Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:05:27.461Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Geometric and algebraic approach to the inverse kinematics of four-link manipulators

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

I. Uzmay  and
S. Yildirim
I. Uzmay
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Erciyes, 38090 Kayseri (Turkey)
S. Yildirim
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Erciyes, 38090 Kayseri (Turkey)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper presents an example of the application of geometric and algebraic approaches to the inverse kinematics problem of four-link robot manipulators. A special arm configuration of the robot manipulator is employed for solving the inverse kinematics problem by using the geometric approach. The obtained joint variables as angular positions are defined in the form of cubic polynomials. The other kinematic parameters of the joints, such as angular velocities and angular accelerations, are the time derivatives of these polynomials. It is evident that there is no definite difference between the results of the two approaches. Consequently, if an appropriate arm configuration for the geometric approach can be established, the inverse kinematics can be solved in a simpler and shorter way.

Keywords

Inverse kinematicsAlgebraic approachGeometric approachCosine ruleKinematic parameters.
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , January 1994 , pp. 59 - 64
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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

REFERENCES

1.Paul, R.P., Robot Manipulators: Mathematics, Programming and Control (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1981).Google Scholar
2.Craig, J.J., Introduction to Robotics: Mechanisms & Control, (Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., USA, 1986).Google Scholar
3.Fu, K.S., Gonzalez, R.C. and Lee, C.S.G., Robotics: Control, Sensing, Vision and Intelligence (McGraw-Hill Book Co., USA, 1987).Google Scholar
4.Wang, K. and Lien, T.K., “Closed Form Solution for the Inverse Kinematics of A Puma Robot Manipulator-II Demonstration” Rob. & Compt.-Int. Manufacturing 5, no. 2/3, 159–163 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Seo, W. Park and Jun, H. Oh, “An Inverse Kinematics Algorithm for Robot Manipulators Using Incremental Unit Computation Method” Robotica 10, 435–446 (1991).Google Scholar
6.Mayorga, R.V., Wong, A.K.C. and Ma, K.S., “Procedure for Manipulator Inverse Kinematics Computation and Proper Pseudoinverse Perturbation J. Robotic Systems 9(5), 681–702 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Manseur, R. and Doty, K.L., “Fast Inverse Kinematics of Five-Revolute-Axis Robot Manipulators” Mech. Mach. Theory 27, No. 5, 587–597 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Mayorga, R.V., Milano, N. and Wong, A.K.C., “A Fast Procedure for Manipulator Inverse Kinematics Computation and Singularities Prevention” J. Robotic Systems 10(1), 45–72 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Elgazzar, S., “Efficient Kinematic Transformations for The Puma 560 Robot” IEEE J. Robotics and Automation RA-1, No. 3, 142–151 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Cheng, P., Chen, C. and Weng, C., “Application of Symbolic Representation Method to the Inverse Kinematics Problem of Robot Manipulators” Mech. Mach. Theory 24, No. 1, 61–72 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar