Research Papers

Improving Techniques in Statically Equivalent Serial Chain Modeling for Center of Mass Estimation

[+] Author and Article Information
Bingjue Li

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
University of Dayton,
Dayton, OH 45469
e-mail: lib002@udayton.edu

Andrew P. Murray, David H. Myszka

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
University of Dayton,
Dayton, OH 45469

Manuscript received September 26, 2014; final manuscript received November 23, 2014; published online December 31, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Venkat Krovi.

J. Mechanisms Robotics 7(1), 011013 (Feb 01, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: JMR-14-1270; doi: 10.1115/1.4029294 History: Received September 26, 2014; Revised November 23, 2014; Online December 31, 2014

Any articulated system of rigid bodies defines a statically equivalent serial chain (SESC). The SESC is a virtual chain that terminates at the center of mass (CoM) of the original system of bodies. An SESC may be generated experimentally without knowing the mass, CoM, or length of each link in the system given that its joint angles and overall CoM may be measured. This paper presents three developments toward recognizing the SESC as a practical modeling technique. Two of the three developments improve utilizing the technique in practical applications where the arrangement of the joints impacts the derivation of the SESC. The final development provides insight into the number of poses needed to create a usable SESC in the presence of data collection errors. First, modifications to a matrix necessary in computing the SESC are proposed, followed by the experimental validation of SESC modeling. Second, the problem of generating an SESC experimentally when the system of bodies includes a mass fixed in the ground frame are presented and a remedy is proposed for humanoid-like systems. Third, an investigation of the error of the experimental SESC versus the number of data readings collected in the presence of errors in joint readings and CoM data is conducted. By conducting the method on three different systems with various levels of data error, a general form of the function for estimating the error of the experimental SESC is proposed.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Fisher, O., 1902, “Über die reduzierten systeme und die hauptpunkte der glieder eines gelenkmechanismus,” Zeitschrift für angewandte Mathematik und Physik, 47, pp. 429–466.
Lowen, G., and Berkof, R., 1968, “Survey of Investigations Into the Balancing of Linkages,” J. Mech., 3(4), pp. 221–231. [CrossRef]
Espiau, B., and Boulic, R., 1998, “On the Computation and Control of the Mass Center of Articulated Chains,” INRIA, Montbonnot St Martin, France, Report No. RR-3479.
Cotton, S., Murray, A., and Fraisse, P., 2008, “Statically Equivalent Serial Chains for Modeling the Center of Mass of Humanoid Robots,” 8th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Human Robotics (Humanoids 2008), Daejeon, South Korea, Dec. 1–3, pp. 138–144. [CrossRef]
Cotton, S., Murray, A., and Fraisse, P., 2009, “Estimation of the Center of Mass Using Statically Equivalent Serial Chain Modeling,” ASME Paper No. DETC2009-86227. [CrossRef]
Cotton, S., Murray, A., and Fraisse, P., 2009, “Estimation of the Center of Mass: From Humanoid Robots to Human Beings,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, 14(6), pp. 707–712. [CrossRef]
Cotton, S., Vanoncini, M., Fraisse, P., Ramdani, N., Demircan, E., Murray, A., and Keller, T., 2011, “Estimation of the Centre of Mass From Motion Capture and Force Plate Recordings: A Study on the Elderly,” Appl. Bionics Biomech., 8(1), pp. 67–84. [CrossRef]
Gonzalez, A., Hayashibe, M., and Fraisse, P., 2012, “Three Dimensional Visualization of the Statically Equivalent Serial Chain From Kinect Recording,” International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), San Diego, CA, Aug. 28–Sept. 1, pp. 4843–4846. [CrossRef]
Dubowsky, S., and Papadopoulos, E., 1993, “The Kinematics, Dynamics, and Control of Free-Flying and Free-Floating Space Robotic Systems,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 9(5), pp. 531–543. [CrossRef]
Vafa, Z., and Dubowsky, S., 1990. “The Kinematics and Dynamics of Space Manipulators—The Virtual Manipulator Approach,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 9(4), pp. 3–21. [CrossRef]
Vafa, Z., and Dubowsky, S., 1990, “On the Dynamics of Space Manipulators Using the Virtual Manipulator, With Applications to Path Planning,” J. Astronaut. Sci., 38(4), pp. 441–472 [CrossRef].
Papadopoulos, E., and Dubowsky, S., 1991, “On the Nature of Control Algorithms for Free-Floating Space Manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 7(6), pp. 750–758. [CrossRef]
Agrawal, S., Gardner, G., and Pledgie, S., 2001, “Design and Fabrication of an Active Gravity Balanced Planar Mechanism Using Auxiliary Parallelograms,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 123(4), pp. 525–528. [CrossRef]
