Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-lpg2g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T15:56:47.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Automated inverse-kinematics for robot off-line programming

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

W.Edward Red and
Shao-Wei Gongt
W.Edward Red
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602 (USA).
Shao-Wei Gongt
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tennessee Tech. University, Cookeville, TN 38501 (USA).
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Automated methods are developed to classify a robot's kinematic type and select an appropriate library inverse-kinematic solution based on this classification. These methods automatically generate DenavitHartenberg joint frame parameters, given any frame representation that can mathematically be represented as a homogeneous transformation.

To reduce the number of closed-form inverse-kinematics solutions required for a broad class of serial robots, additional methods account for differences in robot zero state, base frame location, and joint polarity. Further generalization results from using joint frame decoupling to map lower degree-of-freedom robots into the inverse-kinematics solutions of higher degree-offreedom robots.

Keywords

Off-line programmingInverse kinematicsRobotsAutomated methods.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , January 1994, pp. 45 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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.Pieper, D.L., “The Kinematics of Manipulators under Computer Control” Ph.D. Thesis (Stanford University, 1968).Google Scholar
2.Goldenberg, A.A., Benhabib, B. and Fenton, R.G., “A Complete Generalized Solution to the Inverse-kinematics of Robots” IEEE J. Robotics and Automation RA-1, No. 1, 14–20 (03, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Goldenberg, A.A. and Lawrence, D., “A Generalized Solution to the Inverse Kinematics of Robotic Manipulators” J. Dynamic System, Measurement, and Control 107, 103–106 (03, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Craig, J.J., Introduction to Robotics, Mechanics & Control (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA, 1989).Google Scholar
5.Litvin, F.L., Castelli, V. Parenti and Phillips, R. H., “Manipulators: Execution of Prescribed Trajectories, Special Link Positions and Versions of Assembly” Mechanisms and Machine Theory No. 107, 173–185 (1986).Google Scholar
6.Hiller, M. and Woernle, C., “A Systematic Approach for Solving the Inverse Kinematics Problem of Robot Manipulators” Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on the Theory of Machines & Mechanisms 2, (09, 1987) pp. 1135–1139.Google Scholar
7.Gupta, K.C., “Kinematic Analysis of Manipulators Using the Zero Reference Position Description” Int. J. Robotics Research 5, No. 2, 5–13 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Gong, Shoo-Wei, “Generalized Inverse-Kinematics for Robot Off-Line Programming” M.S. Thesis (Brigham Young University, 06, 1990).Google Scholar