Advertisement

Cybernics pp 41-64 | Cite as

Robot Motion Control for Physical Assistance

  • Yasuhisa Hasegawa
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter introduces some motion control algorithms for a mechanical system that has a redundant degree of freedom. Human motions are intelligently and dexterously controlled by sensory and motor nerve systems based on sophisticated sensory organs, intelligent environment recognition, task planning, and redundant and soft mechanical structures. An assistive robot, such as an exoskeleton robot, should be capable of achieving the same level of motions as humans when it compensates for some of the impaired motions of the patient using the device. Human sensorial and motional properties, including a musculoskeletal system, will be introduced in Chap.  4. This chapter focuses on motion control of the redundant mechanical structure, such as an arm system, and the whole body of the exoskeleton. Some basic and advanced control algorithms for a redundant mechanical structure of a robot are introduced to make the physically assistive robot useful and comfortable.

Keywords

Redundant degree of freedom Control algorithm Assistive robot 

References

  1. 1.
    Morasso P (1981) Spatial control of arm movements. Exp Brain Res 42:223–227Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abend W, Bizzi E, Morasso P (1982) Human arm trajectory formation. Brain 105:331–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hogan N (1984) An organizing principle for a class of voluntary movements. J Neurosci 4(11):2745–2754Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Flash T, Hogan N (1985) The coordination of arm movement: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model. J Neurosci 5(7):1688–1703Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Uno Y, Kawato M, Suzuki R (1989) Formation and control of optimal trajectory in human multijoint arm movement. Minimum torque-change model. Biol Cybern 61(2):89–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yoshikawa T (1985) Manipulability of robotic mechanisms. J Robot Res 4(2):3–9CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khatib O (1987) A unified approach for motion and force control of robot manipulators: the operational space formulation. IEEE J Robot Autom RA-3(1):43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hollerback JM, Suh KC (1987) Redundancy resolution of manipulators through torque optimization. IEEE J Robot Autom RA-3(4):308–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Arimoto S, Hashiguchi H, Sekimoto M, Ozawa R (2005) Generation of natural motions for redundant multi-joint systems: a differential-geometric approach based upon the principle of least actions. J Field Robot 22(11):583–605Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grizzle JW, Abba G, Plestan F (2001) Asymptotically stable walking for biped robots: analysis via systems with impulse effects. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 46(1):51–64CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Westervelt ER, Buche G, Grizzle J (2004) Experimental validation of a framework for the design of controllers that induce stable walking in planar bipeds. Int J Robot Res 23(6):559–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Doi M, Hasegawa Y, Fukuda T (2004) Passive dynamic control of bipedal walking. In: Proceedings of IEEE-RAS/RSJ international conference on humanoid robots. Los Angeles, CA, USA, pp 3049–3054Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Doi M, Matsuno T, Hasegawa Y, Fukuda T (2006) Proposal of smooth biped walking control by means of heel-off motion. In: Proceedings of the 2006 I.E. international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA2006). Orlando, Florida, USA, pp 1591–1596Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Doi M, Hasegawa Y, Matsuno T, Fukuda T (2007) Stability proof of biped walking control based on point-contact. Proceedings of the 2007 I.E. international conference on robotics and automation. Roma, Italy, pp 3204–3209Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Doi M, Kojima S, Matsuno T, Fukuda T, Hasegawa Y (2006) Analytical design method of Brachiation controller on the irregular ladder. In: Proceedings of the first IEEE/RAS-EMBS international conference on biomedical robotics and biomechatronics, (BIOROB 2006). Pisa, Tuscany, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Asano Y, Doi M, Hasegawa Y, Matsuno T, Fukuda T (2007) Quadruped walking by joint-interlocking control based on the assumption of point-contact: comparison between pace gait and crawl gait based on the energy consumption. Trans JSME C73(725):230–236 (in Japanese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hemami H, Wyman BF (1979) Modeling and control of constrained dynamic systems with application to biped locomotion in the frontal plane. IEEE Trans Automat Contr AC-24(4):526–535CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Miura H, Shimoyama I (1984) Dynamic walking of a biped. Int J Robot Res 3(2):60–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sano A, Furusho J (1991) Realization of dynamic quadruped locomotion in pace gait by controlling walking cycle. International symposium on experimental robotics. Toulouse, France, pp 491–502Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kuo AD (1999) Stabilization of lateral motion in passive dynamic walking. Int J Robot Res 18(9):917–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Doi M, Hasegawa Y, Fukuda T (2005) 3D dynamic walking based on the inverted pendulum model with two degree of underactuation. In: Proceedings of 2005 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, pp 2788–2793Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Aoyama T, Hasegawa Y, Sekiyama K, Fukuda T (2009) Stabilizing and direction control of efficient 3-D biped walking based on PDAC. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 14(6):712–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Information and SystemsUniversity of TsukubaTsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations