Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T03:46:54.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cartesian control of robotic manipulators with joint compliance*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

S. D. Hill and
R. J. Vaccaro
S. D. Hill
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881, (U.S.A.)
R. J. Vaccaro
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881, (U.S.A.)
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

An efficient on-line scheme for computing the inverse joint solution of robotic manipulators is combined with an improved formulation of robust, non-linear feedback control in joint space to produce a realizable Cartesian control scheme. Parametric uncertainties in the robot model are highlighted by the inclusion of compliance at each joint. Simulation results for a two link, coupled manipulator demonstrate that this Cartesian control enables the tip of the arm to track the demanded trajectory with arbitrarily small error in response to realistic actuator torques.

Information

Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , July 1987, pp. 207 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Paul, R.P., Robot Manipulators: Mathematics, Programming and Control (Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1981).Google Scholar
2.Bejczy, A.K., “Robot arm dynamics and control” Technical Memorandum 33–669, JPL, Pasedena, CA (02 1974).Google Scholar
3.Hollerbach, J.M., “A recursive Lagrangian formulation of manipulator dynamics and a comparative study of dynamics formulation complexity” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics SMC-10, No. 11, 730–736 (11, 1980).Google Scholar
4.Silver, W.M., “On the equivalence of Lagrangian and Newton-Euler dynamics for manipulators” Intern. J. Robotics Research 1, No. 2, 60–70 (Summer, 1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Tourassis, V.D., and Neuman, C.P., “The inertial characteristics of dynamic robot models” Mechanism and Machine Theory 20, No. 1, 41–52 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Sweet, L.M., and Good, M.C., “Re-definition of the robot control problem” IEEE Control Systems Magazine 18–25 (08, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Forrest-Barlach, M.G. et al. , “End point position control of a single link, 2 degree of freedom manipulator with joint compliance and actuator dynamics” ASME International Conference on Computers in EngineeringBoston, MA, 189–197 (08, 1985).Google Scholar
8.Kuntze, H.B., and Jacubasch, A.H.K., “Control algorithms for stiffening an elastic industrial robot” IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation RA-1, No. 2, 71–78 (06, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Marino, R., and Nicosia, S., “On the control of robots with elastic joints” Proceedings of the American Control ConferenceBoston, MA, 69–70 (06, 1985).Google Scholar
10.Khatib, O., “Dynamic control of manipulators in operational space” Prooceedings of the 6th IFTOMM Congress on Theory of Machines and Mechanisms New Delhi, 1128–1131 (12, 1983).Google Scholar
11.Craig, J.J., Introduction to Robotics: Mechanics and Control (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1986).Google Scholar
12.Wolovich, W.A. and Elliot, H., “A computational technique for inverse kinematics” Proceedings of the 23rd Conference on Decision and Control,Las Vegas, NV, 1359–1363 (12, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Tourassis, V.D., and Neuman, C.P., “Properties and structure of dynamic robot models for control engineering applications” Mechanism and Machine Theory 20, No. 1, 27–40 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Strang, G., Linear Algebra and its Applications (Academic Press, New York, 1980).Google Scholar
15.Vaccaro, R.J., and Hill, S.D., “A feedback system for inverse kinematics” Proceedings of the 20th; conference on Information Sciences and SystemsPrinceton, NJ, 813–816 (04, 1986).Google Scholar
16.Khalil, W., Liégeois, A. and Fournier, A., “Commande dynamique de robots” RAIRO/Syst. Anal. Contr. 13, No. 2, 189–201 (06, 1979).Google Scholar
17.Tourassis, V.D., and Neumann, C.P., “Robust nonlinear feedback control for robotic manipulators” IEEE Proceedings 132, pt. D, No. 4, 134–143, (07, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Khosla, P.K., and Neumann, C.P., “Computational requirements of customized Newton-Euler algorithms” J. Robotic Systems 2, 3, 309–327 (Fall, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Rangan, K.V., “Position and velocity measurement by optical shaft encoders” Technical report CMU-RI-TR-82–8, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA (06, 1982).Google Scholar
20.An, C.H., Atkeson, C.G. and Hollerbach, J.M., “Estimation of inertial parameters of rigid body links of manipulators” Proceedings of the 24th Conference on Decision and Control,Fort Lauderdale, FL, 990–995 (12, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Neuman, C.P., and Tourassis, V.D., “Discrete dynamic robot models” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics SMC-15, No. 2, 193–203 (03/04, 1985).Google Scholar
22.Tourassis, V.D., and Neuman, C.P., “Inverse dynamics applications of discrete robot models” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics SMC-15, No. 6, 798–803 (11/12, 1985).Google Scholar
23.Riven, E.I., “Analysis of structural compliance for robot manipulators” Proceedings of Robotics and Factories of the Future Charlotte, NC, 262–269, (12, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar