A convex programming approach to the base placement of a 6-DOF articulated robot with a spherical wrist

  • Seung-Woo Son
  • Dong-Soo KwonEmail author


Robot manipulators are widely used in various areas of industrial factory automation. However, their base positioning is still achieved through trial-and-error methods based on the intuition and expertise of the engineer, even with the use of off-line programming software. Most previous studies do not provide on-line or on-site solutions suitable for practical applications because the nonlinearity and derivative complexity of the robot kinematics result in heavy computational burden and lengthy processing times. In this paper, we suggest a convex programming approach that uses time-efficient and reliable methods to solve the optimization problem in order to determine the base position of a six-degrees-of-freedom articulated robot with a spherical wrist. The proposed method uses convex optimization to accurately check the reachability of the given task without solving the inverse kinematics and to determine the feasible base position to satisfy singularity avoidance and spatial limitations. The feasibility of the proposed method is evaluated through various simulations, and the results show that not only the feasible base position but also the range of allowable base locations as an ellipsoidal volume can be provided within a few minutes without high computing performance or large resources.


Robot placement Robot positioning Off-line programming Robot cell design Convex optimization 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



  1. 1.
    Pan Z, Polden J, Larkin N, Van Duin S, Norrish J (2010) Recent progress on programming methods for industrial robots. In: 2010 41st international symposium on and 2010 6th german conference on robotics (ROBOTIK) Robotics (ISR), VDE, pp 1-8Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mitsi S, Bouzakis KD, Sagris D, Mansour G (2008) Determination of optimum robot base location considering discrete end-effector positions by means of hybrid genetic algorithm. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 24 (1):50–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nektarios A, Aspragathos NA (2010) Optimal location of a general position and orientation end-effector’s path relative to manipulator’s base, considering velocity performance. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 26(2):162–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nguyen QC, Kim Y, Kwon H (2017) Optimization of layout and path planning of surgical robotic system. Int J Control Autom Syst 15(1):375–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Spensieri D, Carlson JS, Bohlin R, Kressin J, Shi J (2016) Optimal robot placement for tasks execution. Procedia CIRP 44:395–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kamrani B, Berbyuk V, Wäppling D, Stickelmann U, Feng X (2009) Optimal robot placement using response surface method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 44(1-2):201–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang J, Fang X (2013) Response surface method based robotic cells layout optimization in small part assembly. In: 2013 44th international symposium on robotics (ISR), IEEE, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    dos Santos RR, Steffen V, Saramago SdFP (2010) Optimal task placement of a serial robot manipulator for manipulability and mechanical power optimization. Intell Inf Manag 2(09):512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Doan NCN, Lin W (2017) Optimal robot placement with consideration of redundancy problem for wrist-partitioned 6r articulated robots. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 48:233–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ren S, Xie Y, Yang X, Xu J, Wang G, Chen K (2017) A method for optimizing the base position of mobile painting manipulators. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 14(1):370–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yu Q, Wang G, Hua X, Zhang S, Song L, Zhang J, Chen K (2018) Base position optimization for mobile painting robot manipulators with multiple constraints. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 54:56–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Asokan T, Seet G, Lau M, Low E (2005) Optimum positioning of an underwater intervention robot to maximise workspace manipulability. Mechatronics 15(6):747–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zacharias F, Borst C, Hirzinger G (2007) Capturing robot workspace structure: representing robot capabilities. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, 2007. IROS 2007. IEEE, pp 3229–3236Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zacharias F, Borst C, Hirzinger G (2009a) Online generation of reachable grasps for dexterous manipulation using a representation of the reachable workspace. In: 2009 international conference on advanced robotics, 2009. ICAR. IEEE, pp 1-8Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zacharias F, Sepp W, Borst C, Hirzinger G (2009b) Using a model of the reachable workspace to position mobile manipulators for 3-d trajectories. In: 9th IEEE-RAS international conference on humanoid robots, 2009. Humanoids 2009. IEEE, pp 55–61Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Porges O, Lampariello R, Artigas J, Wedler A, Borst C, Roa MA (2015) Reachability and dexterity: Analysis and applications for space robotics. In: Proceedings of the workshop on advanced space technologies for robotics and automation (ASTRAGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vahrenkamp N, Asfour T, Dillmann R (2013) Robot placement based on reachability inversion. In: 2013 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). IEEE, pp 1970–1975Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dong J, Trinkle JC (2015) Orientation-based reachability map for robot base placement. In: 2015 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS). IEEE, pp 1488–1493Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Makhal A, Goins AK (2018) Reuleaux: Robot base placement by reachability analysis. In: 2018 2nd IEEE international conference on robotic computing (IRC). IEEE, pp 137–142Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Barber CB, Dobkin DP, Huhdanpaa H (1996) The quickhull algorithm for convex hulls. ACM Trans Math Software (TOMS) 22(4):469–483MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boyd S, Vandenberghe L (2004) Convex optimization. Cambridge university press, CambridgeCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Spong MW, Vidyasagar M (2008) Robot dynamics and control. Wiley, New YearGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yoshikawa T (1985) Manipulability of robotic mechanisms. Int J Robot Res 4(2):3–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grant M, Boyd S (2014) CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming, version 2.1.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyDaejeonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations