Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:03:01.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adjusting the parameters of the mechanical impedance for velocity, impact and force control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2011

Ranko Zotovic Stanisic  and
Ángel Valera Fernández
Ranko Zotovic Stanisic*
Affiliation:
Department of Systems Engineering and Control, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, P.O. Box. 22012, E-46071 Valencia, Spain.
Ángel Valera Fernández
Affiliation:
Department of Systems Engineering and Control, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, P.O. Box. 22012, E-46071 Valencia, Spain.
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: rzotovic@isa.upv.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This work is dedicated to the analysis of the application of active impedance control for the realisation of three objectives simultaneously: velocity regulation in free motion, impact attenuation and finally force tracking. At first, a brief analysis of active impedance control is made, deducing the value of each parameter in order to achieve the three objectives. It is demonstrated that the system may be made overdamped with the adequate selection of the parameters if the characteristics of the environment are known, avoiding high overshoots of force during the impact. The second and most important contribution of this work is an additional measure for impact control in the case when the characteristics of the environment are unknown. It consists in switching among different values of the parameters of the impedance in order to dissipate faster the energy of the system, limiting the peaks of force and avoiding losses of contact. The optimal switching criteria are deduced for every parameter in order to dissipate the energy of the system as fast as possible. The results are verified in simulation.

Keywords

Robot controlImpactForce controlImpedance controlSwitching
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , July 2012 , pp. 583 - 597
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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.)

References

1.Brogliato, B., Nonsmooth Mechanics (Springer Verlag, London, 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Brach, R., Mechanical Impact Dynamics: Rigid Body Collisions (John Wiley & Sons Publishers, New York, 1991).Google Scholar
3.Brogliato, B., Nicolescu, S. I. and Orhant, P., “On the control of finite dimensional mechanical systems with unilateral constraints,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 42 (2), 200–215 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Volpe, R. and Khosla, P., “A theoretical and experimental investigation of impact control for manipulators,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 12 (4), 351–365 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Hyde, J. and Cutkosky, M., “Controlling contact transitions,” IEEE Control Syst. 14 (1), 25–30 (1994).Google Scholar
6.Xu, Y., Hollerbach, J. M. and Ma, D., “A nonlinear PD controller for force and contact transient control,” IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 15 (1), 15–21 (1995).Google Scholar
7.Ferretti, G., Magnani, G. and Zavala Río, A., “Impact modelling and control for industrial manipulators,” IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 18 (4), 65–71 (1998).Google Scholar
8.Armstrong, B., Neevel, D. and Kusik, T., “New results in NPID control: Tracking, integral control, friction compensation and experimental results,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 9 (2), 399–406 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Armstrong, B., Gutierrez, J., Wade, B. and Joseph, R., “Stability of phase-based gain modulation with designer-chosen switch functions,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 25 (8), 781–796 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Hogan, N., “Impedance control: An approach to manipulation. Part I: Theory. Part II: Implementation. Part III: Applications,” J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 107, 1–24 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.De Schutter, J., Bruyninckx, H., Zhu, W. H. and Spong, M., “Force Control: A Bird's Eye View,” Proceedings of the IEEE CSS/RAS International Workshop on Control problems in Robotics and Automation: “Future Directions,” San Diego, California (1997), pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
12.Zotovic, R., Valera Fernández, A. and García Gil, P. J., “Impact and Force Control with Switching between Mechanical Impedance Parameters,” Proceedings of the 16th IFAC World congress, Prague, Czech Republic (2005), pp. 169–174.Google Scholar
13.Zotovic Ranko, R. and Valera Fernández, A., “Simultaneous velocity, impact and force control,” Robotica 27 (7), 1039–1047 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Kewis, F. L., Dawson, D. M. and Abdallah, C. T., Robot Manipulator Control: Theory and Practice (Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 2004).Google Scholar
15.Spong, M. W., Hutchison, S. and Vidyasagar, M., Robot Modeling and Control (John Wiley & Sons Publishers, 2006).Google Scholar
16.Siciliano, B., Sciavicco, L., Villani, L. and Oriolo, G., Robotics: Modeling, Planning and Control (Springer Verlag, London, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Seraji, H. and Colabaugh, R., “Force tracking in impedance control,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 16 (1), 97–117 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Ott, C., Albu-Schäffer, A., Kugi, A. and Hirzinger, G., “On the passivity-based impedance control of flexible joint robots,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 24 (2), 416–429 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Ott, C., Cartesian Impedance Control of Redundant and Flexible Joint Robots (Springer Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2008).Google Scholar
20.Lu, Z. and Goldenberg, A., “Robust impedance control and force regulation: Theory and experiments,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 14 (3), 225–254 (1995).Google Scholar
21.Ikeura, R. and Inooka, H., “Variable Impedance of a Robot for Cooperation with a Human,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference of Robotics and Automation, Nagoya, Japan (1995) pp. 3097–3102.Google Scholar
22.Tsuji, T. and Tanaka, Y., “Bio-mimetic impedance control of robotic manipulator for dynamic contact tasks,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 56, 306–316, (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Canudas de Wit, C., Siciliano, B. and Bastin, G., Theory of Robot Control (Springer Verlag, London, 1997).Google Scholar
24.Chang, K. S. and Khatib, O., “Manipulator control at kinematic singularities: A dynamically consistent strategy”, Proceedings of the IEEE/ RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Pittsburg, USA (1995), pp. 84–88.Google Scholar
25.Edwards, C. and Spurgeon, S. K, Sliding Mode Control: theory and Applications (Taylor and Francis publishers, London, 1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar