Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T18:20:32.624Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An iterative method for generating kinematically feasible interference-free robot trajectories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

R. O. Buchai  and
D. B. Cherchas
R. O. Buchai
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, N6A 5B9 (Canada).
D. B. Cherchas
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 1W5 (Canada).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper proposes a method for finding an optimal geometric robot trajectory to perform a specified point-to-point motion without violating joint displacement limits or interference constraints. The problem is discretised, and a quantitative measure of interference is proposed. Constraint violations are represented by exterior penalty functions, and the problem is solved by iteratively improving an initial estimate of the trajectory. This is accomplished by numerically minimizing a cost functional using a modified Newton–Raphson method.

Keywords

Robot trajectoriesInterference-freeIterative methodFeasible kinematics.
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , April 1989 , pp. 119 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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.Lozano-Perez, T., “Spatial Planning: A Configuration Space Approach” IEEE Transactions on Computers C-32, No. 2, 108–120 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Red, W.E. & Kim, K.H., “Dynamic Direct Subspaces for Robot Path Planning” Robotica 5, 29–36 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Fournier, A. & Khalil, W., “Coordination and Reconfiguration of Mechanical Redundant Systems” Proceedings of the Int. Conf. Cybernetics Soc. pp. 227–231 (1977).Google Scholar
4.Konstantinov, M.S., Markov, M.D. & Nechev, D.N., “Kinematic Control of Redundant Manipulators”, Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Industrial Robots, Tokyo 561–568 (1981).Google Scholar
5.Konstantinov, M.S., Patarinski, S.P., Zamanov, V.B. & Nechev, D.N., “A Contribution to the Inverse Kinematic Problem for Industrial Robots” Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Industrial Robots, Paris459–467 (1982).Google Scholar
6.Yoshikawa, T., 1984, “Analysis and Control of Robot Manipulators with Redundancy” Robotics Research, The First International Symposium (Brady, M., & Paul, R., Eds.) (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1984) pp. 735–747.Google Scholar
7.Kircanski, M. & Vukobratovic, M., “Trajectory Planning for Redundant Manipulators in the Presence of Obstacles” 5th CISM 43–50 (1984).Google Scholar
8.Maciejewski, A.A. & Klein, C.A., “Obstacle Avoidance for Kinematically Redundant Manipulators in Dynamically Varying Environments” Intern. J. Robotics Research 4, No. 3, 109–117 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Ozaki, H. & Mohri, A., “Planning of Collision-Free Movements of a Manipulator with Dynamic Constraints” Robotica 4, 163–169 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Vukobratovic, M. & Kircanski, M., “Method for Optimal Synthesis of Manipulator Robot Trajectories” ASME J. Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control 104, No. 2, 188–193 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Vukobratovic, M. & Kircanski, M., Scientific Fundamentals of Robotics 3: Kinematics and Trajectory Synthesis of Manipulation Robots (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986) pp. 180–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Nakamura, Y. & Hanafusa, H., “Optimal Redundancy Control of Robot Manipulators”, Intern. J. Robotics Research 6, No. 1, 32–42 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Uchiyama, M., Shimizu, K. & Hakomori, K., “Performance Evaluation of Manipulators using the Jacobian and its Application to Trajectory Planning” Robotics Research: The Second International Symposium (Hanafusa, H. & Inoue, H., Eds.) (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1985) pp. 447–454.Google Scholar
14.Gilbert, E.G. & Johnson, D.W., “Distance Functions and their Application to Robot Path Planning in the Presence of Obstacles” IEEE J. Robotics and Automation RA-1, No. 1, 21–30 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Buchal, R.O., “Determination of Robot Trajectories Satisfying Joint Limit and Interference Constraints Using an Optimization Method”, Ph.D. Thesis, University of British Columbia, Department of Mechanical Engineering (1987).Google Scholar
16.Buchal, R.O., Cherchas, D.B., Duncan, J.P. & Sassani, F., “Development of an Automatic Programming System for a Welding Robot—Phase 2: Techniques and Software for Interference Detection and Path Planning”, Computer Aided Manufacturing and Robotics Laboratory (CAMROL) Report 86−1 (University of British Columbia, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 1986).Google Scholar