Advertisement

Homogeneous Rigid Body Mechanics with Elastic Coupling

  • David Hestenes
  • Ernest D. Fasse

Abstract

Geometric algebra is used in an essential way to provide a coordinate-free approach to Euclidean geometry and rigid body mechanics that fully integrates rotational and translational dynamics. Euclidean points are given a homogeneous representation that avoids designating one of them as an origin of coordinates and enables direct computation of geometric relations. Finite displacements of rigid bodies are associated naturally with screw displacements generated by bivectors and represented by twistors that combine multiplicatively. Classical screw theory is incorporated in an invariant formulation that is less ambiguous, easier to interpret geometrically, and manifestly more efficient in symbolic computation. The potential energy of an arbitrary elastic coupling is given an invariant form that promises significant simplifications in practical applications.

Keywords

Rigid Body Euclidean Geometry Geometric Algebra Homogeneous Method Elastic Coupling 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Brockett, R. and J. Loncaric (1986). The geometry of compliance programming. In C. Byrnes and A. Lindquist (eds.),Theory and Applications of Nonlinear Control Systems, North Holland, pp. 35–42.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Ciblak, N. and H. Lipkin (1998). Synthesis of stiffnesses by springs. InProc. ASME Design Engineering Technical ConI., Number DETC98-MECH-5879, CD-ROM.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Fasse, E. (2000, July 9–12). Some applications of screw theory to lumped parameter modeling of visco-elastically coupled rigid bodies. InProc. of A Symposium Commemorating the Legacy, Works, and Life of Sir Robert Stawell Ball (Ball 2000), Cambridge University, Trinity College.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Fasse, E. (2002). Application of screw theory to lumped parameter modelling of elastically coupled rigid bodies,J. of Mechanical Engineering Science, Part C, in press.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Fasse, E. and P. Breedveld (1998). Modelling of elastically coupled bodies: Part I: General theory and geometric potential function method,ASME J. of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control 120, 496–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Fasse, E. and S. Zhang (1999). Lumped-parameter modelling of spatial compliance using a twist-based potential function. InProc. of the ASME Dynamic Systems and Control Dividion, Vol. 15, pp. 779–786.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Fasse, E., S. Zhang and A. Arabyan (2000). Modelling of elastically coupled bodies using a twist-based potential function.ASME J. of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Griffis, M. and J. Duffy (1991). Kinestatic control: A-novel theory for simultaneously regulating force and displacement,ASME J. of Mechanical Design 113, 508–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Hestenes, D. (1966).Space-Time Algebra, Gordon & Breach, New York.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Hestenes, D. (1974). Proper particle mechanics,J. Math. Phys. 15, 1768–1777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Hestenes, D. (1986).New Foundations for Classical Mechanics. D. Reidel, Dordrecht/Boston, 2nd edition, 1999.MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Hestenes, D. (1991). The design of linear algebra and geometry,Acta Applicandae Mathematicae 23, 65–93.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Hestenes, D. (2001). Old Wine in New Bottles: A new algebraic framework for computational geometry. In E. Bayro-Corrochano & G. Sobczyk (eds.),Advances in Geometric Algebra with Applications in Science and Engineering, Birkhäuser, Boston, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Hestenes, D. and G. Sobczyk. (1984).Clifford Algebra to Geometric Calculus, A Unified Language for Mathematics and Physics, G. Reidel Publ. Co., Dordrecht/Boston.MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Huang, S. and J. Schimmels (1998). Achieving an arbitrary spatial stiffness with springs connected in parallel,ASME J. of Mechanical Design 120, 520–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Loncarić, J. (1987). Normal forms of stiffness and compliance matrices,IEEE Trans, on Robotics and Automation 9, 567–572.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Maschke, B. (1996). Elements on the modelling of mechanical systems. In C. Melchiorri and A. Tomambé (eds.),Modelling and Control of Mechanisms and Robots, World Scientific Publishing, pp. 1–31.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Patterson, T. and H. Lipkin (1993). Structure of robot compliance,ASME J. of Mechanical Design 115, 576–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Zefran, M. and V. Kumar (1999). A geometric approach to the study of the Cartesian stiffness matrix,ASME J. of Mechanical Design, accepted for publication.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Hestenes
  • Ernest D. Fasse

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations