Research Papers

Pose Changes From a Different Point of View

[+] Author and Article Information
Gregory S. Chirikjian

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD 21218
e-mail: gchirik1@jhu.edu

Robert Mahony

College of Engineering and Computer Science,
The Australian National University,
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
e-mail: robert.mahony@anu.edu.au

Sipu Ruan

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD 21218
e-mail: ruansp@jhu.edu

Jochen Trumpf

College of Engineering and Computer Science,
The Australian National University,
Canberra 2601, ACT, Australia
e-mail: jochen.trumpf@anu.edu.au

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Mechanisms and Robotics Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANISMS AND ROBOTICS. Manuscript received September 22, 2017; final manuscript received December 22, 2017; published online February 27, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Andrew P. Murray.

J. Mechanisms Robotics 10(2), 021008 (Feb 27, 2018) (12 pages) Paper No: JMR-17-1315; doi: 10.1115/1.4039121 History: Received September 22, 2017; Revised December 22, 2017

For more than a century, rigid-body displacements have been viewed as affine transformations described as homogeneous transformation matrices wherein the linear part is a rotation matrix. In group-theoretic terms, this classical description makes rigid-body motions a semidirect product. The distinction between a rigid-body displacement of Euclidean space and a change in pose from one reference frame to another is usually not articulated well in the literature. Here, we show that, remarkably, when changes in pose are viewed from a space-fixed reference frame, the space of pose changes can be endowed with a direct product group structure, which is different from the semidirect product structure of the space of motions. We then show how this new perspective can be applied more naturally to problems such as monitoring the state of aerial vehicles from the ground, or the cameras in a humanoid robot observing pose changes of its hands.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Denavit, J. , and Hartenberg, R. S. , 1955, “ A Kinematic Notation for Lower-Pair Mechanisms Based on Matrices,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 22, pp. 215–221.
Adorno, B. V. , and Fraisse, P. , 2017, “ The Cross-Motion Invariant Group and Its Application to Kinematics,” IMA J. Math. Control Inf., 34(4), pp. 1359–1378.
Cayley, A. , 1843, “ On the Motion of Rotation of a Solid Body,” Cambridge Math. J., 3, pp. 224–232.
Euler, L. , 1758, “ Du Mouvement de Rotation des Corps Solides Autour d'un Axe Variable,” Mémoires de l'Académie des Sciences de Berlin, 14, pp. 154–193.
Rodrigues, O. , 1840, “ Des lois géométriques qui régissent les déplacements d'un système solide dans l'espace, et de la variation des coordonnées provenant de ces déplacements considérés independamment des causes qui peuvent les produire,” J. Math. Pures Appl., 5, pp. 380–440.
Blaschke, W. , and Müller, H. R. , 1956, Ebene Kinematik, Verlag von R. Oldenbourg, Munich, Germany.
Chasles, M. , 1830, “ Note sur les propriétés générales du système de deux corps semblables entre eux et placés d'une manière quelconque dans l'espace; et sur le déplacement fini ou infiniment petit d'un corps solide libre,” Férussac, Bull. Sci. Math., 14, pp. 321–326.
Altmann, S. L. , 2005, Rotations, Quaternions, and Double Groups, Dover, Mineola, NY.
Bottema, O. , and Roth, B. , 1979, Theoretical Kinematics, Dover, Mineola, NY.
Angeles, J. , 1988, Rational Kinematics, Springer-Verlag, New York. [CrossRef]
Herve, J. M. , 1999, “ The Lie Group of Rigid Body Displacements, a Fundamental Tool for Machine Design,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 34(5), pp. 719–730. [CrossRef]
Karger, A. , and Novák, J. , 1985, Space Kinematics and Lie Groups, Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York.
McCarthy, J. M. , 1990, Introduction to Theoretical Kinematics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Murray, R. M. , Li, Z. , and Sastry, S. S. , 1994, A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Ravani, B. , and Roth, B. , 1983, “ Motion Synthesis Using Kinematic Mapping,” ASME J. Mech. Transm. Autom. Des., 105(3), pp. 460–467. [CrossRef]
Selig, J. M. , 2005, Geometrical Fundamentals of Robotics, 2nd ed., Springer, New York.
Ball, R. S. , 1900, A Treatise on the Theory of Screws, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Crane , C. D., III ., and Duffy, J. , 2008, Kinematic Analysis of Robot Manipulators by Carl D. Crane III (2008-01-28)1623, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Davidson, J. K. , and Hunt, K. H. , 2004, Robots and Screw Theory: Applications of Kinematics and Statics to Robotics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Duffy, J. , Hunt, H. E. M. , and Lipkin, H. , eds., 2000, Proceedings of a Symposium Commemorating the Legacy, Works, and Life of Sir Robert S. Ball, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Lipkin, H. , 1985, “Geometry and Mappings of Screws With Applications to the Hybrid Control of Robotic Manipulators,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Rooney, J. , 1978, “ A Comparison of Representations of General Spatial Screw Displacements,” Environ. Plann. B, 5(1), pp. 45–88. [CrossRef]
Chirikjian, G. S. , and Kyatkin, A. B. , 2016, Harmonic Analysis for Engineers and Applied Scientists, Dover, Mineola, NY.
Stramigioli, S. , 2001, “ Nonintrinsicity of References in Rigid-Body Motions,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 68(6), pp. 929–936. [CrossRef]
Legnani, G. , Casolo, F. , Righettini, P. , and Zappa, B. , 1996, “ A Homogeneous Matrix Approach to 3D Kinematics and Dynamics—I: Theory,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 31(5), pp. 573–587. [CrossRef]
Selig, J. , 2006, “ Active Versus Passive Transformations in Robotics,” Rob. Autom. Mag., 13(1), pp. 79–84. [CrossRef]
Fanghella, P. , and Galletti, C. , 1995, “ Metric Relations and Displacement Groups in Mechanism and Robot Kinematic,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 117(3), pp. 470–478. [CrossRef]
Kazerounian, K. , and Rastegar, J. , 1992, “Object Norms: A Class of Coordinate and Metric Independent Norms for Displacement,” Flexible Mech., Dynam. Anal., 47, pp. 271–275.
Martinez, J. M. R. , and Duffy, J. , 1995, “ On the Metrics of Rigid Body Displacement for Infinite and Finite Bodies,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 117(1), pp. 41–47. [CrossRef]
Park, F. C. , 1995, “ Distance Metrics on the Rigid-Body Motions With Applications to Mechanism Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 117(1), pp. 48–54. [CrossRef]
Larochelle, P. M. , Murray, A. P. , and Angeles, J. , 2007, “ A Distance Metric for Finite Sets of Rigid-Body Displacements Via the Polar Decomposition,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(8), pp. 883–886. [CrossRef]
Lin, Q. , and Burdick, J. W. , 2000, “ Objective and Frame-Invariant Kinematic Metric Functions for Rigid Bodies,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 19(6), pp. 612–625. [CrossRef]
Amato, N. M. , Bayazit, O. B. , Dale, L. K. , Jones, C. , and Vallejo, D. , 1998, “ Choosing Good Distance Metrics and Local Planners for Probabilistic Roadmap Methods,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA'98), Leuven, Belgium, May 20, pp. 630–637.
Chirikjian, G. S. , 2015, “ Partial Bi-Invariance of SE(3) Metrics,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 15(1), p. 011008. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Demonstrating the three-frame scenario with a separate observer frame O for a humanoid robot

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Relationship between the frames O, A, B, and C

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Translation vectors  OOtA, OOtB, OOtC, AOtB, BOtC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Demonstration of the difference between  AWdB and  AWtB, BWdC and  BWtC, AWdC and  AWtC (note that  AWdB=BWdC=AWdC=0)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Demonstration of  AOdB, BOdC, AOdC and  AOtB, BOtC, AOtC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Transformation of the observer frame from O to 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Coordinates of all vectors computed in frame 1 instead of frame O

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Conjugation resulting from changing body-fixed frames

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of geodesic trajectories for SE(3) and PCG(3)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparisons of interpolation using multiple frames and two adjacent frames. Dashed curves: SE(3); Solid curves: PCG(3); Dotted curves: lines that connect poses. (a) Multiple frames and (b) adjacent frames.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparisons of interpolation by shifting according to the mean of frames. Dashed curves: SE(3); Solid curves: PCG(3); Dotted curves: lines that connect poses. (a) Mean (μ) of frames in SE(3)  (0.96590.2586−0.00857.5−0.25860.9638−0.064615−0.00850.06460.997815) and (b) Mean (μ) of frames in PCG(3) (0.96590.2586−0.00859.6656−0.25860.9638−0.064615.9882−0.00850.06460.997812.2066).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparisons of interpolation based on different parameterizations of time steps. Dashed curves: SE(3); Solid curves: PCG(3); Dotted curves: lines that connect poses. (a) Fitted curves based on evenly distributed time steps and (b) fitted curves based on distance-related time steps.




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