Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-ckgrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T11:48:21.954Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Closed loop trajectory control of walking machines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

J. F. Gardner ,
K. Srinivasan  and
K. J. Waldron
J. F. Gardner
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering Dept., The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802 (USA)
K. Srinivasan
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering Dept., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210 (USA)
K. J. Waldron
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering Dept., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210 (USA)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The global trajectory control of walking machines is addressed here with particular attention paid to the consequences of actuator redundancy for control and to the inclusion of actuator dynamics in trajectory controller design. Redundancy of actuation, typical of walking machines, results in the trajectory control problem being formulated perforce in a global coordinate frame, instead of the joint space, as in nonredundant manipulators. This lack of one-to-one correspondence between the degrees of freedom of motion in the global coordinate frame and the actuators results in coupling between the different trajectory control loops. A mechanism for reducing this coupling effect is proposed here, along with a procedure to take into account approximately the effect of actuator dynamics in designing the trajectory controllers. The proposed methods are evaluated by simulation for an example problem in legged locomotion and are shown to be effective.

Keywords

Walking robotsActuator dynamicsActuation redundancyclosed loop control
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , January 1990 , pp. 13 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

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.Whitney, D.E., “Resolved Motion Rate Control of Manipulators and Human Prostheses” IEEE Transaction on Man–Machine Systems MMS-10, No. 2, 47–53 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Asda, H. and Slotine, J-J.E., Robot Analysis and Control (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1986).Google Scholar
3.Khosla, P.K. and Kanade, T., “Experimental Evaluation of Nonlinear Feedback and Feedforward Control Schemes for Manipulators” Int. J. Robotics Research 7, No. 1, 18–28 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Asada, H., Kanade, T. and Takeyama, I., “Control of a Direct-Drive Arm” ASME J. Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control 105, 136–142 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.An, C. H., Atkeson, C. G., Griffith, J. D. and Hollerbach, J. M., “Experimental Evaluation of Feedforward and Computed Torque Control” Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation,Raleigh, North Carolina, 165–168 (04, 1987).Google Scholar
6.Asada, H. and Youcef-Toumi, K., “Analysis of Multi-Degree-of-Freedom Actuator Systems for Robot Arm Design” In: Control of Manufacturing Processes and Robotic Systems (Hardt, D.E. and Book, W.J., eds.) (ASME Publications, N.Y., 1983) pp. 205–218.Google Scholar
7.Good, M.C., Sweet, L.M. and Strobel, K.L., “Dynamic Models for Control System Design of Integrated Robots and Drive Systems” In: Sensors and Controls for Automated Manufacturing and Robotics (ASME Publications, N.Y., 1984) pp 253–269.Google Scholar
8.Kazerooni, H., Sheridan, T. B. and Houpt, P.K., “Robust Compliant Motion for Manipulators, Part I: The Fundamental Concepts of Compliant Motion, and Part II: Design Method” IEEE J. Robotics and Automation RA-2, No. 2, 83–105 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Forrest-Barlach, M.G. and Babcock, S.M., “Inverse Dynamics Position Control of a Compliant Manipulator” IEEE J. Robotics and Automation RA-3, No. 1, 75–83 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Spong, M.W., Khorasani, K. and Dodotovic, P.V., “A Slow Manifold Approach to Feedback Control of Nonlinear Flexible Systems” Proc. American Control Conference,Boston, MA, 1386–1391 (06, 1985).Google Scholar
11.Khorasani, K. and Spong, W., “Invariant Manifolds and their Application to Robot Manipulators with Flexible Joints” Proc. International Conference on Robotics and Automation,St. Louis, MO., 978–983 (03, 1985).Google Scholar
12.Waldron, K.J. and McGhee, R.B., “The Adaptive Suspension Vehicle” IEEE Control Systems Magazine 6, No. 6, 7–12 (12, 1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Gardner, J. F., Srinivasan, K. and Waldron, K. J., “A New Method for Controlling Forces in Redundantly Acutated Closed Kinematic Chains” Symposium on Robotics, Proc. ASME Winter Annual Mtg, Chicago. IL, 315–324 (12, 1988).Google Scholar
14.Waldron, K.J., “Force and Motion Management in Legged Locomotion”, IEEE J. Robotics and Automation RA-2, 214–220 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Kumar, V. and Waldron, K.J., “Force Distribution in Closed Kinematic Chains”, Proc. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation,Philadelphia, PA, 114–119 (1988).Google Scholar
16.Srinivasan, K., Holloway, M.K., and Waldron, K.J., “Control of a Hydraulically Powered Walking Machine Leg” Proc. 1st Fluid Power National Educational Seminar, Iowa State University, 115–134 (1984).Google Scholar
17.Pery, A., Gardner, J.F. & Waldron, K.J., “Design and Testing of a High Performance Hydraulic Power System for a Legged Locomotion Application” Proc. American Control Conference,Boston, MA,730–736 (1985).Google Scholar
18.Gardner, J.F., “Force Distribution and Trajectory Control for Closed Kinematic Chains with Applications to Walking Machines” Ph.D. Thesis (Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University, 1987).Google Scholar
19.Gardner, J.F., “Control of Force Distribution to Improve Performance in Redundantly Actuated Closed Kinematic Chains” Proc. USA-Japan Symposium on Flexible Automation, Minneapolis, MN (07, 1988).Google Scholar