Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T08:16:43.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Collision Detection on Industrial Robots in Repetitive Tasks Using Modified Dynamic Time Warping

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 October 2019

Zaviša Gordić Open the ORCID record for Zaviša Gordić [Opens in a new window]  and
Kosta Jovanović Open the ORCID record for Kosta Jovanović [Opens in a new window]
Zaviša Gordić*
Affiliation:
School of Electrical Engineering, University of Belgrade, 11000, Belgrade, Serbia E-mail: [email protected]
Kosta Jovanović
Affiliation:
School of Electrical Engineering, University of Belgrade, 11000, Belgrade, Serbia E-mail: [email protected]
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper presents a non-model-based collision detection algorithm for robots without external sensors and with closed control architecture. A reference signal of repetitive motion is recorded from the robot operation. To detect collisions, the reference is compared with measurements from the robot. One of the key contributions is a novel approach to optimal matching of compared signals, which is ensured by the newly developed modified Dynamic Time Warping (mDTW) method presented in this paper. One of the main improvements of the mDTW is that it enables comparing a signal with the most similar section of the other signal. Partial matching also enables online application of time warping principles and reduces the time and computation resources needed to perform matching. In addition to mDTW, two complementary decision rules are developed to identify collisions. The first rule, based on the absolute difference between compared matched samples, uses statistically determined thresholds to perform rapid detection of unambiguous collisions. The second rule is based on Eigen values of the covariance matrix of matched samples, and it employs its higher sensitivity to detect collisions with lower intensity. Results from experimental validation of the proposed collision algorithm on two industrial robots are shown.

Keywords

Collision detectionIndustrial robotModified dynamic time warpingHuman-robot interactionElastic similarity measures
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 38 , Special Issue 10: Human–Robot Interaction (HRI) , October 2020 , pp. 1717 - 1736
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

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.)

References

De Luca, A., Albu-Schäffer, A., Haddadin, S. and Hirzinger, G., “Collision Detection And Safe Reaction With The DLR-III Lightweight Manipulator Arm,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems – IROS, Beijing, China (2006) pp. 1623–1630.Google Scholar
Haddadin, S., Albu-Schäffer, A., Luca, A. D. and Hirzinger, G., “Evaluation of Collision Detection and Reaction for a Human-Friendly Robot on Biological Tissues,” IARP International Workshop on Technical Challenges and for Dependable Robots in Human Environments, Los Angeles, CA, USA (2008).Google Scholar
De Luca, A. and Flacco, F., “Integrated Control for pHRI: Collision Avoidance, Detection, Reaction and Collaboration,” IEEE RAS & EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics – BioRob, Roma, Italy (2012) pp. 288–295.Google Scholar
Dimeas, F., Avendaño-Valencia, L. and Aspragathos, N., “Human – robot collision detection and identification based on fuzzy and time series modelling,” Robotica 33(9), 1886–1898 (2015).10.1017/S0263574714001143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharkawy, A.-N., Koustoumpardis, P. and Aspragathos, N., “Manipulator Collision Detection and Collided Link Identification based on Neural Networks,” International Conference on Robotics in Alpe-Adria Danube Region – RAAD, Patras, Greece (2018).Google Scholar
Pastor, P., Righetti, L., Kalakrishnan, M. and Schaal, S., “Online Movement Adaptation Based on Previous Sensor Experiences,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems – IROS, San Francisco, CA, USA (2011) pp. 365–371.Google Scholar
Flacco, F. and De Luca, A., “Safe Physical Human-Robot Collaboration,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems – IROS, Tokyo, Japan (2013) p. 2072.Google Scholar
Magrini, E., Flacco, F. and De Luca, A., “Control of Generalized Contact Motion and Force in Physical Human-Robot Interaction,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation – ICRA, Seattle, Washington, USA (2015) pp. 2298–2304.Google Scholar
Haddadin, S., Albu-Schäffer, A. and Hirzinger, G., “Safe Physical Human-Robot Interaction: Measurements, Analysis and New Insights,” In: Robotics Research, Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics (Kaneko, M. and Nakamura, Y., eds.), vol. 66 (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010) pp. 395–407.Google Scholar
Haddadin, S., Albu-Schäffer, A. and Hirzinger, G., “Safety evaluation of physical human-robot interaction via crash-testing,” In: Robotics: Science and Systems (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2007) pp. 217–224.Google Scholar
Heinzmann, J. and Zelinsky, A., “Quantitative safety guarantees for physical human-robot interaction,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 22(7–8), 479–504 (2003).10.1177/02783649030227004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddadin, S., Albu-Schäffer, A., De Luca, A. and Hirzinger, G., “Collision Detection and Reaction: A Contribution to Safe Physical Human Robot Interaction,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems – IROS, Nice, France (2008) pp. 3356–3363.Google Scholar
De Luca, A. and Mattone, R., “Sensorless Robot Collision Detection and Hybrid Force/Motion Control,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation – ICRA, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (2005) pp. 1011–1016.Google Scholar
Geravand, M., Flacco, F. and De Luca, A., “Human-Robot Physical Interaction and Collaboration Using an Industrial Robot With a Closed Control Architecture,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation – ICRA, Karlsruhe, Germany (2013) pp. 4000–4007.Google Scholar
Yamada, Y., Hirasawa, Y., Huand, S. and Umetani, Y., “Fail-Safe Human/Robot Contact in the Safety Space,” IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication – RO-MAN, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan (1996) pp. 59–64.Google Scholar
Erden, M. and Tomiyama, T., “Human-intent detection and physically interactive control of a robot without force sensors,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 26(2), 370–382 (2010).10.1109/TRO.2010.2040202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordić, Z. and Jovanović, K., “Fully Integrated Torque-Based Collision Detection in Periodic Tasks for Industrial Robots with Closed Control Architecture,” International Conference on Robotics in Alpe-Adria Danube Region – RAAD, Patras, Greece (2018).Google Scholar
Müller, M., “Chapter 4: Dynamic Time Warping,” In: Information Retrieval for Music and Motion (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007) pp. 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oregi, I., Pérez, A., Del Ser, J. and Lozano, J. A., “On-Line Dynamic Time Warping for Streaming Time Series,” Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases – ECML /PKDD, Skopje, Macedonia (2017) pp. 591–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oregi, I., Pérez, A., Del Ser, J. and Lozano, J. A., “On-line elastic similarity measures for time series,” Pattern Recog. 88, 506–517 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latecki, L. J., Megalooikonomou, V., Wang, Q., Lakaemper, R., Ratanamahatana, C. A. and Keogh, E., “Partial Elastic Matching of Time Series,” IEEE International Conference on Data Mining – ICDM, Houston, Texas, USA (2005) pp. 577–584.Google Scholar
Sart, D., Mueen, A., Najjar, W. A., Keogh, E. J. and Niennattrakul, V., “Accelerating Dynamic Time Warping Subsequence Search with GPUs and FPGAs,” IEEE International Conference on Data Mining – ICDM, Sydney, Australia (2010) pp. 1001–1006.Google Scholar
Navarro, G., “A guided tour to approximate string matching,” ACM Comput. Surv. 33(1), 31–88 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschberg, D. S., “A linear space algorithm for computing maximal common subsequences,” Commun. ACM 18(6), 341–343 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jekel, C. F., Venter, G., Venter, M. P., Stander, N. and Haftka, R. T., “Similarity measures for Identifying material parameters from hysteresis loops using inverse analysis,” Int. J. Mater. Form. 12(3), 355–378 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gordić and Jovanović supplementary material

Gordić and Jovanović supplementary material

Download Gordić and Jovanović supplementary material(Video)
Video 15.1 MB