Romansy 16 pp 97-104 | Cite as

Dexterity Analysis of Planar Parallel Manipulators

  • Geoffrey Pond
  • Juan A. Carretero
Part of the CISM Courses and Lectures book series (CISM, volume 487)


Currently, two methods exist for obtaining constrained, dimensionally homogeneous Jacobian matrices for planar manipulators. These two methods differ in that a set of Cartesian velocities is expressed in either the moving or global frame which is then used to represent the end effector velocity. Therefore, the resulting Jacobian matrices are different depending on the method used. However, both methods formulate the Jacobian matrices based on an arbitrary choice of six potential Cartesian variables to define the dimensions of the task space.

This paper will obtain all six possible Jacobian matrices based on the six choices of available task space variables in the global frame. As an example, the Jacobian matrices of the 3-RRR planar parallel mechanism are formulated. These are then tested by comparing the resulting actuator velocities for a defined end effector path and velocity profile.

Each of the six Jacobian matrices is numerically unique and therefore have different singular values and condition numbers. Dexterity measures focusing on only one of the six matrices are potentially bias. Therefore, four proposed strategies for measuring the manipulator dexterity are then discussed. These are based on the singular values and condition number of the six constrained, dimensionally homogenous Jacobian matrices instead of a single matrix.


Condition Number Jacobian Matrix Parallel Manipulator Jacobian Matrice Task Space 
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. J. Angeles. Fundamentals of Robotic Mechanical Systems. Springer-Verlag, 2003.Google Scholar
  2. M. Arsenault and R. Boudreau. The synthesis of three-degree-of-freedom planar parallel manipulators with revolute joints (3-RRR) for an optimal singularity-free workspace. Journal of Robotic Systems, 21(5):259–274, 2004.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. M. Badescu and C. Mavroidis. Workspace optimization of 3-legged UPU and UPS parallel platforms with joint constraints. Journal of Mechanical Design, 126(2):291–300, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. C. M. Gosselin. Kinematic Analysis, Optimization and Programming of Parallel Robotic Manipualtors. Ph.D. Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. C. M. Gosselin. The optimum design of robotic manipulators using dexterity indices. Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 9(4):213–226, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. C. M. Gosselin and J. Angeles. The optimum kinematic design of a spherical three-degree-of-freedom parallel manipulator. Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design, 111:202–207, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. S. G. Kim and J. Ryu. New dimensionally homogeneous Jacobian matrix formulation by three end-effector points for optimal design of parallel manipulators. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 19(4):731–737, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. G. Pond and J. A. Carretero. Formulating Jacobian matrices for the dexterity analysis of parallel manipulators. Submitted to Mechanism and Machine Theory, 2005.Google Scholar
  9. L.-W. Tsai. Robot Analysis: The Mechanics of Serial and Parallel Manipulators. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© CISM, Udine 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geoffrey Pond
    • 1
  • Juan A. Carretero
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of New BrunswickCanada

Personalised recommendations