Advertisement

A Control Method for Joint Torque Minimization of Redundant Manipulators Handling Large External Forces

  • Jon WoolfreyEmail author
  • Wenjie Lu
  • Dikai Liu
Open Access
Article
  • 140 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, a control method is developed for minimizing joint torque on a redundant manipulator where an external force acts on the end-effector. Using null space control, the redundant task is designed to minimize the torque required to oppose the external force, and reduce the dynamic torque. Furthermore, the joint motion can be weighted to factor in physical constraints such as joint limits, collision avoidance, etc. Conventional methods for joint torque minimization only consider the internal dynamics of the manipulator. If external forces acting on the end-effector are inadvertently implemented in to these control methods this could lead to joint configurations that amplify the resulting joint torque. The proposed control method is verified through two different case studies. The first case study involves simulation of high-pressure blasting. The second is a simulation of a manipulator lifting and moving a heavy object. The results show that the proposed control method reduces overall joint torque compared to conventional methods. Furthermore, the joint torque is minimized such that there is potential for a manipulator to execute certain tasks beyond its nominal payload capacity.

Keywords

Null space control Dynamic control Optimization Robotic manipulator Redundancy Torque minimization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Research supported in part by the Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Project (LP150100935) and the Roads and Maritime Services NSW.

References

  1. 1.
    Bhangale, P., Agrawal, V., Saha, S.: Attribute based specification, comparison and selection of a robot. Proceedings of the 11th National Conference on Machines and Mechanisms, pp. 131–138 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yoshikawa, T.: Analysis and control of robot manipulators with redundancy. Robotics Research: The First International Symposium, Cambridge, pp. 735–747 (1984)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu, D.K., Dissayanake, G., Manamperi, P., Brooks, P., Paul, G., Webb, S., Kirchner, N., Chotiprayanakul, P., Kwok, N.M., Ren, T.: A robotic system for steel bridge maintenance: Research challenges and system design, Proceedings of the Australasian Conference on Robotics and Automation (ACRA) (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Denso Wave Incorporated, 6-Axis robots VM series specifications (Online), (http://www.denso-wave.com/en/robot/product/five-six/vm__Spec.html) Accessed 12th Feb 2018
  5. 5.
    Paul, G., Webb, S.S., Liu, D., Dissanayake, G.: A robotic system for steel bridge maintenance: Field testing, Proceedings of the Australasian Conference on Robotics and Automation (ACRA) (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Manamperi, P., Brooke, P., Kaluarachchi, W., Peters, G., Ho, A., Lie, S., To, A., Payl, G., Rushton-Smith, D., Webb, S., Liu, D.K.: Robotic Grit-blasting: Engineering Challenges. Sustainable Bridges: The Thread of Society, pp. 321–330 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu, D.K., Dissanayake, G., Miro, J., Waldron, K.: Infrastructure robotics: Research challenges and opportunities. Int. Symp. Autom. Robot. Constr. 31, 1 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kirchner, N., Paul, G., Liu, D.K.: Bridge maintenance robotic arm: mechanical technique to reduce the nozzle force of a sandblasting rig. J. Wuhan Univ. Technol. 28(Suppl. 2006-083), 12–18 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Woolfrey, J., Liu, D.K., Carmichael, M.: Kinematic control of an autonomous underwater Vehicle-Manipulator system using autoregressive predictive of vehicle motion and model predictive control. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 4591–4596 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hollerbach, J., Suh, K.: Redundancy resolution of manipulators through torque optimization. IEEE J. Robot. Autom. 3(4), 308–316 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nedungadi, A., Kazerouinian, K.: A local solution with global characteristics for the joint torque optimization of a redundant manipulator. Adv. Robot. 6(5), 631–645 (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kang, H., Freeman, R.: Joint torque optimization of redundant manipulators via the null space damping method. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 520–525 (1992)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chung, C., Lee, B., Kim, M., Lee, C.: Torque optimizing control with singularity-robustness for kinematically redundant robots. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 28(3), 231–258 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tang, W., Wang, J.: Two recurrent neural networks for local joint torque optimization of kinematically redundant manipulators. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. Part B (Cybern.) 30(1), 120–128 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang, Y., Ge, S., Lee, T.: A unified quadratic-programming-based dynamical system approach to joint torque optimization of physically constrained redundant manipulators. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. Part B (Cybern.) 34(5), 2126–2132 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang, Y., Guo, D., Ma, S.: Different-level simultaneous minimization of joint-velocity and joint-torque for redundant robot manipulators. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 72(3-4), 301–324 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Flacco, F., De Luca, A.: Discrete-time redundancy resolution at the velocity level with acceleration/torque optimization properties. Robot. Auton. Syst. 70, 191–201 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bussmann, K., Dietrich, A., Ott, C.: Whole-Body Impedance control for a planetary rover with robotic arm: theory, Control Design, and Experimental Validation. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 910–917 (2018)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Luo, L., Yuan, C., Yan, R.J., Yuan, Q., Wu, J., Shin, K.S.: Trajectory planning for energy minimization of robotic manipulators using the lagrange interpolation method. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. 16(5), 911–917 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chan, T., Dubey, R.: A weighted least-norm solution based scheme for avoiding joint limits for redundant joint manipulators. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 11(2), 286–292 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dariush, B., Hammam, G.B., Orin, D.: Constrained Resolved Acceleration Control for Humanoid Robots. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 710–717 (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen, P., Shan, C., Xiang, J., Wei, W.: Moving Obstacle Avoidance for Redundant Manipulator via Weighted Least Norm Method, 27th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC), pp. 6181–6186 (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wampler, C.: Manipulator inverse kinematic solutions based on vector formulations and Damped-Least-Sqaures methods. IEEE Tran. Syst. Man. Cybern. SMC-16 1, 93–101 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chiaverini, S., Egeland, O., Kanestrom, R.: Achieving user-defined accuracy with damped least-squares inverse kinematics. Fifth International Conference on Advanced Robotics, pp. 672–677 (1991)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hsu, P., Hauser, J., Sastry, S.: Dynamic control of redundant manipulators. J. Robot. Syst. 6(2), 133–148 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rethinkrobotics.com, Sawyer Technical Specifications, (Online) (http://www.rethinkrobotics.com/sawyer/tech-specs/), Accessed 5th Feb 2018
  27. 27.
    Igus.com, Robolink WR, (Online), (https://www.igus.com/wpck/16962/N16_10_11) , Accessed 5th Feb 2018
  28. 28.
    Choi, H.R., Chung, W.K., Youm, Y.: Stiffness analysis and control of redundant manipulators IEEE. International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 689–695 (1994)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ang, M.H., Andeen, G.B.: Specifying and achieving passive compliance based on manipulator structure. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 11(4), 504–515 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li, Y., Kao, L.: Stiffness control on redundant manipulators: a unique and kinematically consistent solution. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 3956–3961 (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ajoudani, A., Tsagarakis, N.G., Bicchi, A., Ajoudani, A., Tsagarakis, N.G.: Bicchi, On the role of robot configuration in Cartesian stiffness control”, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 1010–1016 (2015)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gasparri, G.M., Gabiani, F., Garabini, M., Pallottino, L., Catalon, M., Grioli, G., Perischin, R., Bicchi, A.: Robust optimization of system compliance for physical interaction in uncertain scenarios. IEEE-RAS 16th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), pp. 911–918 (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Technology SydneyUltimoAustralia

Personalised recommendations