Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:55:04.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Dynamic multi-priority control in redundant robotic systems1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2013

Hamid Sadeghian*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology (IUT), Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran PRISMA Lab, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e Tecnologie dell'Informazione, Università di Napoli Federico II, Italy
Luigi Villani
Affiliation:
PRISMA Lab, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e Tecnologie dell'Informazione, Università di Napoli Federico II, Italy
Mehdi Keshmiri
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology (IUT), Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
Bruno Siciliano
Affiliation:
PRISMA Lab, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e Tecnologie dell'Informazione, Università di Napoli Federico II, Italy
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: h.sadeghian@me.iut.ac.ir

Summary

This paper presents a dynamic-level control algorithm to meet simultaneously multiple desired tasks based on allocated priorities for redundant robotic systems. It is shown that this algorithm can be treated as a general framework to achieve control over the whole body of the robot. The control law is an extension of the well-known acceleration-based control to the redundant robots, and considers also possible interactions with the environment occurring at any point of the robot body. The stability of this algorithm is shown and some of the previously developed results are formulated using this approach. To handle the interaction on robot body, null space impedance control is developed within the multi-priority framework. The effectiveness of the proposed approaches is evaluated by means of computer simulation.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

A preliminary version of this paper appeared in the proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2011.

References

1.Sadeghian, H., Villani, L., Keshmiri, M. and Siciliano, B., “Multi-Priority Control in Redundant Robotic Systems,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (San Francisco, CA, 2011) pp. 37523757.Google Scholar
2.Nakamura, Y., Hanafusa, H. and Yoshikawa, T., “Task-priority based redundancy control of robot manipulators,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 6 (2), 315 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Nakamura, Y., Advanced Robotics Redundancy and Optimization (Addison-Wesley, Boston MA, 1991).Google Scholar
4.Siciliano, B. and Slotine, J. J., “A General Framework for Managing Multiple Tasks in Highly Redundant Robotic Systems,” In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Advanced Robotics (Pisa, Italy, 1991) pp. 12111216.Google Scholar
5.Nakamura, Y. and Hanafusa, H., “Inverse kinematic solutions with singularity robustness for robot manipulator control,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 108, 163171 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Wampler, C. W., “Manipulator inverse kinematic solutions based on vector formulations and damped least-squares methods,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 16, 93101 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Nenchev, D. and Sotirov, Z. M., “Dynamic Task-Priority Allocation for Kinematically Redundant Robotic Mechanisms,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (Munich, 1994) pp. 518524.Google Scholar
8.Chiaverini, S., “Singularity-robust task priority redundancy resolution for real-time kinematic control of robot manipulators,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 13, 398410 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Antonelli, G., “Stability Analysis for Prioritized Closed-Loop Inverse Kinematic Algorithms for Redundant Robotic Systems,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Pasadena, CA, USA, 2008) pp. 19931998.Google Scholar
10.De Santis, A., Pierro, P. and Siciliano, B., “The Virtual End-Effectors Approach for Human–Robot Interaction,” In: Advances in Robot Kinematics (Lenarcic, J. and Roth, B., eds.) (Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2006) pp. 133144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Sadeghian, H., Keshmiri, M., Villani, L. and Siciliano, B., “Priority Oriented Adaptive Control of Kinematically Redundant Manipulators,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA, 2012) pp. 293298.Google Scholar
12.De Luca, A., Oriolo, G. and Siciliano, B., “Robot redundancy resolution at the acceleration level,” Lab. Robot. Autom. 4, 97106 (1992).Google Scholar
