Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T13:26:24.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kinematic coupling complexity of heavy-payload forging manipulator

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2011

Xiaobing Chu  and
Feng Gao
Xiaobing Chu
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and Vibration, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, P. R. China
Feng Gao*
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and Vibration, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, P. R. China
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: chuxiaobing@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

There exist several kinds of definitions for complexity in different areas. In mechanical engineering area, some formulations capable of measuring the complexity of robotic architectures have been proposed at the conceptual-design stage. This paper presents the definition of Kinematic Coupling Complexity to measure the kinematic coupling degree of a manipulator based on the input/output velocity matrix. In order to distinguish the differences among many matrixes, three factors will be considered including the proportion of nonzero elements in matrix J, the difference of nonzero elements' numbers in every row among many matrixes, and the difference of nonzero elements' positions among many matrixes. To illustrate the methods introduced in this paper, four types of heavy-payload forging manipulators are analyzed and the type of forging manipulator with the smallest Kinematic Coupling Complexity is chosen as our prototype.

Keywords

Kinematic coupling complexityForging manipulatorInput/output velocity relationship
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , July 2012 , pp. 551 - 558
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]Shannon, C. E., “The mathematical theory of communication,” M.D. Comput. 14 (4), 306–317 (1997).Google ScholarPubMed
[2]Cover, T. M. and Thomas, J., Elements of Information Theory (Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1991).Google Scholar
[3]Suh, N., The Principles of Design (Oxford University Press, USA, 1990).Google Scholar
[4]Suh, N. P., “Theory of complexity, periodicity and the design axioms,” Res. Eng. Des.: Theory, Appl. Concurr. Eng. 11 (2), 116–131 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Frey, D. D., Jahangir, E. and Engelhardt, F., “Computing the information content of decoupled designs,” Res. Eng. Des.: Theory, Appl. Concurr. Eng. 12 (2), 90–102 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Khan, W. A., Caro, S., Angeles, J. and Pasini, D., “A formulation of complexity based rules for the preliminary design stage of robotic architectures,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, Paris, France (Aug. 28–31, 2007).Google Scholar
[7]Caro, S., Khan, W. A., Pasini, D. and Angeles, J., “The rule-based conceptual design of the architecture of serial Schönflies-motion generators,” Mech. Mach. Theory 45 (2), 251–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Jin, W. and Yang, T. L., “Synthesis and analysis of a group of 3-degree-of-freedom partially decoupled parallel manipulators,” J. Mech. Des. 126 (2), 301–306 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Jin, Y., Chen, I. M. and Yang, G. L., “Kinematic design of a family of 6-DOF partially decoupled parallel manipulators,” Mech. Mach. Theory 44 (5), 912–922 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Jin, Q. and Yang, T. L., “Theory for topology synthesis of parallel manipulators and its application to three-dimension-translation parallel manipulators,” J. Mech. Des., Trans. ASME 126 (4), 625–639 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Yan, C., Gao, F. and Guo, W., “Co-ordinated kinematic modelling for motion planning of heavy-duty manipulators in an integrated open-die forging centre,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part B: J. Eng. Manuf. 223 (10), 1299–1313 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Nawratil, G., “New performance indices for 6-dof UPS and 3-dof RPR parallel manipulators,” Mech. Mach. Theory 44 (1), 208–221 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Gosselin, C. M., “The optimum design of robotic manipulators using dexterity indices,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 9 (4), 213–226 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Merlet, J. P., “Jacobian, manipulability, condition number, and accuracy of parallel robots,” J. Mech. Des. 128 (1), 199–206 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Pond, G. and Carretero, J. A., “Formulating Jacobian matrices for the dexterity analysis of parallel manipulators,” Mech. Mach. Theory 41 (12), 1505–1519 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar