Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zsp5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T21:12:09.660Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Position and force tracking in nonlinear teleoperation systems under varying delays

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2014

Farzad Hashemzadeh and
Mahdi Tavakoli
Farzad Hashemzadeh*
Affiliation:
Control Engineering Department, Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, IranDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2V4, Canada
Mahdi Tavakoli
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2V4, Canada
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: farzad.hashemzadeh@ualberta.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

In this paper, a novel control scheme is proposed to guarantee position and force tracking in nonlinear teleoperation systems subject to varying communication delays. Stability and tracking performance of the teleoperation system are proved using a proposed Lyapunov–Krasovskii functional. To show its effectiveness, the teleoperation controller is simulated on a pair of planar 2-DOF (degree of freedom) robots and experimented on a pair of 3-DOF PHANToM Premium 1.5A robots connected via a communication channel with time-varying delays. Both the planar robots in simulations and the PHANToM robots in experiments possess nonlinear dynamics.

Keywords

Nonlinear teleoperationTime-varying time delayLyapunov–Krasovskii functionalForce and position tracking

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , May 2015, pp. 1003 - 1016
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

References

1. Imaida, T., Yokokohji, Y., Oda, M. and Yoshikawa, T., “Groundspace bilateral teleoperation of ETS-VII robot arm by direct bilateral coupling under 7-s time delay condition,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 20 (3), 499–511 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Lozano, R., Chopra, N. and Spong, M. W., “Passivation of force reflecting bilateral teleoperators with time varying delay,” Proceedings of the 8. Mechatronics Forum (2002) pp. 954–962.Google Scholar
3. Nuño, E., Basañez, L. and Ortega, R., “Passivity-based control for bilateral teleoperation: A tutorial,” Automatica 47, 485–495 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Kim, W., Ji, K. and Ambike, A., “Networked Real-Time Control Strategies Dealing with Stochastic Time Delays and Packet Losses,” Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Portland, USA (Jun. 2005), vol. 1, pp. 621–626.Google Scholar
5. Polushin, I. G., Liu, P. X. and Lung, C. H., “Projection-based force reflection algorithm for stable bilateral teleoperation over networks,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 57 (9), 1854–1865 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hua, C. C. and Liu, X. P., “Delay-dependent stability criteria of teleoperation systems with asymmetric time-varying delays,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 26, 925–932 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Polushin, I. G., Liu, P. X. and Lung, C. H., “A control scheme for stable force-reflecting teleoperation over IP networks,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 36 (4), 930–939 (2006).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Polushin, I. G., Liu, P. X. and Lung, C. H., “A force-reflection algorithm for improved transparency in bilateral teleoperation with communication delay,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 12 (3), 361–374 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Polushin, I. G., Liu, P. X., Lung, C. H. and On, G. D., “Position-error based schemes for bilateral teleoperation with time delay: Theory and experiments,” J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 132, 1–11 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Liu, X. and Tavakoli, M., “Adaptive inverse dynamics 4-channel control of uncertain nonlinear teleoperation systems,” Adv. Robot. 25 (13), 1729–1750 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Eusebi, A. and Melchiorri, C., “Force reflecting telemanipulators with time-delay: Stability analysis and control design,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 14 (4), 635–640 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Zhu, W. H. and Salcudean, S. E., “Stability guaranteed teleoperation: An adaptive motion/force control approach,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 45 (11), 1951–1969 (2000).Google Scholar
13. Hashtrudi-Zaad, K. and Salcudean, S. E., “Transparency in time-delayed systems and the effect of local force feedback for transparent teleoperation,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 18 (1), 108–114 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Kelly, R., Santibáñez, V. and Loria, A., Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space (Springer, London, UK, 2005).Google Scholar
15. Spong, M. W., Hutchinson, S. and Vidyasagar, M., Robot Modeling and Control (Wiley, New York, 2005).Google Scholar
16. Malysz, P. and Sirouspour, S., “Nonlinear and filtered force/position mapping in bilateral teleoperation with application to enhanced stiffness discrimination,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 25 (5), 1134–1149 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Speich, J. E., Shao, L. and Goldfarb, M., “Modeling the human hand as it interacts with a telemanipulation system,” Mechatronics 15 (9), 1127–1142 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Cavusoglu, M. C., Feygin, D. and Tendick, F., “A critical study of the mechanical and electrical properties of the phantom haptic interface and improvements for high performance control,” Presence 11, 555–568 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hashemzadeh and Tavakoli Supplementary Material

The video clip shows experimental setup with gravity compensation on free-motion and contact-motion test of two PHANToM Premium 1.5A robots in teleoperation. To show the performances of the proposed method, the master and slave positions and the operator and environment forces are plotted in synchrony with the free-motion or contact-motion tests.

Download Hashemzadeh and Tavakoli Supplementary Material(Video)
Video 54.7 MB