Small-angle perturbation method for moving platform orientation to avoid singularity of asymmetrical 3-RRR planner parallel manipulator

  • Yin GaoEmail author
  • Ke Chen
  • Hong Gao
  • Ping Xiao
  • Lei Wang
Technical Paper


To overcome the weakness of the present methods of singularity avoidance for 3-RRR planar parallel manipulator (PPM), a new method of avoiding singular points on planed paths in workspace via orientation perturbation to moving platforms is proposed. First, an inverse kinematics model of 3-RRR PPM is built. A discriminant matrix of type II singularity is specified and the mapping between determinant values of the matrix and points in workspace of 3-RRR PPM is defined as a singularity surface. Then, the planned path is regarded as a directrix and intersecting line between cylindrical surfaces (its generating line is parallel to the z-axis) and the singularity surface is defined as a singularity curve corresponding to a planned path. By determining the critical perturbation value of the moving platform’s orientation angle, the maximum value of the singularity curve corresponding to the planned path is no larger than 0 or its minimum value is no smaller than 0. Therefore, singular points on the planned path are avoided by changing the moving platform’s orientation angle without changing the planned path. Moreover, a numerical realization method is given; example and experiment verification indicates that singular points in the planned path can be avoided when perturbation to the moving platform’s orientation angle is no larger than 0.1745 rad. Therefore, the proposed method lays a solid foundation for singularity-free kinematics control based on inverse solutions.


3-RRR PPM Working mode Workspace Singularity avoidance Perturbation to the moving platform’s orientation 



The authors would like to thank the financial support of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51305001) and the Major Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Provincial Universities (Grant No. KJ2017ZD14) for their financial support.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.


  1. 1.
    Hu P, Li Y, Zhao Q (2010) Development of micro-force sensor based on 3-RRR parallel mechanism. Appl Mech Mater 36:57–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kuan YY, Lu TF (2009) Kinetostatic modeling of 3-RRR compliant micro-motion stages with flexure hinges. Mech Mach Theory 44(6):1156–1175MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Farajtabar M, Daniali HM, Varedi SM (2015) Pick and place trajectory planning of planar 3-RRR parallel manipulator in the presence of joint clearance. Robotica 35(2):241–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Varedi-Koulaei SM, Daniali HM, Farajtabar M et al (2016) Reducing the undesirable effects of joints clearance on the behavior of the planar 3-RRR parallel manipulators. Nonlinear Dyn 86(2):1007–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Šalinić S, Nikolić A (2018) A new pseudo-rigid-body model approach for modeling the quasi-static response of planar flexure-hinge mechanisms. Mech Mach Theory 124:150–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhan Z, Zhang X, Jian Z et al (2018) Error modelling and motion reliability analysis of a planar parallel manipulator with multiple uncertainties. Mech Mach Theory 124:55–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Banke B, Dhiraj K, Chandan J et al (2016) A geometric approach for the workspace analysis of two symmetric planar parallel manipulators. Robotica 34(4):738–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ganesh M, Banke B, Singh RV et al (2017) Determination of the closed-form workspace area expression and dimensional optimization of planar parallel manipulators. Robotica 35(10):2056–2075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Florentin B, Dumitru L, Ioan D (2014) A workspace characterization of the 3-RRR planar parallel mechanism. Appl Mech Mater 658:563–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marc A, Roger B (2006) Synthesis of planar parallel mechanisms while considering workspace, dexterity, stiffness and singularity avoidance. J Mech Des 128(1):69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Flavio F, Ron PP (2009) Singularity analysis of planar parallel manipulators based on forward kinematic solutions. Mech Mach Theory 44(7):1386–1399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Florentin B, Cezar D, Dumitru L (2014) Problems regarding singularities analysis of a 3-RRR parallel mechanism. Appl Mech Mater 658:569–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kucuk S (2013) Energy minimization for 3-RRR fully planar parallel manipulator using particle swarm optimization. Mech Mach Theory 62(4):129–149MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sung-Hoon C, Lasky Ty A, Velinsky Steven A (2007) Kinematically-redundant variations of the 3-RRR mechanism and local optimization-based singularity avoidance. Mech Based Des Struct Mach 35(1):15–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cha S-H, Lasky TA, Velinsky SA (2009) Determination of the kinematically redundant active prismatic joint variable ranges of a planar parallel mechanism for singularity-free trajectories. Mech Mach Theory 44(5):1032–1044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liu S, Qiu ZC, Zhang XM (2017) Singularity and path-planning with the working mode conversion of a 3-DOF 3-RRR planar parallel manipulator. Mech Mach Theory 107:166–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Daniel RR, Pamanes Garcia JA, Wenger P (2016) Trajectory planning of kinematically redundant parallel manipulators by using multiple working modes. Mech Mach Theory 98:216–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ebrahimi I, Carretero JA, Boudreau R (2008) A family of kinematically redundant planar parallel manipulators. J Mech Des 130(6):876–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhu Z, Dou R (2009) Optimum design of 2-DOF parallel manipulators with actuation redundancy. Mechatronics 19(5):761–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fontes JVDC, Santos JC, Silva MMD (2018) Numerical and experimental evaluation of the dynamic performance of kinematically redundant parallel manipulators. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 40(3):142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fontes JV, Silva MMD (2016) On the dynamic performance of parallel kinematic manipulators with actuation and kinematic redundancies. Mech Mach Theory 103:148–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li RQ, Dai JS (2009) Crank conditions and rotatability of 3-RRR planar parallel mechanisms. Sci China Ser E: Technol Sci 52(12):3601–3612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Abhishek A, Chaman N, Sandipan B (2016) Dynamic singularity avoidance for parallel manipulators using a task-priority based control scheme. Mech Mach Theory 96:107–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bohigas O, Henderson ME, Ros L, Manubens M, Porta JM (2013) Planning singularity-free paths on closed-chain manipulators. IEEE Trans Robot 29(4):888–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Conkur ES, Buckingham R (1997) Clarifying the definition of redundancy as used in robotics. Robotica 15(5):583–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nasa C, Bandyopadhyay S (2011) Trajectory-tracking control of a planar 3-RRR parallel manipulator with singularity avoidance. In: 13th world congress in mechanism and machine science, Guanajuato, Mexico, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gosselin C, Angeles J (1990) Singularity analysis of closed-loop kinematic chains. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 6(3):281–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Can E, Stachel H (2014) A planar parallel 3-RRR robot with synchronously driven cranks. Mech Mach Theory 79:29–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringHefei University of TechnologyHefeiChina
  2. 2.School of Mechanical and Automotive EngineeringAnhui Polytechnic UniversityWuhuChina
  3. 3.School of EngineeringUniversity of BridgeportBridgeportUSA

Personalised recommendations