Durability-Aware Multi-Objective Optimization of the Jansen Linkage: Trading Gait Quality Against Joint Wear

A companion study introduced joint durability into the dimensional design of the Theo Jansen walking linkage and found its classical "holy numbers" Pareto-dominated, but it modelled the revolute joints as ideal, clearance-free pins, so its wear figures were relative rankings, not a prediction of in-service degradation. Here we relax that idealization. We build a forward-dynamic model of the Jansen leg in which a revolute joint becomes a clearance joint with a continuous normal contact law (Lankarani-Flores, hysteresis-damped) and Ambrosio friction, integrated as a constraint-stabilized differential-algebraic system, and couple it to the Archard law in a wear->clearance->impact feedback loop. Three findings emerge. First, neglecting clearance underestimates the peak joint load: the clearance model gives a peak contact force of ~104 N at the load-bearing pin against ~48 N for the ideal joint (~2x amplification), rising to ~426 N when two joints carry clearance at once. Second, the coupling is strongly impact-sensitive--single trajectories are non-monotonic and can reverse the design ranking, a chaos consistent with the literature--so designs must be compared statistically; over an ensemble of 16 randomized phases the optimized joint is robustly more durable, with per-cycle wear ~9-7x lower (peak force ~4x lower) at one clearance joint and still ~1.7x lower on both with two (p<0.01 throughout). Third, the wear is strongly non-uniform--it concentrates on a ~10 deg load arc--so assuming uniform clearance growth underestimates local clearance growth by ~36x. The clearance-free durability advantage thus survives the chaotic, multi-joint, non-uniformly-worn coupling in the ensemble mean. We deliver the first clearance-coupled forward-dynamic model of the Jansen leg and specify a falsifiable protocol to test each prediction.

Designing mechanical linkages involves combinatorial topology selection and continuous parameter fitting. We show that language models can systematically improve linkage designs through symbolic representations. Language model agents explore discrete topologies while numerical optimisers fit continuous parameters. A symbolic lifting operator translates simulator trajectories into qualitative descriptors, motion labels, temporal predicates, and structural diagnostics that models interpret across iterative design cycles. Across six engineering-relevant motion targets and three open-source models (Llama 3.3 70B, Qwen3 4B, Qwen3 MoE 30B-A3B), the modular architecture reduces geometric error by up to 68% and improves structural validity by up to 134% over monolithic baselines. Critically, 78.6% of iterative refinement trajectories show measurable improvement, with the system correctly diagnosing overconstraint (56.3%) and underconstraint (35.6%) failure modes and proposing grounded corrections. Models across all three families acquire interpretable mechanical reasoning strategies without fine-tuning, demonstrating that principled symbolic abstraction bridges generative AI and the numerical precision required for engineering design.

LIPM is everywhere in legged-locomotion control, but almost always as a modeling choice rather than as something the controller's cost actually prefers. This note tries to make that link more explicit. Working from a small centroidal OCP that penalizes the rate of angular momentum, we look at what its optimum tends to look like. Three things come out. With full-rank stance, the optimum drifts toward a pendular force pattern at a rate determined by the SVD of the moment Jacobian; the constant is set by foot-span geometry and matches the experiments to within 16%. With N=2 stance, as in trot, the friction cone introduces a lower bound on $\|\dot{H}_G\|$ that no amount of weight tuning fixes; we also see a non-smooth feasibility kink at a critical horizontal acceleration that we can write in closed form. Adding a task term that asks for a nonzero $\dot{H}_G$ moves the optimum off the pendular set in a predictable way. None of this is far from the classical ZMP/DCM picture. We test these claims on a point-mass quadruped and on the Unitree Go1 in MuJoCo (open-loop QP and a torque-level closed-loop controller), and we note where the asymptotic story stops being a good description of what the closed loop actually does.