0
Research Papers

A Unified Approach for Second-Order Control of the Manipulator With Joint Physical Constraints

[+] Author and Article Information
Pei Jiang

College of Mechanical Engineering,
Chongqing University,
Chongqing 400030, China
e-mail: peijiang@cqu.edu.cn

Shuihua Huang

Department of System Science and Engineering,
Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou 310027, China
e-mail: huanggao@zju.edu.cn

Ji Xiang

Department of System Science and Engineering,
Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou 310027, China
e-mail: jxiang@zju.edu.cn

Michael Z. Q. Chen

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong 999077, China
e-mail: mzqchen@outlook.com

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received June 11, 2016; final manuscript received March 23, 2017; published online May 15, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Andreas Mueller.

J. Mechanisms Robotics 9(4), 041009 (May 15, 2017) (11 pages) Paper No: JMR-16-1170; doi: 10.1115/1.4036569 History: Received June 11, 2016; Revised March 23, 2017

Kinematic control of manipulators with joint physical constraints, such as joint limits and joint velocity limits, has received extensive studies. Many studies resolved this problem at the second-order kinematic level, which may suffer from the self-motion instability in the presence of persistent self-motion or unboundedness of joint velocity. In this paper, a unified approach is proposed to control a manipulator with both joint limits and joint velocity limits at the second-order kinematic level. By combining the weighted least-norm (WLN) solution in the revised joint space and the clamping weighted least-norm (CWLN) solution in the real joint space, the unified approach ensures the joint limits and joint velocity limits at the same time. A time-variant clamping factor is incorporated into the unified approach to suppress the self-motion when the joint velocity diverges, or the end-effector stops, which improves the stability of self-motion. The simulations in contrast to the traditional dynamic feedback control scheme and the new minimum-acceleration-norm (MAN) scheme have been made to demonstrate the advantages of the unified approach.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Xiang, J. , Zhong, C. , and Wei, W. , 2010, “ General-Weighted Least-Norm Control for Redundant Manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 26(4), pp. 660–669. [CrossRef]
Jiang, P. , Xiang, J. , Wei, W. , and Shan, C. , 2015, “ General-Weighted Least-Norm Control for Redundant Manipulators Under Time-Dependent Constraint,” Int. J. Adv. Rob. Syst., 12(5).
Chen, P. , Xiang, J. , and Wei, W. , 2016, “ A Unified Weighted Least Norm Method for Redundant Manipulator Control,” Int. J. Adv. Rob. Syst., 13(1).
Huang, S. , Xiang, J. , Wei, W. , and Chen, M. Z. Q. , 2017, “ On the Virtual Joints for Kinematic Control of Redundant Manipulators With Multiple Constraints,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., epub.
Liegeois, A. , 1977, “ Automatic Supervisory Control of the Configuration and Behavior of Multibody Mechanisms,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., 7(12), pp. 868–871. [CrossRef]
Siciliano, B. , and Slotine, J.-J. E. , 1991, “ A General Framework for Managing Multiple Tasks in Highly Redundant Robotic Systems,” Fifth International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR), Pisa, Italy, June 19–22, pp. 1211–1216.
Mansard, N. , and Chaumette, F. , 2009, “ Directional Redundancy for Robot Control,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 54(6), pp. 1179–1192. [CrossRef]
Kanoun, O. , Lamiraux, F. , and Wieber, P.-B. , 2011, “ Kinematic Control of Redundant Manipulators: Generalizing the Task-Priority Framework to Inequality Task,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 27(4), pp. 785–792. [CrossRef]
Chan, T. F. , and Dubey, R. V. , 1995, “ A Weighted Least-Norm Solution Based Scheme for Avoiding Joint Limits for Redundant Joint Manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 11(2), pp. 286–292. [CrossRef]
Huang, S. , Peng, Y. , Wei, W. , and Xiang, J. , 2014, “ Clamping Weighted Least-Norm Method for the Manipulator Kinematic Control: Avoiding Joint Limits,” 33rd Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Nanjing, China, July 28–30, pp. 8309–8314.
Huang, S. , Peng, Y. , Wei, W. , and Xiang, J. , 2016, “ Clamping Weighted Least-Norm Method for the Manipulator Kinematic Control With Constraints,” Int. J. Control, 89(11), pp. 2240–2249.
Nakanishi, J. , Cory, R. , Mistry, M. , Peters, J. , and Schaal, S. , 2008, “ Operational Space Control: A Theoretical and Empirical Comparison,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 27(6), pp. 737–757. [CrossRef]
Luh, J. Y. , Walker, M. W. , and Paul, R. P. , 1980, “ Resolved-Acceleration Control of Mechanical Manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 25(3), pp. 468–474. [CrossRef]
Siciliano, B. , and Khatib, O. , 2008, Springer Handbook of Robotics, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Flacco, F. , and Luca, A. D. , 2014, “ Discrete-Time Velocity Control of Redundant Robots With Acceleration/Torque Optimization Properties,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Hong Kong, China, May 31–June 7, pp. 5139–5144.
Kircanski, M. , and Kirćanski, N. , 1997, “ Resolved-Rate and Resolved-Acceleration-Based Robot Control in the Presence of Actuators' Constraints,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Albuquerque, NM, Apr. 20–25, Vol. 1, pp. 235–240.
Chiaverini, S. , and Fusco, G. , 1999, “ A New Inverse Kinematics Algorithm With Path Tracking Capability Under Velocity and Acceleration Constraints,” 38th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Phoenix, AZ, Dec. 7–10, pp. 2064–2069.
Antonelli, G. , Chiaverini, S. , and Fusco, G. , 2003, “ A New On-Line Algorithm for Inverse Kinematics of Robot Manipulators Ensuring Path Tracking Capability Under Joint Limits,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 19(1), pp. 162–167. [CrossRef]
Lo Bianco, C. G. , and Gerelli, O. , 2011, “ Online Trajectory Scaling for Manipulators Subject to High-Order Kinematic and Dynamic Constraints,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 27(6), pp. 1144–1152. [CrossRef]
Guo, D. , and Zhang, Y. , 2014, “ Acceleration-Level Inequality-Based Man Scheme for Obstacle Avoidance of Redundant Robot Manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 61(12), pp. 6903–6914. [CrossRef]
Hollerbach, J. M. , and Suh, K. C. , 1987, “ Redundancy Resolution of Manipulators Through Torque Optimization,” IEEE J. Rob. Autom., 3(4), pp. 308–316. [CrossRef]
Maciejewski, A. A. , 1991, “ Kinetic Limitations on the Use of Redundancy in Robotic Manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 7(2), pp. 205–210. [CrossRef]
De Luca, A. , and Oriolo, G. , 1990, “ Efficient Dynamic Resolution of Robot Redundancy,” American Control Conference (ACC), San Diego, CA, May 23–25, pp. 221–227.
Kang, H.-J. , and Freeman, R. A. , 1993, “ Null Space Damping Method for Local Joint Torque Optimization of Redundant Manipulators,” J. Rob. Syst., 10(2), pp. 249–270. [CrossRef]
Chen, T.-H. , Cheng, F.-T. , Sun, Y.-Y. , and Hung, M.-H. , 1994, “ Torque Optimization Schemes for Kinematically Redundant Manipulators,” J. Rob. Syst., 11(4), pp. 257–269. [CrossRef]
Hsu, P. , Mauser, J. , and Sastry, S. , 1989, “ Dynamic Control of Redundant Manipulators,” J. Rob. Syst., 6(2), pp. 133–148. [CrossRef]
Zergeroglu, E. , Dawson, D. D. , Walker, I. W. , and Setlur, P. , 2004, “ Nonlinear Tracking Control of Kinematically Redundant Robot Manipulators,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, 9(1), pp. 129–132. [CrossRef]
Qiu, B. , Guo, D. , Tan, H. , Yang, Z. , and Zhang, Y. , 2014, “ Different-Level Simultaneous Minimization With Aid of Ma Equivalence for Robotic Redundancy Resolution,” Advances in Neural Networks- ISNN 2014, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 431–438.
Liao, B. , and Liu, W. , 2015, “ Pseudoinverse-Type Bi-Criteria Minimization Scheme for Redundancy Resolution of Robot Manipulators,” Robotica, 33(10), pp. 2100–2113. [CrossRef]
Qiu, B. , Zhang, Y. , and Yang, Z. , 2016, “ Revisit and Compare Ma Equivalence and Zhang Equivalence of Minimum Velocity Norm (MVN) Type,” Adv. Rob., 30(6), pp. 416–430. [CrossRef]
Flacco, F. , and De Luca, A. , 2015, “ Discrete-Time Redundancy Resolution at the Velocity Level With Acceleration/Torque Optimization Properties,” Rob. Auton. Syst., 70, pp. 191–201. [CrossRef]
Ma, S. , and Nenchev, D. N. , 1996, “ Local Torque Minimization for Redundant Manipulators: A Correct Formulation,” Robotica, 14(2), pp. 235–239. [CrossRef]
O'Neil, K. A. , 2002, “ Divergence of Linear Acceleration-Based Redundancy Resolution Schemes,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 18(4), pp. 625–631. [CrossRef]
Chiaverini, S. , Egeland, O. , and Kanestrom, R. , 1991, “ Achieving User-Defined Accuracy With Damped Least-Squares Inverse Kinematics,” Fifth International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR), Pisa, Italy, June 19–22, pp. 672–677.
Khalil, H. K. , and Grizzle, J. , 1996, Nonlinear Systems, 3rd ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Caccavale, F. , Chiaverini, S. , and Siciliano, B. , 1997, “ Second-Order Kinematic Control of Robot Manipulators With Jacobian Damped Least-Squares Inverse: Theory and Experiments,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, 2(3), pp. 188–194. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The 4R manipulator. The arrows are the axes of the joints.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The trajectory of the end-effectors in a three-dimensional space. The asterisk is the starting point of the end-effector.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Simulation of the nonredundant manipulator under the unified approach: (a) normalized joint position, (b) normalized joint velocity, (c) tracking error, (d) weighting factors of the joint 1, the dashed line is w¯11, and the solid line is w¯21, (e) revised joint velocity of the joint 1, (f) revised joint acceleration of the joint 1, (g) minimal singular value of JW−12, and (h) damping factor λ

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Simulation of the redundant manipulator under the dynamic feedback control law (51): (a) tracking error, (b) normalized joint position, (c) joint velocity trajectory, and (d) homogeneous joint velocity, the dash line is ||(I−J+J)g||, the solid line is ||(I−J+J)q˙||

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Simulation of the redundant manipulator under the MAN scheme: (a) normalized joint velocity trajectory, (b) joint velocity trajectory, (c) homogeneous joint velocity ||(I−J+J)q˙||, and (d) tracking error

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Simulation of the redundant manipulator under the unified approach: (a) joint acceleration trajectory, (b) joint velocity trajectory, (c) normalized joint position trajectory, (d) tracking error, (e) homogeneous joint velocity ||(I−J+J)q˙||, (f) clamping factor c, (g) weighting factors, and (h) weighting factors of the joint 4, the red solid line is w¯14, the blue dash line is w¯24

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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