13.Hsu, P., Hauser, J. and Sastry, S., “Dynamic control of redundant manipulators,” J. Robot. Syst. 6, 133148 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.O'Neil, K. A., “Divergence of linear acceleration-based redundancy resolution schemes,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 18 (4), 625631 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Nakanishi, J., Cory, R, Peters, M. J. and Schaal, S., “Operational space control: A theoretical and empirical comparison,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 27, 737757 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Khatib, O., Sentis, L., Park, J. H. and Warren, J., “Whole-body dynamic behavior and control of human-like robots,” Int. J. Humanoid Robot. 1, 2943 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Sentis, L. and Khatib, O., “Prioritized Multi-Objective Dynamics and Control of Robots in Human Environments,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Santa Monica, CA, USA, 2004) pp. 764780.Google Scholar
18.Khatib, O., “A unified approach for motion and force control of robot manipulators: The operational space formulation,” IEEE J. Robot. Autom. 3, 11151120 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Peters, J., Mistry, M., Udwadia, F., Nakanishi, J. and Schaal, S., “A unifying framework for robot control with redundant DOFs,” Auton. Robots 24, 112 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Platt, R., Abdallah, M. and Wampler, C., “Multi-priority Cartesian Impedance Control,” Robotics Science and Systems VI (online proceedings) (Zaragoza, Spain, 2010).Google Scholar
21.Diftler, M., Mehling, J., Abdallah, M., Radford, N., Bridgwater, L., Sanders, A., Askew, S., Linn, M., Yamokoski, J., Permenter, F., Hargrave, B., Platt, R., Savely, R. and Ambrose, R., “Robonaut 2 the First Humanoid Robot in Space,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Shanghai, China, 2011) pp. 21782183.Google Scholar
22.Platt, R. Jr., Abdallah, M. and Wampler, C., “Multiple Priority Impedance Control,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Shanghai, China, 2011) pp. 60336038.Google Scholar
23.Ben-Israel, A. and Greville, T. N. E., Generalized Inverses: Theory and Applications, 2nd ed. (Springer, New York, 2002).Google Scholar
24.Park, J., Choi, Y., Chung, W. K. and Youm, Y., “Multiple Tasks Kinematics Using Weighted Pseudo-Inverse for Kinematically Redundant Manipulators,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Seoul, Korea, 2001) pp. 40414047.Google Scholar
25.Antonelli, G., Arrichiello, F. and Chiaverini, S., “The null-space-based behavioral control for autonomous robotic systems,” Intell. Serv. Robot. 1, 2739 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Baerloclier, P. and Boulic, R., “Task-Priority Formulations for the Kinematic Control of Highly Redundant Articulated Structures,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (Victoria, BC, CANADA, 1998) pp. 323329.Google Scholar
27.Caccavale, F., Chiaverini, S. and Siciliano, B., “Second-order kinematic control of robot manipulators with Jacobian damped least-squares inverse: Theory and experiments,” IEEE itASME Trans. Mechatronics 2 (3), 188194 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Sadeghian, H., Keshmiri, M., Villani, L. and Siciliano, B., “Null-Space Impedance Control with Disturbance Observer,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (Vilamoura, Algarve, Portugal, 2012) pp. 27952800.Google Scholar
29.Sadeghian, H., Ficuciello, F., Villani, L. and Keshmiri, M., “Global Impedance Control of Dual-Arm Manipulation for Safe Interaction,” In: Proceedings of the 10th IFAC Symposium on Robot Control (Dubrovnik, Croatia, 2012) pp. 767772.Google Scholar
30.Albu-Schaffer, A., Ott, C., Frese, U. and Hirzinger, G., “Cartesian Impedance Control of Redundant Robots; Recent Results with the DLR-Light-Weight Arms,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Taipei, Taiwan, 2003) pp. 37043709.Google Scholar
31.Oh, Y., Chung, W. and Youm, Y., “Extended impedance control of redundant manipulators based on weighted decomposition of joint space,” J. Robot. Syst. 15 (5), 231258 (1998).3.0.CO;2-P>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Ott, C., Kugi, A. and Nakamura, Y., “Resolving the Problem of Non-Integrability of Null-Space Velocities for Compliance Control of Redundant Manipulators by Using Semi-Definite Lyapunov Functions,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Pasadena, CA, USA, 2008) pp. 19992004.Google Scholar
33.Caccavale, F., Natale, C., Siciliano, B. and Villani, L., “Resolved acceleration control of robot manipulators: A critical review with experiments,” Robotica 16, 565573 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Nemec, B. and Zlajpah, L., “Null-space velocity control with dynamically consistent pseudo-inverse,” Robotica 18, 513518 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35.Featherstone, R. and Khatib, O., “Load independence of the dynamically consistent inverse of the Jacobian matrix,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 16, 168170 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar