Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T18:10:34.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An approach to autonomous robot assembly

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

Daniel E. Koditschek
Daniel E. Koditschek
Affiliation:
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, EELS Department, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109(USA)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Assembly problems require that a robot with fewer actuated degrees of freedom manipulate an environment containing a greater number of unactuated degrees of freedom. From the perspective of control theory, these problems hold considerable interest because they are characterized by the presence of non-holonomic constraints that preclude the possibility of feedback stabilization. In this sense they necessitate the introduction of a hierarchical controller. This paper explores these issues in the simple instance when all of the pieces to be assembled are constrained to lie on a line. A hierarchical controller is devised for this problem and is shown to be correct: the closed loop system achieves any desired final assembly from all initial configurations that lie in its connected component in configuration space; the generated sequence of motions never causes collisions between two pieces. Further examination of this approach interprets the controller's mediation of conflicting subgoals as promoting an M-player game amongst the pieces to be assembled.

Keywords

Autonomous assemblyRobotsHierarchical controllerClosed loop system
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , March 1994 , pp. 137 - 155
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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.Baillieul, J. and Martin, D.P., “Resolution of kinematic redundancy” Robotics (American Mathematical Society, 1990).Google Scholar
2.Whitcomb, Louis L. and Koditschek, Daniel E., “Automatic assembly planning and control via potential functions” Proc. IEEE International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systene Osaka, Japan, 11. 1991. IEEE (1991) pp. 55–60.Google Scholar
3.Koditschek, Daniel E., “Assembly: Another source of nonholonomy in robotics” Proc. American Control Conference, MA, Boston, 06 1991. American Society of Control Engineers (1991) pp. 1627–1632.Google Scholar
4.Alami, Rachid, Simeon, Thierry and Laumond, Jean-Paul, “A geometrical approach to planning manipulation tasks. The case of discrete placements and grasps”. In (Miura, H. and Arimoto, S., editors) Robotics Research 453–463 (MIT Press, 1990).Google Scholar
5.Khatib, Oussama, “Real time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots” The Int. Robotics, J.Research 5(1) 90–99 (spring 1986).Google Scholar
6.Koditschek, Daniel E. and Rimon, Elon, “Robot navigation functions on manifolds with boundary” Advances in Applied Mathematics 11 412–442 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Koditschek, Daniel E., “The control of natural motion in mechanical systems” Dynamic, ASME J.Systems, Measurement, and Control 113(4) 547–551 (12. 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Bühler, M., Koditschek, D.E. and Kindlmann, P.J., “A family of robot control strategies for intermittent dynamical environments IEEE Control Systems Magazine 10 16–22 (02. 1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Bühler, M., Koditschek, D.E. and Kindlmann, P.J., “Planning and Control of Robotic Juggling Tasks” In (Miura, H. and Arimoto, S., editors) Fifth International Symposium on Robotics Research (MIT Press, 1990) pp. 321–332.Google Scholar
10.Hoperoft, J.E., Schwartz, J.T. and Shair, M., “On the complexity of motion planning for multiple independent objects: Pspace hardness of the “Warehouseman's Problem” Robotics Report 14 (N.Y.U. Courant Institute Department of Computer Science, New York, 1984).Google Scholar
11.Lozano-Pérez, T. et al., “A robot systems that recognizes, plans, and manipulates” Proceedings IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Aut., (1987) pp. 843–849.Google Scholar
12.Gottschlich, Susan N. and Kak, Avinash C., “A dynamic approach to high-precision parts mating” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 19(4) 797–810 (07, 1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Hutchinson, Seth A. and Kak, Avinash C., “Planning sensing strategies in robot work cell with multi-sensor capabilities” IEEE J. Robotics and Automation 5(6) 765–783 (12., 1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Mello, L.S. Homer de and Sanderson, A.C., “Representations of mechanical assembly sequences” IEEE J. Robotics and Automation 7(2) 211–227 (04., 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Mello, L.S. Homer de and Sanderson, A.C., “A correct and complete algorithm for generation of mechanical assembly sequences” IEEE J. Robotics and Automation, 7(2) 228–240 (04., 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Latombe, Jean-Claude, Robot Motion Planning (Kluwer, Boston, MA, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Murray, R. and Sastry, S., “Grasping and manipulation using multifingered robot hands” Robotics, Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics Vol. 41, Providence, RI, 1990 American Mathematical Society (1990).Google Scholar
18.Krishnaprasad, P.S., Yang, R. and Dayawansa, W., “Control problems on principle bundles and nonholonomic mechanics” Proc. IEEE Conf. Dec. Contr. Brighton, UK, Dec., 1991 IEEE (1991) pp. 1133–1138.Google Scholar
19.Dorst, Leo, Mandhyan, Indur and Trovato, Karen, “The geometrical representation of path planning problems” Technical Report MS-90–054 (Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff Manor, 07, 1990).Google Scholar
20.Samson, C. and Ait-Abderrahim, K., “Feedback control of a nonholonomic wheeled cart in Cartesian space” Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robt. Aut., Apr., 1991 (1991) pp. 1136–1141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Bloch, Anthony M. and McClamroch, N. Harris, “Control of mechanical systems with classical non-holonomic constraints” Proc. 28th IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control, Tampa, FL, 12., 1989 (1989) pp. 201–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Daniel, D.E. “Globally stable closed loops imply autonomous behavior” Proc. Fifth IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control, Philadelphia, PA, 09, 1990 pp. 651–656.Google Scholar
23.Koditschek, Daniel E., “Robot control systems, In (Shapiro, Stuart, editor) Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1987) pp. 902–923.Google Scholar
24.Rimon, E. and Koditschek, D.E., “Exact robot navigation in topologically simple but geometrically complicated environments” Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Cincinnati, OH, 05, 1990 (1990) pp. 1937–1943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Rimon, E. and Koditschek, D.E., “The construction of analytic díffeomorphisms for exact robot navigation on star worlds” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 327(1) 71–115 (09., 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Kawski, Matthias, “Stabilization of nonlinear systems in the plane” Systems and Control Letters 12 169–1775 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Whitney, D.E., “Force feedback control of manipulator fine motions” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. 98 91–97 (06 1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Lozano-Perez, Tomás, Mason, Matthew T. and Taylor, Russell H., “Automatic synthesis of fine-motion strategies for robots” The Int. J. Robotics Research 3(1) 3–23 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Neimark, Ju. I. and Fufaev, N.A., Dynamics of Nonholonomic Systems Vol. 33 Translations of Mathematical Monographs (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1972).Google Scholar
30.Sussmann, H.J., “A general theorem on local controllability” SIAM J. on Control and Optimization 25(1) 158–194 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Sontag, E.D., Mathematical Control Theory (Springer-Verlag, NY, 1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Brockett, Roger W., “Asymptotic stability and feedback stabilization” In (Brockett, Roger W., Millman, Richard S. and Sussman, Hector J., editors) Differential Geometric Control Theory, chapter 3 (Birkhäuser, 1983) pp. 181–191.Google Scholar
33.Reyhanoglu, M. and McClamroch, N.H., “Reorientation of space multibody systems maintaining zero angular momentum” AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conf. New Orleans, La. AIAA 1330–1340 (1991).Google Scholar
34.Zabczyk, J., “Some comments on stabilizability” Appl Math. Optim. 19 1–10 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35.Lasalle, J.P., The Stability of Dynamical Systems, volume 25 of Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics. (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36.Li, Shu and Basar, Tamer, “Distributed algorithms for the computation of noncooperative equilibria” Automatica 23(4) 523–533 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37.Forsythe, G.E. and Wasow, W.R., Finite Difference Methods for Partial Differential Equations (John Wiley, New York, 1960).Google Scholar
38.Luenberger, David G., Linear and Nonlinear Programming (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1984).Google Scholar
39.Rockafellar, R. Tyrrell, Convex Analysis (Princeton U.P., Princeton, NJ, 1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40.Khatib, O. and Maitre, J.-F. Le, “Dynamic control of manipulators operating in a complex environment” Proceedings Third International CISM-IFToMM Symposium, Udine, Italy, 09., 1978 (1978) pp. 267–282.Google Scholar
41.Miyazaki, F., Arimoto, S., Takegaki, M. and Maeda, Y., “Sensory feedback based on the artificial potential for robot manipulators Proceedings 9th IFAC, volume 6. Budapest, Hungary, 1984) (1984) pp. 2381–2386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42.Andrews, J.R. and Hogan, N., “Impedance control as a framework for implementing obstacle avoidance in a manipulator” In (Hardt, David E. and Book, Wayne J., editors) Control of Manufacturing and Robotic Systems (A.S.M.E., Boston, MA, 1983) pp. 243–251.Google Scholar
43.Pavlov, V.V. and Voronin, A.N., “The method of potential functions for coding constraints of the external space in an intelligent mobile robot” Soviet Automatic Control 6 45–51 (1984).Google Scholar
44.Rimon, E. and Koditschek, D.E., “Exact robot navigation using cost functions: The case of spherical boundaries in E”. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation Philadelphia, PA, 04, 1988 (1988) pp. 1791–1796.Google Scholar
45.Salisbury, Kenneth, Eberman, Brian, Levin, Michael and Townsend, William, “The design and control of an experimental whole-arm manipulator” Proc. Fifth Int. Symp. Rob. Res., Tokyo, Japan, 09., 1989 (1989) pp. 261–269.Google Scholar
46.Bühler, M. and Koditschek, D.E., “A prelude to juggling” 26th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control Los Angeles, CA., 12., 1987 (1987)(paper available from authors - not in proceedings).Google Scholar
47.Bühler, M., Koditschek, D.E. and Kindlmann, P.J., “A Simple Juggling Robot: Theory and Experimentation In (Hayward, V. and Khatib, O., editors) Experimental Robotics I (Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1990) pp. 35–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48.Bühler, M. and Koditschek, D.E., “From stable to chaotic juggling” Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Cincinnati, OH, 05, 1990 (1990) pp. 1976–1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar