Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T22:08:36.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A control theory framework for performance evaluation of mobile manipulators

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2007

Katarzyna Zadarnowska  and
Krzysztof Tchoń
Katarzyna Zadarnowska*
Affiliation:
Institute of Computer Engineering, Control and Robotics, Wrocław University of Technology, 50-372 Wrocław, Poland
Krzysztof Tchoń
Affiliation:
Institute of Computer Engineering, Control and Robotics, Wrocław University of Technology, 50-372 Wrocław, Poland
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

We propose a new, control theoretic methodology for defining performance measures of mobile manipulators. As a guiding principle, we assume that the kinematics or the dynamics of a mobile manipulator are represented by the end point map of a control system with outputs, and that a locally controllable system yields nontrivial performance measures. In the paper, we focus on two categories of dynamic performance measures: the compliance measure and the admittance measure. In both these categories, the following local and global performance characteristics are introduced: the agility ellipsoid, the agility and mobility, the condition number and the distortion. The usefulness of new local measures is demonstrated on the example of determining optimal motion patterns of a wheeled mobile robot.

Keywords

Mobile manipulatorperformancecontrol systemGram matrixcomplianceadmittance
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 25 , Issue 6 , November 2007 , pp. 703 - 715
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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.Tchoń, K. and Jakubiak, J., “Endogenous configuration space approach to mobile manipulators: A derivation and performance assessment of Jacobian inverse kinematics algorithms,” Int. J. Control 76, 1387–1419, (2003).Google Scholar
2.Fruchard, M., Morin, P. and Samson, C., “A framework for the control of nonholonomic mobile manipulators,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 25, 745–780 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Liegeois, A., “Automatic supervisory control for the configuration and behavior of multibody mechanisms,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 7, 842–868, (1977).Google Scholar
4.Salisbury, J. K. and Craig, J. J., “Articulated hands: Force control and kinematic issues,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 1, 4–17, (1982).Google Scholar
5.Yoshikawa, T., “Manipulability of robotic mechanisms,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 4, 3–9, (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Klein, C. A. and Blaho, B. E., “Dexterity measures for the design and control of kinematically redundant manipulators,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 6, 72–82, (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Van den Doel, K. and Pai, D. K., “Performance measures for robot manipulators: A unified approach,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 15, 92–111, (1998).Google Scholar
8.Bowling, A. and Khatib, O., “The dynamic capability equations: a new tool for analyzing robotic manipulator performance,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21, 115–123, (2005).Google Scholar
9.Gosselin, C. and Angeles, J., “A global performance index for the kinematic optimization of robotic manipulators,” Trans. ASME 113, 220–226, (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Park, F. C. and Brockett, R. W., “Kinematic dexterity of robotic mechanisms,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 13, 1–15 (1994).Google Scholar
11.Gardner, J. F., Velinsky, S. A., “Kinematics of mobile manipulators and implications for design,” J. Robot. Syst. 17, 309–320, (2000).Google Scholar
12.Pamanes-Garcia, J. A., “A criterion for Optimal Placement of Robotic Manipulators,” Proceedings of the 6th IFAC International Symposium on Information Control Problems in Manufacturing Technology, Madrid, Spain (1987) pp. 183–187.Google Scholar
13.Angeles, J., “The Robust Design of Parallel Manipulators,” Proceedings of the 1st International Colloqium of Collaborative Research Centre 562, Braunschweig, Germany (2002) pp. 9–30.Google Scholar
14.Aspragathos, N. A. and Foussias, S., “Optimal location of a robot path when considering velocity performance,” Robotica 20, 139–147, (2002).Google Scholar
15.Yamamoto, Y. and Yun, X., “Coordinating locomotion and manipulation of a mobile manipulator,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Contrl 39, 1326–1332, (1994).Google Scholar
16.Yamamoto, Y. and Yun, X., “Unified Analysis of Mobility and Manipulability of Mobile Manipulators,” Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE International on Conference and Robotics Automation, Detroit, MI (1999) pp. 1200–1206.Google Scholar
17.Foulon, G., Fourquet, I. Y. and Renaud, M., “On Coordinated Tasks for Nonholonomic Mobile Manipulators,” Proceedings of the 5th IFAC Symposium on Robot Control, Nantes, France (1997) pp. 491–498.Google Scholar
18.Bayle, B., Fourquet, I. Y. and Renaud, M., “Manipulability Analysis for Mobile Manipulators,” Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Seoul, Korea (2001) pp. 1251–1256.Google Scholar
19.Yamamoto, Y. and Fukuda, S., “Trajectory Planning of Multiple Mobile Manipulators with Collision Avoidance Capability,” Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington, DC (2002) pp. 3565–3570.Google Scholar
20.Bayle, B., Fourquet, J.-Y. and Renaud, M., “Manipulability of wheeled mobile manipulators: Application to motion generation,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 22, 565–581, (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Tchoń, K. and Muszyński, R., “Instantaneous Kinematics and Dexterity of Mobile Manipulators,” Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Francisco, CA (2000) pp. 2493–2498.Google Scholar
22.Tchoń, K. and Zadarnowska, K., “Kinematic dexterity of mobile manipulators: An endogenous configuration space approach,” Robotica 21, 521–530, (2003).Google Scholar
23.Zadarnowska, K., “Dynamic Dexterity and Isotropy of Mobile Robots: An Endogenous Configuration Space Approach,” In: On Advances in Robot Kinematics (Lenarcic, J. and Galletti, C., eds.), (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2004) pp. 477–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Zadarnowska, K., Performance Measures of Mobile Manipulators Ph. D Dissertation (Wroclaw, Poland: Insitute of Engineering Cybernetics, Wrocław University of Technology, 2005) (in Polish).Google Scholar
25.Rugh, W. J., Linear System Theory (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1997).Google Scholar
26.Doty, K. L., Melchiorri, C., Schwartz, E.M. and Bonivento, C., “Robot manipulability,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 11, 462–468, (1995).Google Scholar
27.Doty, K. L., Melchiorri, C. and Bonivento, C., “A theory of generalized inverses applied to robotics,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 12, 1–19, (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Nakamura, Y., Advanced Robotics: Redundancy and Optimization (Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1991).Google Scholar
29.Sontag, E. D., Mathematical Control Theory (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990.Google Scholar
30.Marsden, J. E. and Hughes, T. J. R., Mathematical Foundations of Elasticity (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1983).Google Scholar
31.Chirikjian, G. S. and Kyatkin, A. B., Engineering Applications of Noncomutative Harmonic Analysis (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2001.Google Scholar
32.Gelfand, I. M. and Fomin, S. V., Calculus of Variations (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1963).Google Scholar
33.Kabała, M., Muszyński, R. and Wnuk, M., “Singularity Robust, Dynamic Linearization Control Algorithm for MK Mobile Robot” In: Robot Control 2003 (Duleba, I. and Sasiadek, J. Z. eds.) (Elsevier, Oxford, 2003) pp. 557–562.Google Scholar
34.Caracciolo, L., De Luca, A. and Iannitti, S., “Trajectory Tracking Control of a Four-Wheel Differentially Driven Mobile Robot,” Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Detroit, MI, (1999) pp. 2632–2638.Google Scholar
35.D‘Andrea-Novel, B., Campion, G. and Bastin, G., “Control of wheeled mobile robots not satisfying ideal velocity constraints: A singular perturbation approach,” Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 5, 243–267, (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36.Kiencke, U. and Nielsen, L., Automotive Control Systems (Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2000.Google Scholar
37.Zadarnowska, K., A Control Theory Framework for Performance Evaluation of Wheeled Mobile Robots Subjected to Slipping: Compliance Performance Measures Report of the Institute of Computer Engineering, Control and Robotics (Wrocław University of Technology, Wroclew, Poland: 2006).Google Scholar
38.Sussmann, H. J., “Lie Bracketts, Real Analyticity and Geometric Control,” In:Differential Geometric Control Theory (Brockett, R. W., Millman, R. S. and Sussmann, H. J. eds.) (Birkhäuser, Boston, 1983) pp. 1–116.Google Scholar