Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T14:23:04.883Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adaptive hybrid suppression control of space free-flying robots with flexible appendages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 September 2014

P. Zarafshan ,
S. Ali A. Moosavian  and
E. G. Papadopoulos
P. Zarafshan*
Affiliation:
Department of Agro-Technology, College of Aburaihan, University of Tehran, Pakdasht, Tehran, Iran
S. Ali A. Moosavian
Affiliation:
Center of Excellence in Robotics and Control, Advanced Robotics and Automated Systems Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
E. G. Papadopoulos
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Control of rigid–flexible multi-body systems in space, during cooperative manipulation tasks, is studied in this paper. During such tasks, flexible members such as solar panels may vibrate. These vibrations in turn can lead to oscillatory disturbing forces on other subsystems, and consequently may produce significant errors in the position of operating end-effectors of cooperative arms. Therefore, to design and implement efficient model-based controllers for such complicated nonlinear systems, deriving an accurate dynamics model is required. On the other hand, due to practical limitations and real-time implementation, such models should demand fairly low computational complexity. In this paper, a precise dynamics model is derived by virtually partitioning the system into two rigid and flexible portions. These two portions will be assembled together to generate a proper model for controller design. Then, an adaptive hybrid suppression control (AHSC) algorithm is developed based on an appropriate variation rule of a virtual damping parameter. Finally, as a practical case study a space free-flying robot (SFFR) with flexible appendages is considered to move an object along a desired path through accurate force exertion by several cooperative end-effectors. This system includes a main rigid body equipped with thrusters, two solar panels, and two cooperative manipulators. The system also includes a third and fourth arm that act as a communication antenna and a photo capturing camera, respectively. The maneuver is deliberately planned such that flexible modes of solar panels get stimulated due to arms motion, while obtained results reveal the merits of proposed controller as will be discussed.

Keywords

Space roboticRigid–flexible multi-body systemsAdaptive controlDynamics modelingSuppression control
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 34 , Issue 7 , July 2016 , pp. 1464 - 1485
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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

1.Moosavian, S., Ali, A. and Papadopoulos, E., “Free-flying robots in space: An overview of dynamics modelling, planning and control,” J. Robot. 25, 537–547 (2007).Google Scholar
2.Dwivedy, S. K. and Eberhard, P., “Dynamic analysis of flexible manipulators, a literature review,” J. Mech. Mach. Theory 41, 749–777 (2006).Google Scholar
3.McConley, M., “Review of stability and control of large-scale dynamical systems: A vector dissipative systems approach,” AIAA J. Guid. Control Dyn. 35 (5), 1688–1689 (2012).Google Scholar
4.Zarafshan, P., Moosavian, S. and Ali, A., “Control of a Space Robot with Flexible Members,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA2011), Shanghai, China, (2011) pp. 2211–2216.Google Scholar
5.Ata, A. A. and Johar, H., “Dynamic Force/Motion Simulation of a Rigid Flexible Manipulator during Task Constrained,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics, (2004) pp. 268–273.Google Scholar
6.Yoshida, K., Nakanishi, H., Ueno, H., Inaba, N., Nishmaki, T. and Oda, M., “Dynamics, control and impedance matching for robotic capture of a non-cooperative satellite,” J. Adv. Robot. 18 (2), 175–198 (2004).Google Scholar
7.Sabatinia, M., Gasbarrib, P., Montib, R. and Palmerinia, G. B., “Vibration control of a flexible space manipulator during on orbit operations,” Acta Astronaut. 73, 109–121 (2012).Google Scholar
8.Fattah, A., Angeles, J. and Misra, A. K., “Dynamics of a 3-DOF Spatial Parallel Manipulator with Flexible Links,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, (1995) pp. 627–632.Google Scholar
9.Kasai, S. and Kojma, H., “Input-shaped link motion control of planar space robot equipped with flexible appendage,” Trans. Japan Soc. Aeronaut. Space Sci. 55 (4), 205–213 (2012).Google Scholar
10.Ulrich, S., Sasiadek, Z. J., and Barkana, I., “Modeling and direct adaptive control of a flexible-joint manipulator,” AIAA J. Guid. Control Dyn. 35 (1), 25–39 (2012).Google Scholar
11.Zarafshan, P., and Moosavian, S. A. A., “Cooperative object manipulation by a space robot with flexible appendages,” J. ISRN Aerosp. Eng. 2013, Article ID 965481, 1–14 (2013).Google Scholar
12.Zarafshanand, P.Moosavian, S. A. A., “Dynamics modelling and hybrid suppression control of space robots performing cooperative object manipulation,” J. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 18 (10), 2807–2824 (2013).Google Scholar
13.Zarafshan, P. and Moosavian, S. A. A., “Adaptive Hybrid Suppression Control of a Wheeled Mobile Robot with Active Flexible Members,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA 2011), Beijing, China, (2011), pp. 932–937.Google Scholar
14.Shabana, A. A., Dynamics of Multi-Body Systems, 3rd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2005), Chaps. 4–6.Google Scholar
15.Jain, R. and Pathak, P. M., “Trajectory planning of 2 DOF planar space robot without attitude controller,” World J. Modelling Simul. 4 (3), 196–204 (2008).Google Scholar
16.Suleman, A., “Multibody dynamics and nonlinear control of flexible space structures,” J. Vib. Control 10 (11), 1639–1661 (2004).Google Scholar
17.Zhang, X., Xu, W., Nair, S. S. and Chellabonia, V. S., “PDE modeling and control of a flexible two-link manipulator,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 13 (2), 301–312 (2005).Google Scholar
18.Zer, O. and Semercigil, S. E., “An event-based vibration control for a two-link flexible robotic arm: Numerical and experimental observations,” J. Sound Vib. 31 (3), 375–394 (2008).Google Scholar
19.Kilicaslana, S., Ozgörenb, M. K. and Iderb, S. K., “Hybrid force and motion control of robots with flexible links,” J. Mech. Mach. Theory 45 (1), 91–105 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Jiang, Z. H., “Impedance control of flexible robot arms with parametric uncertainties,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 42 (2), 113–133 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Moosavian, S., Ali, A., Rastegari, R. and Papadopoulos, E., “Multiple impedance control for space free-flying robots,” AIAA J. Guid. Control Dyn. 28 (5), 939–947 (2005).Google Scholar
22.Holmberg, R. and Khatib, O., “Development and control of a holonomic mobile robot for mobile manipulation tasks,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 19 (11), 1066–1074 (2002).Google Scholar
23.Moosavian, S., Ali, A. and Ashtiani, H. R., “Cooperation of robotic manipulators using non-model-based multiple impedance control,” J. Ind. Robot. 35 (6), 549–558 (2008).Google Scholar
24.Ge, X. and Liu, Y., “The attitude stability of a spacecraft with two flexible solar arrays in the gravitational field,” J. Chaos Solitons Fractals 37, 108–112 (2008).Google Scholar
25.Pratiher, B. and Dwivedy, S. K. “Non-linear dynamics of a flexible single link cartesian manipulator,” Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 42, 1062–1073 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Ambrosio, J. A. C., “Dynamics of structures undergoing gross motion and nonlinear deformations: a multi-body approach,” J. Comput. Struct. 59 (6), 1001–1012 (1996).Google Scholar
27.Schmitke, C. and McPhee, J., “Using linear graph theory and the principle of orthogonality to model multi-body, multi-domain systems,” J. Adv. Eng. Inform. 22 (2), 147–160 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Sadigh, M. J. and Misra, A. K., “Stabilizing Tethered Satellite Systems Using Space Manipulators,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, (1994) pp. 1546–1553.Google Scholar
29.Zohoor, H. and Khorsandijou, S. M., “Dynamic model of a flying manipulator with two highly flexible links,” J. Appl. Math. Modelling 32, 2117–2132 (2008).Google Scholar
30.Deu, J. F., Galucio, A. C. and Ohayon, R., “Dynamic responses of flexible-link mechanisms with passive/active damping treatment,” J. Comput. Struct. 86, 258–265 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Anderson, K. S. and Duan, S., “A hybrid parallelizable low-order algorithm systems for dynamics of multi-rigid-body part I, chain systems,” Math. Comput. Modell. 30, 193–215 (1999).Google Scholar
32.McKetta, J. J., “Coupling of Substructures for Dynamic Analyses: An Overview,” AIAA J. -1573, (2000).Google Scholar
33.Simeon, B., “On lagrange multipliers in flexible multi-body dynamics,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 195, 6993–7005 (2006).Google Scholar
34.Subudhi, B. and Morris, A. S., “Soft computing methods applied to the control of a flexible robot manipulator,” Appl. Soft Comput. 9, 149–158 (2009).Google Scholar
35.Zarafshan, P., Moosavian, S., and Ali, A., “Rigid-flexible interactive dynamics modelling approach,” J. Math. Comput. Modell. Dyn. Syst. 18 (2), 1–25 (2011).Google Scholar
36.Siegwart, R. and Nourbakhsh, I. R., Introduction to Autonomous Mobile Robots (Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi, India, 2005), Chaps. 1, 2, 3.Google Scholar
37.Piefort, V., “Finite element modelling of piezoelectric active structures,” Ph.D. Thesis, (Faculty of Applied Sciences, University of Libre De Bruxelles, 2001).Google Scholar
38.Aglietti, G. S., Langley, R. S., Gabriel, S. B. and Rogers, E., “A modeling technique for active control design studies with application to spacecraft microvibrations,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102 (4), 2158–2166 (1997).Google Scholar
39.Slotine, J. J. E. and Li, W., Applied Nonlinear Control (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1991), Chap. 6.Google Scholar
40.Moosavian, S., Ali, A. and Papadopoulos, E., “Explicit dynamics of space free-flyers with multiple manipulators via SPACEMAPLE,” J. Adv. Robot. 18 (2), 223–244 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41.Katti, V. R., Thyagarajan, K., Shankara, K. N. and Kiran Kumar, A. S., “Spacecraft technology,” J. Curr. Sci. 93 (12), 1715–1736 (2007).Google Scholar
42.Brennan, M. J., Bonito, J. G., Elliott, S. J., David, A. and Pinnington, R. J., “Experimental investigation of different actuator technologies for active vibration control,” J. Smart Mater. Struct. 8, 145–153 (1999).Google Scholar