Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using metaheuristics for optimum design of 3R orthogonal manipulators considering their topology

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Several studies have investigated the properties of the workspace of opened chain robotics with the purpose of emphasizing their geometric and kinematic characteristics to devise analytical algorithms and procedures for their design. The workspace of a manipulator robot is considered of great interest from a theoretical and practical viewpoint. In this paper, the workspace topology is defined by the number of kinematic solutions, the number of cusps and nodes that appear on the workspace boundary. In this work, a multiobjective optimization problem is formulated with the aim of obtaining the optimal geometric parameters of robot, which must obey the topology specified by the designer. The maximum workspace volume, the maximum system stiffness and the optimum dexterity are considered as multiobjective functions. In addition, the optimization problem is subject to penalties that control the topology, forcing it to occupy a certain portion of the workspace. In this study, a computational tool, called Improved Differential Evolution with parallel processing, is developed using the concept of evolution shuffled sets. Moreover, three different metaheuristics are applied to obtain the problem solution. Five robotic applications are presented to show the efficiency of the proposed methodology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abdel-Malek K, Yeh HJ, Othman S (2000) Understanding Voids in the Workspace of Serial Robot Manipulators, Proceedings Pf 23rd ASME, Design Engineering Technical Conference, Baltimore, Maryland

  2. Angeles J (ed) (2003) Fundamentals of robotics mechanical systems, ed 2. Theory, Methods and Algorithmas, Springer

  3. Baili M (2004) Analyse et classification de manipulateur 3R axes orthogonaux. Thèse de Doctorat - University of Nantes, France

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bandyopadhyay S, Saha S, Maulik U, Deb K (2008) A simulated annealing-based multiobjective optimization algorithm: AMOSA, IEEE trans. on Evolutionary Computation

  5. Bergamaschi PR, Nogueira AC, Saramago SFP (2006) Design and optimization of 3R manipulators using the workspace features. Appl Math Comput Elsevier 172(1):439–463

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bergamaschi PR, Saramago SFP, Coelho LS (2008) Comparative study of SQP and metaheuristics for robotic manipulator design. Appl Numer Math 58:1396–1412

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Bujok P (2011) Parallel models of adaptive differential evolution based on migration process. Aplimat J Appl Math 4:2

  8. Ceccarelli M (1996) A formulation for the workspace boundary of general N-revolute manipulators. IFToMM J Mech Mach Theory 31(5):637–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ceccarelli M, Lanni C (2004) A multi-objective optimum design of general 3R manipulators for prescribed workspace limits. Mech Mach Theory 39:119–132

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Ceccarelli M (2004) Fundamentals of mechanics of robotic manipulation. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Chong CK, Mohamad MS, Deris S, Shamsir MS, W, Choon YW, Chai LE (2012) Improved differential evolution algorithm for parameter estimation to improve the production of biochemical pathway. Int J Interact Multimed Artif Intell Spec Issue Distr Comput Artif Intell 1: 22–29

  12. Company O, Pierrot F, Fauroux JC (2005) A method for modeling analytical stiffness of a lower mobility parallel manipulator. In: Proceeding Of IEEE ICRA: Int. Conf. On Robotics and Automation, Barcelona 18–25 Apr 2005

  13. Corvez S, Rouillier F (2002) Using computer algebra tools to classify serial manipulators. Proceeding Fourth International Workshop on Automated Deduction in Geometry, Lins

    Google Scholar 

  14. Das S, Konar A, Chakraborty UK (2005) Two improved differential evolution schemes for faster global search, In GECCO’05. ACM, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  15. Deblaise D, Hernot X, Maurine P (2006) A systematic analytical method for PKM stiffness matrix calculation. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation

  16. Duan QA, Gupta VK, Sorooshian S (1993) A parallel differential evolution algorithm. J Optim Theory Appl 76:3

  17. El-Khasawneh BS, Ferreira PM (1999) Computation of stiffness and stiffness bounds for parallel link manipulator. Int. J. Mach Tools Manuf 39(2):321–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Houck CR, Joinez JA, Kay MG (1985) A genetic algorithms for function optimization: a matlab implementation. NCSO-IE Technical Report, University of North Caroline, USA

    Google Scholar 

  19. Deb K (2001) Multiobjective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. Khalil W, Dombre E (1999) Modlisation Identification et Commande des Robots, 2me dition revue et augmente. Herms, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kwedlo W, Bandurski K (2006) A parallel differential evolution algorithm. In: Parallel Computing in Electrical Engineering, PAR ELEC

  22. Lee E, Mavroidis C (2002) Solving the geometric design problem of spatial 3R robot manipulators using polynomial homotopy continuation. J Mech Des 124:652–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Li R, Xu L, Shi XW, Zhanh N, Lv ZQ (2011) Improved differential evolution strategy for antenna array pattern synthesis problems. Prog Electromagn Res 113:429–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mehablia A (2010) An improved differential evolution algorithm and its application in reaction kinetic parameters estimation. In: European Conference of Chemical Engineering

  25. Nocedal J, Wright SJ (2000) Numerical optimization, Springer Series in Operations Research

  26. Oliveira LS, Saramago, SFP (2010) Multiobjective optimization techniques applied to engineering problems. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng XXXII: 94–104

  27. Ottaviano E, Ceccarelli M, Husty M (2007) Workspace topologies of industrial 3R manipulators. Int J Adv Robot Syst 4(3):355–364

    Google Scholar 

  28. Paul RP, Stevenson CN (1983) Kinematics of robot wrists. Int J Robot Res 2(1):31–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rivin EI (1999) Stiffness and damping in mechanical design. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  30. Saramago SFP, Ottaviano E, Ceccarelli M (2002) A characterization of the workspace boundary of three-revolute manipulators, design engineering technical conferences (DETC-02). In: Proceedings of DETC-02, ASME 2002, Montreal, vol 1, pp 34342–34352

  31. Tasoulis DK, Pavlidis NG, Plagianakos VP, Vrahatis MN (2004) Parallel differential evolution. In: Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 2023–2029

  32. Vinogradov IB, Kobrinski AE, Stepanenko YE, Tives LT (1971) Details of kinematics of manipulators with the method of volumes (in Russian). Mekhanika Mashin 27–28:5–16

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wenger P, Omri ElJ (1996) Changing posture for cuspidal robot manipulators. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation, Philadelphia, pp 3173–3178

  34. Yang DC, Lai ZC (1985) On the conditioning of robotic manipulators-service angle. ASME J Mech Transm Auto Des 107:262–270

  35. Yoshikawa T (1985) Manipulability of robotic mechanisms. Int J Robot Res 4(2):3–9

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG) for the financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Uberlândia, 2160 João Naves de Ávila, Campus Santa Mônica, CEP 38400-902, Uberlândia, Brazil

    M. A. L. Brandão & G. T. S. Oliveira

  2. College of Mathematics, Federal University of Uberlândia, 2160 João Naves de Ávila, Campus Santa Mônica, CEP 38400-902, Uberlândia, Brazil

    S. F. P. Saramago

  3. College of Mathematics, Federal University of Uberlândia, 1600, 20 street, Tup, CEP 38304-402, Ituiutaba, Brazil

    J. L. Doricio

Authors
  1. M. A. L. Brandão
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. T. S. Oliveira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. F. P. Saramago
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. L. Doricio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. A. L. Brandão.

Additional information

Technical Editor: Glauco A. de P. Caurin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brandão, M.A.L., Oliveira, G.T.S., Saramago, S.F.P. et al. Using metaheuristics for optimum design of 3R orthogonal manipulators considering their topology. J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 37, 1701–1718 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-014-0298-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-014-0298-9

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation