0
Journal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics | Volume 4 | Issue 3 | Research Paper
Research Papers

A Gauge-Invariant Formulation for Constrained Mechanical Systems Using Square-Root Factorization and Unitary Transformation

[+] Author and Article Information
Farhad Aghili

Space Technologies, Canadian Space Agency, Saint-Hubert, QC J3Y 8Y9 Canadafarhad.aghili@space.gc.ca

A manifold with a Euclidean metric is said to be “flat” and the curvature associated with it is identically zero (11).

Also known as generalized coordinates.

By definition, a Riemannian manifold that is locally isometric to Euclidean manifold is called a locally flat manifold (9).

J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam 4(3), 031010 (Jun 09, 2009) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3124094 History: Received May 01, 2008; Revised January 13, 2009; Published June 09, 2009
Article
References
Figures

A gauge-invariant formulation for deriving the dynamic equations of constrained multibody systems in terms of (reduced) quasivelocities is presented. This formulation does not require any weighting matrix to deal with the gauge-invariance problem when both translational and rotational components are involved in the generalized coordinates or in the constraint equations. Moreover, in this formulation the equations of motion are decoupled from those of constrained force, and each system has its own independent input. This allows the possibility to develop a simple force control action that is totally independent from the motion control action facilitating a hybrid force/motion control. Tracking force/motion control of constrained multibody systems based on a combination of feedbacks on the vectors of the quasivelocities and the configuration-variables are presented.
FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2009 by the Canadian Government
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Lipkin, H., and Duffy, J., 1988, “Hybrid Twist and Wrench Control for a Robotic Manipulator,” ASME J. Mech., Transm., Autom. Des., 110 , pp. 138–144.
2
Manes, C., 1992, “Recovering Model Consistence for Force and Velocity Measures in Robot Hybrid Control,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , pp. 1276–1281.
3
De Luca, A. D., and Manes, C., 1994, “Modeling of Robots in Contact With a Dynamic Environment,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 10 (4), pp. 542–548.  [CrossRef]
4
Angeles, J., 2003, “A Methodology for the Optimum Dimensioning of Robotic Manipulators,” Memoria del 5o, Congreso Mexicano de Robótica , pp. 190–203.
5
Aghili, F., 2005, “A Unified Approach for Inverse and Direct Dynamics of Constrained Multibody Systems Based on Linear Projection Operator: Applications to Control and Simulation,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 21 (5), pp. 834–849.  [CrossRef]
6
Kodischeck, D. E., 1985, “Robot Kinematics and Coordinate Transformation,” IEEE International Conference on Decision and Control , pp. 1–4.
7
Gu, Y. L., and Loh, N. K., 1987, “Control System Modeling by Using of a Canonical Transformation,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control , pp. 1–4.
8
Bedrossian, N. S., 1992, “Linearizing Coordinate Transformation and Riemann Curvature,” IEEE International Conference on Decision and Control , pp. 80–84.
9
Spong, M. W., 1992, “Remarks on Robot Dynamics: Canonical Transformations and Riemannian Geometry,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , pp. 554–559.
10
Rodriguez, G., and Kertutz-Delgado, K., 1992, “Spatial Operator Factorization and Inversion of Manipulator Mass Matrix,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 8 (1), pp. 65–76.  [CrossRef]
11
Jain, A., and Rodriguez, G., 1995, “Diagonalized Lagrangian Robot Dynamics,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 11 (4), pp. 571–584.  [CrossRef]
12
Loduha, T. A., and Ravani, B., 1995, “On First-Order Decoupling of Equations of Motion for Constrained Dynamical Systems,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 62 (1), pp. 216–222.  [CrossRef]
13
Junkins, J. L., and Schaub, H., 1997, “An Instantaneous Eigenstructure Quasivelocity Formulation for Nonlinear Multibody Dynamics,” J. Astronaut. Sci., 45 (3), pp. 279–295.
14
Kozlowski, K., 1998, "Modelling and Identification in Robotics", Springer-Verlag, London.
15
Papastavridis, J. G., 1998, “A Panoramic Overview of the Principles and Equations of Motion of Advanced Engineering Dynamics,” Appl. Mech. Rev., 51 (4), pp. 239–265.  [CrossRef]
16
Gu, E. Y. L., 2000, “A Configuration Manifold Embedding Model for Dynamic Control of Redundant Robots,” Int. J. Robot. Res., 19 (3), pp. 289–304.  [CrossRef]
17
Herman, P., 2005, “PD Controller for Manipulator With Kinetic Energy Term,” J. Intell. Robotic. Syst., 44 , pp. 101–121.
18
Herman, P., and Kozlowski, K., 2006, “A Survey of Equations of Motion in Terms of Inertial Quasi-Velocities for Serial Manipulators,” Arch. Appl. Mech., 76 (September), pp. 579–614.  [CrossRef]
19
Sinclair, A. J., Hurtado, J. E., and Junkins, J. L., 2006, “Linear Feedback Control Using Quasi Velocities,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., 29 (6), pp. 1309–1314.  [CrossRef]
20
Aghili, F., 2007, “Simplified Lagrangian Mechanical Systems With Constraints Using Square-Root Factorization,” Multibody Dynamics 2007, ECCOMAS Thematic Conference .
21
Aghili, F., 2008, “A Gauge-Invariant Formulation for Constrained Robotic Systems Using Square-Root Factorization and Unitary Transformation,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems , pp. 2814–2821.
22
Kozolowski, K., and Herman, P., 2000, “A Comparison of Control Algorithm for Serial Manipulators in Terms of Quasi-Velocity,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems , pp. 1540–1545.
23
Herman, P., and Kozlowski, K., 2001, “Some Remarks on Two Quasi-Velocities Approaches in PD Joint Space Control,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems , pp. 1888–1893.
24
Doty, K. L., Melchiorri, C., and Bonivento, C., 1993, “A Theory of Generalized Inverses Applied to Robotics,” Int. J. Robot. Res., 12 (1), pp. 1–19.  [CrossRef]
25
Schutter, J. D., and Bruyuinckx, H., 1996, "The Control Handbook", CRC, New York, Chap. Force Control of Robotic Manipulators, pp. 1351–1358.
26
Corben, H. C., and Stehle, P., 1960, "Classical Mechanics", Wiley, New York.
27
Meirovitch, L., 1970, “Rigid Body Dynamics,” "Methods of Analytical Dynamics", McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 157–160.
28
Baruh, H., 1999, "Analytical Dynamics", McGraw-Hill, London.
29
Schaub, H., Tsiotras, P., and Junkins, J. L., 1995. “Principal Rotation Representations of Proper NxN Orthogonal Matrices,” Int. J. Eng. Sci., 33 (2), pp. 2277–2295.  [CrossRef]
30
Bar-Itzhack, I. Y., 1989, “Extension of the Euler’s Theorem to n-Dimensional Spaces,” IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag., 25 (6), pp. 903–909.  [CrossRef]
31
Oshman, Y., and Bar-Itzhack, I., 1985, “Eigenfactor Solution of the Matrix Riccati Equation—A Continous Square Root Algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 30 (10), pp. 971–978.  [CrossRef]
32
Klema, V. C., and Laub, A. J., 1980, “The Singular Value Decomposition: Its Computation and Some Applications,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 25 (2), pp. 164–176.  [CrossRef]
33
Press, W. H., Flannery, B. P., Teukolsky, S. A., and Vetterling, W. T., 1988, "Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing", Cambridge University Press, New York.
34
Golub, G. H., and Loan, C. F. V., 1996, "Matrix Computations", The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, London.
35
Anton, H., 2003, "Contemporary Linear Algebra With Maple Manual Set", Wiley, New York.
36
Kane, T. R., 1961. “Dynamics of Nonholonomic Systems,” Trans. ASME, J. Appl. Mech., 28 (4), pp. 574–578.
37
Kane, T. R., and Levinson, D. A., 1985, "Dynamics: Theory and Applications" (McGraw-Hill Series in Mechanical Engineering ), McGraw-Hill, New York.
38
de Jalon, J. G., and Bayo, E., 1989, "Kinematic and Dynamic Simulation of Multibody Systems", Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
39
Ascher, U. M., and Petzold, L. R., 1998, "Computer Methods for Ordinary Differential Equations and Differential-Algebraic Equations", SIAM, Philadelphia.
40
Gear, C. W., 1971, “The Simultaneous Numerical Solution of Differential-Algebraic Equations,” IEEE Trans. Circuit Theory, 18 , pp. 89–95.  [CrossRef]
41
Baumgarte, J., 1972, “Stabilization of Constraints and Integrals of Motion in Dynamical Systems,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 1 , pp. 1–16.  [CrossRef]
42
Rodríguez, G., 1987, "Kalman Filtering, Smoothing and Recursive Robot Arm Forward and Inverse Dynamics", pp. 624–639.
43
1996, "Theory of Robot Control", C.Canudas de Wit, B.Siciliano, and G.Bastin, eds., Springer, London.
44
LaSalle, J. P., 1960, “Some Extensions of Lyapunov’s Second Method,” IRE Trans. Circuit Theory, 7 (4), pp. 520–527.
45
Khalil, H. K., 1992, "Nonlinear Systems", Macmillan, New York.
46
Doty, K. L., Melchiorri, C., and Bonivento, C., 1993, “A Theory of Generalized Inverses Applied to Robotics,” Int. J. Robot. Res., 12 (1), pp. 1–19.  [CrossRef]
47
Featherstone, R., and Fijany, A., 1999, “A Technique for Analyzing Constrained Rigid-Body Systems, and Its Application to Constraint Force Algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 15 (6), pp. 1140–1144.  [CrossRef]
48
Featherstone, R., Thiebaut, S., and Khatib, O., 1999. “A General Contact Model for Dynamically-Decoupled Force-Motion Control,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , pp. 3281–3286.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
+Simulated motion tracking
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Simulated motion tracking
Figure 5

Simulated motion tracking

Grahic Jump Location
+Simulated constrained force
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Simulated constrained force
Figure 6

Simulated constrained force

Grahic Jump Location
+Trajectories of the quasiforces
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Trajectories of the quasiforces
Figure 7

Trajectories of the quasiforces

Grahic Jump Location
+Cart pole system
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Cart pole system
Figure 1

Cart pole system

Grahic Jump Location
+Constrained motion of a Cartesian manipulator
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Constrained motion of a Cartesian manipulator
Figure 2

Constrained motion of a Cartesian manipulator

Grahic Jump Location
+Simulated position and force responses
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Simulated position and force responses
Figure 3

Simulated position and force responses

Grahic Jump Location
+A constrained PRR manipulator
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
A constrained PRR manipulator
Figure 4

A constrained PRR manipulator

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. | Accept
Sign In