Compliant Motion Control for Safe Human Robot Interaction

  • Rehan M. Ahmed
  • Anani V. Ananiev
  • Ivan G. Kalaykov
Part of the Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences book series (LNCIS, volume 396)


Robots have recently been foreseen to work side by side and share workspace with humans in assisting them in tasks that include physical human-robot (HR) interaction. The physical contact with human tasks under uncertainty has to be performed in a stable and safe manner [6]. However, current industrial robot manipulators are still very far from HR coexisting environments, because of their unreliable safety, rigidity and heavy structure. Besides this, the industrial norms separate the two spaces occupied by a human and a robot by means of physical fence or wall [9]. Therefore, the success of such physical HR interaction is possible if the robot is enabled to handle this interaction in a smart way to prevent injuries and damages.


Motion Task Actuation Mechanism Tool Center Point Compliant Motion Share Workspace 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bicchi, A., Tonietti, G.: Fast and soft arm tactics: Dealing with the safety-performance trade off in robot arm design and control. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine 11(2), 22–23 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vanderborght, B.: Dynamic stabilization of the biped lucy powered by actuators with controllable stiffness. Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vanderbrought, B., Verrelst, B., Ham, R.V., Damme, M.V., Lefeber, D., Beyl, B.P.: Exploiting natural dynamics to reduce energy consumption by controlling the compliance of soft actuators. International J. Robot. Res. 25(4), 343–358 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chew, C.M., Hong, G.S., Zhou, W.: Series damper actuator: A novel force/torque control actuator. Humanoids (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cannata, G., Maggiali, M., Metta, G., Sandini, G.: An embedded artificial skin for humanoid robots. In: IEEE International conference on Multisensor fusion and integration for intelligent systems, Seoul, Korea, pp. 434–438 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lenarcic, J.: Should robot copy human. In: International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems, Budapest, Hungary (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Danesh, M., Sheikhleslam, F., Keshmiri, M.: An adaptive manipulator controller based on force and parameter estimation. IEICE Transactions Fundamentals E89-A, 1–100 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim, M., Yun, S.K., Kang, S.: Safe design and validation control of a manipulator with passive compliant joints. In: 2nd Int. Conf. on Autonomous robots and agents, Palmerston North, New Zealand (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nagenborg, M., Capurro, R., Weber, J., Pingel, C.: Ethical regulations on robotics in europe. AI and Society, Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Communication 22, 349–366 (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reed, M.: Development of an improved dissipative passive haptic display. Master’s Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Takesue, N., Furusho, J., Sakaguchi, M.: Improvement of response properties of mr-fluid actuator by torque feedback control. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation, Seoul, Korea (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carelli, R., Oliva, E., Soria, C., Nasisi, O.: Combined force and visual control for an industrial robot, vol. 22, pp. 163–171. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ahmed, R.M., Ananiev, A., Kalaykov, I.: Modeling of magneto rheological fluid actuator enabling safe human robot interaction. In: 13th IEEE International conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haddadin, S., Albu-Schäffer, A., Hirzinger, G.: Safety evaluation of physical human robot interaction via crash testing. In: Robotics: Science and Systems Conference (RSS2007), Atlanta, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haddadin, S., Albu-Schäffer, A., Luca, A., Hirzinger, G.: Collision detection and reaction: A contribution to safe physical human-robot interaction. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, Nice, France, vol. 25(4), pp. 343–358 (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fukuda, T., Michelini, R., Potkontak, V., Tzafestas, S., Valavanis, K., Vukobratovic, M.: How far away is the artificial man. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lefebvre, T., Xiao, J., Bruyninckx, H., Gersem, G.D.: Active compliant motion: a survey. Advanced Robotics, VSP and Robotics Society of Japan 19(5), 479–499 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Morita, T., Iwata, H., Sugano, S.: Development of human symbiotic robot: Wendy. In: IEEE International conference on Robotics and Automation pp. 3183–3188 (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer London 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rehan M. Ahmed
    • 1
  • Anani V. Ananiev
    • 1
  • Ivan G. Kalaykov
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Applied Autonomous Sensor Systems (AASS), School of Science and TechnologyÖrebro UniversityÖrebroSweden

Personalised recommendations