Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T09:43:52.133Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Industrial compliant robot bases in interaction tasks: a force tracking algorithm with coupled dynamics compensation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2016

Loris Roveda ,
Nicola Pedrocchi ,
Federico Vicentini  and
Lorenzo Molinari Tosatti
Loris Roveda*
Affiliation:
Institute of Industrial Technologies and Automation (ITIA) of Italian National Research Council (CNR), via Bassini, 15 - 20133 Milan, Italy. E-mails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Nicola Pedrocchi
Affiliation:
Institute of Industrial Technologies and Automation (ITIA) of Italian National Research Council (CNR), via Bassini, 15 - 20133 Milan, Italy. E-mails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Federico Vicentini
Affiliation:
Institute of Industrial Technologies and Automation (ITIA) of Italian National Research Council (CNR), via Bassini, 15 - 20133 Milan, Italy. E-mails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Lorenzo Molinari Tosatti
Affiliation:
Institute of Industrial Technologies and Automation (ITIA) of Italian National Research Council (CNR), via Bassini, 15 - 20133 Milan, Italy. E-mails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Light-weight manipulators are used in industrial tasks mounted on mobile platforms to improve flexibility. However, such mountings introduce compliance affecting the tasks. This work deals with such scenarios by designing a controller that also takes into account compliant environments. The controller allows the tracking of a target force using the estimation of the environment stiffness (EKF) and the estimation of the base position (KF), compensating the robot base deformation. The closed-loop stability has been analyzed. Observers and the control law have been validated in experiments. An assembly task is considered with a standard industrial non-actuated mobile platform. Control laws with and without base compensation are compared.

Keywords

Interaction controlModel based controlCompliant robot base compensationImpedance controlIndustrial robotics
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 35 , Issue 8 , August 2017 , pp. 1732 - 1746
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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. Colgate, E. and Hogan, N., “The Interaction of Robots with Passive Environments: Application to Force Feedback Control,” In: Advanced Robotics: 1989 (Waldron, Kenneth J., ed.) (Springer, 1989) pp. 465–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Fasse, E. D. and Hogan, N., “Control of Physical Contact and Dynamic Interaction,” In: Robotics Research (Georges Giralt Gerhard Hirzinger Prof. Dr.-Ing.) (Springer, 1996) pp. 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Salisbury, J. K., “Active Stiffness Control of a Manipulator in Cartesian Coordinates,” Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control including the Symposium on Adaptive Processes, IEEE, Stanford, CA, USA, vol. 19 (Dec. 1980) pp. 95–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Mason, M. T., “Compliance and force control for computer controlled manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 11 (6), 418–432 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Raibert, M. H. and Craig, J. J., “Hybrid position/force control of manipulators,” J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 103 (2), 126–133 (1981).Google Scholar
6. Yoshikawa, T., “Dynamic hybrid position/force control of robot manipulators–description of hand constraints and calculation of joint driving force,” IEEE J. Robot. Autom, 3 (5), 386–392 (1987).Google Scholar
7. Khatib, O., “A unified approach for motion and force control of robot manipulators: The operational space formulation,” IEEE J. Robot. Autom. 3 (1), 43–53 (1987).Google Scholar
8. Hogan, N., “Impedance Control: An Approach to Manipulation,” American Control Conference, 1984 (Jun. 1984) pp. 304–313.Google Scholar
9. Colgate, E. and Hogan, N., “An Analysis of Contact Instability in Terms of Passive Physical Equivalents,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE (1989) pp. 404–409.Google Scholar
10. Roveda, L., Vicentini, F. and Molinari Tosatti, L., “Deformation-Tracking Impedance Control in Interaction with Uncertain Environments,” Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), IEEE (2013) pp. 1992–1997.Google Scholar
11. Volpe, R. and Khosla, P., “The equivalence of second-order impedance control and proportional gain explicit force control,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 14 (6), 574–589 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Villani, L., Canudas de Wit, C. and Brogliato, B., “An exponentially stable adaptive control for force and position tracking of robot manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 44 (4), 798–802 (1999).Google Scholar
13. Seraji, H. and Colbaugh, R., “Adaptive Force-Based Impedance Control,” Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems' 93, IROS'93, Yokohama, Japan, vol. 3, IEEE (1993) pp. 1537–1544.Google Scholar
14. Seraji, H. and Colbaugh, R., “Force tracking in impedance control,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 16 (1), 97–117 (1997).Google Scholar
15. Jung, S., Hsia, T. and Bonitz, R., “Force tracking impedance control of robot manipulators under unknown environment,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 12 (3), 474–483 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Lee, K. and Buss, M., “Force tracking impedance control with variable target stiffness,” Int. Fed. Autom. Control 16 (1), 6751–6756 (2000).Google Scholar
17. Oh, S., Woo, H. and Kong, K., “Frequency-shaped impedance control for safe human–robot interaction in reference tracking application,” IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 19.6, 1907–1916 (2014).Google Scholar
18. Torres, M. and Dubowsky, S., “Path-Planning for Elastically Constrained Space Manipulator Systems,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE International Conference, vol. 1 (1993) pp. 812–817.Google Scholar
19. Wronka, C. and Dunnigan, M., “Derivation and analysis of a dynamic model of a robotic manipulator on a moving base,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 59 (10), 758–769 (2011).Google Scholar
20. Yoshida, K., Nenchev, D. and Uchiyama, M., “Moving Base Robotics and Reaction Management Control,” In: Robotics Research (Giralt, G. and Hirzinger, G., eds.) (Springer, London, 2000) pp. 100–109.Google Scholar
21. Lew, J. Y. and Moon, S.-M., “A simple active damping control for compliant base manipulators,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 6 (3), 305–310 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Lew, J., “Contact Control of Flexible Micro/Macro-Manipulators,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 1997, Albuquerque, New Mexico, vol. 4 (1997) pp. 2850–2855.Google Scholar
23. Ott, C., Albu-Schaffer, A. and Hirzinger, G., “A Cartesian Compliance Controller for a Manipulator Mounted on a Flexible Structure,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE/IROS International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, IEEE, RSJ, Beijing (2006) pp. 4502–4508.Google Scholar
24. Wongratanaphisan, T. and Cole, M., “Robust impedance control of a flexible structure mounted manipulator performing contact tasks,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 25 (2), 445–451 (2009).Google Scholar
25. Albu-Schäffer, A., Ott, C. and Hirzinger, G., “A unified passivity-based control framework for position, torque and impedance control of flexible joint robots,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 26 (1), 23–39 (2007).Google Scholar
26. Roveda, L., Model Based Compliance Shaping Control of Light-Weight Manipulator in Hard-Contact Industrial Applications, Ph.D. dissertation (Politecnico di Milano, Mechanical Engineering Department, Italy, 2015).Google Scholar
27. Flügge, W., Viscoelasticity (Springer, New York, 1975).Google Scholar
28. Kraus, P. R. and Kumar, V., “Compliant Contact Models for Rigid Body Collisions,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE, Albuquerque, New Mexico, vol. 2, 1997, pp. 1382–1387.Google Scholar
29. Vukobratović, M. K. and Potkonjak, V., “Dynamics of contact tasks in robotics. Part I: general model of robot interacting with environment,” Mech. Mach. Theory 34 (6), 923–942 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Nenchev, D. N., Yoshida, K., Vichitkulsawat, P. and Uchiyama, M., “Reaction null-space control of flexible structure mounted manipulator systems,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 15 (6), 1011–1023 (1999).Google Scholar
31. Weber, M., Ma, O. and Sharf, I., “Identification of Contact Dynamics Model Parameters from Constrained Robotic Operations,” Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. Montreal, Canada, ASME (2002) pp. 1289–1298.Google Scholar
32. Haykin, S. S. et al., Kalman Filtering and Neural Networks (Wiley Online Library, New Jersey, 2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Bendat, J. S. and Piersol, A. G., Random Data: Analysis and Measurement Procedures, vol. 729 (John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, 2011).Google Scholar
34. Ghoreishy, M. H. R., “A state of the art review of the finite element modelling of rolling tyres,” Iran. Polym. J. 17 (8), 571–597 (2008).Google Scholar