Hasan, S. S., Robin, D. W., Szurkus, D. C., Ashmead, D. H., Peterson, S. W., and Shiavi, R. G., 1996, “Simultaneous Measurement of Body Center of Pressure and Center of Gravity During Upright Stance. Part I: Methods,” Gait Posture, 4(1), pp. 1–10. [CrossRef]
Winter, D., 1995, “Human Balance and Posture Control During Standing and Walking,” Gait Posture, 3(4), pp. 193–214. [CrossRef]
Winter, D., 2009, Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement, 4th ed., Wiley, New York. [CrossRef]
Leva, P., 1996, “Adjustments to Zatsiorsky–Seluyanov's Inertia Parameters,” J. Biomech., 29(9), pp. 1223–1230. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Zatsiorsky, V., and Seluyanov, V., 1983, “The Mass and Inertia Characteristics of the Main Segments of the Human Body,” Biomechanics, VIII(B), pp. 1152–1159.
Cavagna, G. A., 1975, “Force Platforms as Ergometers,” J. Appl. Physiol., 39(1), pp. 174–179. [PubMed]
Shimba, T., 1984, “An Estimation of Center of Gravity From Force Platform Data,” J. Biomech., 17(1), pp. 53–60. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
King, D., and Zatsiorsky, V., 1997, “Extracting Gravity Line Displacement From Stabilographic Recordings,” Gait Posture, 6(1), pp. 27–38. [CrossRef]
Brenière, Y., 1996, “Why We Walk the Way We Do?,” J. Mot. Behav., 28(4), pp. 291–298. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Caron, O., Faure, B., and Brenière, Y., 1997, “Estimating the Centre of Gravity of the Body on the Basis of the Centre of Pressure in Standing Posture,” J. Biomech., 30(11–12), pp. 1169–1171. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Schepers, H. M., van Asseldonk, E. H. F., Buurke, J. H., and Veltink, P. H., 2009, “Ambulatory Estimation of Center of Mass Displacement During Walking,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 56(4), pp. 1189–1195. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Betker, A., Moussaviand, Z., and Szturm, T., 2004, “Center of Mass Function Approximation,” 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (IEMBS '04), San Francisco, CA, Sept. 1–5, pp. 687–690. [CrossRef]
Betker, A., Szturm, T., and Moussaviand, Z., 2003, “Application of Feedforward Backpropagation Neural Network to Center of Mass Estimation for Use in a Clinical Environment,” 25th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (IEMBS), Cancun, Mexico, Sept. 17–21, pp. 2714–2717. [CrossRef]
Eames, M., Cosgrove, A., and Baker, R., 1999, “Comparing Methods of Estimating the Total Body Centre of Mass in Three-Dimensions in Normal and Pathological Gaits,” Hum. Mov. Sci., 18(5), pp. 637–646. [CrossRef]
Gard, S. A., Miff, S. C., and Kuo, A. D., 2004, “Comparison of Kinematic and Kinetic Methods for Computing the Vertical Motion of the Body Center of Mass During Walking,” Hum. Mov. Sci., 22(6), pp. 597–610. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Gutierrez-Farewik, E. M., Bartonek, A., and Saraste, H., 2006, “Comparison and Evaluation of Two Common Methods to Measure Center of Mass Displacement in Three Dimensions During Gait,” Hum. Mov. Sci., 25(2), pp. 238–256. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Thirunarayan, M. A., Kerrigan, D. C., Rabuffetti, M., Croce, U. D., and Saini, M., 1996, “Comparison of Three Methods for Estimating Vertical Displacement of Center of Mass During Level Walking in Patients,” Gait Posture, 4(4), pp. 306–314. [CrossRef]
Lafond, D., Duarte, M., and Prince, F., 2004, “Comparison of Three Methods to Estimate the Center of Mass During Balance Assessment,” J. Biomech., 37(9), pp. 1421–1426. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Nigg, B. M., and Herzog, W., 1999, Biomechanics of the Musculo-Skeletal System, Vol. 192, Wiley, New York.
Lee, S.-H., and Terzopoulos, D., 2008, “Spline Joints for Multibody Dynamics,” 35th International Conference and Exhibition on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH 2008), Los Angeles, CA, Aug. 11–15, Paper No. 22. [CrossRef]
Zatsiorsky, V., 1998, Kinematics of Human Motion, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.
Shao, W., and Ng-Thow-Hing, V., 2003, “A General Joint Component Framework for Realistic Articulation in Human Characters,” Proceedings of the 2003 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics (I3D ’03), Monterey, CA, Apr. 27–30, pp. 11–18. [CrossRef]
Gonzalez, A., Hayashibe, M., and Fraisse, P., 2013, “Online Identification and Visualization of the Statically Equivalent Serial Chain Via Constrained Kalman Filter,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Karlsruhe, Germany, May 6–10, pp. 5323–5328. [CrossRef]
McCarthy, J., 1990, An Introduction to Theoretical Kinematics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
James, M., 1978, “The Generalised Inverse,” Math. Gaz., 62(420), pp. 109–114. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A branched-chain system composed of four moving articulated rigid bodies

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The kinematic and static parameters of the system shown in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The SESC model of the branched chain system shown in Fig. 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

A two-body system that includes a redundancy in the B matrix when CoM data are only gathered in the X–Y plane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

An experimental model of an articulated branched-chain system. A moving reference frame is attached at each joint, and the joint labels indicate the axes of rotation and the numbering scheme used in establishing the SESC.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) The experimental model was posed in a configuration and balanced on a peg supporting the bottom plate and (b) the cylindrical peg used to support the experimental model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

A top view of the bottom plate of the model. The contact area between the bottom plate and the peg causes deviation of the balancing point; therefore, the average of the maximum and the minimum coordinates of the CoM reading was used as the CoM projection data for each configuration. The location of the model's bottom plate in the measuring plane and the location of the supporting peg in the fixed reference frame.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

(a) A vertical line is drawn through the CoM projection in the X–Y plane. (b) The model in the same configuration is balanced with a peg supporting one of the links. Another vertical line passing through the contact point is drawn. The intersection of the two lines is the CoM of the model, thus the CoM location along the Z axis is found.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

A four-body system with the first body fixed on the ground

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

(a) A numerical model of a spatial 11-body-17DOF humanoid-like branched chain developed in matlab and (b) its ideal SESC model S

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

E versus the quantity of experimental data points collected for the spatial humanoid-like model shown in Fig. 10(a)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

The 90th percentile values of E versus the quantity of experimental data for the same process as shown in Fig. 11

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

A curve fitting of the 90th percentile values of E as shown in Fig. 12

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Curve fittings of the 90th percentile values of E for the humanoid-like model corresponding to different data errors. (The point indicated by “•” shows that the estimated 90th percentile error of E is about 4% after 54 data points are collected with EC = ±0.4 and EJ = ±1 deg.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

E versus number of data for (a) a planar four-body model and (b) a six-body robot-arm-like model with experimental data of various precision

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

The error of the CoM predicted for 300 random configurations using an SESC determined experimentally from another 54 data points for which EC = ±0.4 and EJ  = ±1 deg




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In