journal of
Engineering Structures, 2002, 671-685.
16. I. J. Oppenheim, W. O. Williams, Vibration of an elastic tensegrity structure, Eur. J. Mech.
A/Solids, 2001,1023-1031.
17. I. J. Oppenheim, W. O. Williams, Vibration and damping of a 3 bar tensegrity structure, ASCE J.
Aerospace Engg., 2001, 85-91.
18. R. E. Skeleton, P. P. Jean, D. L. Mingori, Dynamics of the shell class of tensegrity structures,
Journal of The Franklin Institute, 2001, 255-320.
19. J. Quirant, M.N. Kazi-Aoual and R. Motro, Designing tensegrity systems: the case of a double
layer grid, Engineering Structures, 2003, 1121-1130.
20. H. Furuya, Concept of deployable tensegrity structures in space application, International Journal
of Space Structures, 1992, 143-151.
21. C. Sultan, R. E. Skelton, Tendon control deployment of tensegrity structures, In: Proceedings of
th
SPIE 5 symposium on Smart Structures and Materials, 1998, 455-466.
22. A. G. Tibert, S. Pellegrino, Deployable tensegrity reflectors for small satellites, Journal of
Spacecraft Rockets, 2002, 701-709.
23. C. Sultan, R. E. Skelton, Deployment of tensegrity structures, International Journal of Solids and
Structures, 2003, 4637-4657.
24. I. P. Stern, Development of design equations for self deployable N- strut tensegrity systems, M.S.
Thesis, University of Florida, 1999
25. V. G. Jauregui, Tensegrity Structures and their Application to Architecture, MSc in Architecture,
School of Architecture, Queen’s University, Belfast, 2005.
26. Vishay Micro-Measurements, P.O. box 27777, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611,USA,
www.vishaymg.com

View publication stats