0
RESEARCH PAPERS

Velocity Effects on Robotic Manipulator Dynamic Performance

[+] Author and Article Information
Alan P. Bowling

Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556abowling@nd.edu

ChangHwan Kim

Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556ckim@nd.edu

J. Mech. Des 128(6), 1236-1245 (Jan 09, 2006) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2336255 History: Received February 11, 2005; Revised January 09, 2006

This article explores the effect that velocities have on a nonredundant robotic manipulator’s ability to accelerate its end-effector, as well as to apply forces/moments to the environment at the end-effector. This work considers velocity forces, including Coriolis forces, and the reduction of actuator torque with rotor velocity described by the speed-torque curve, at a particular configuration of a manipulator. The focus here is on nonredundant manipulators with as many actuators as degrees-of-freedom. Analysis of the velocity forces is accomplished using optimization techniques, where the optimization problem consists of an objective function and constraints which are all purely quadratic forms, yielding a nonconvex problem. Dialytic elimination is used to find the globally optimal solution to this problem. The proposed method does not use iterative numerical optimization methods. The PUMA 560 manipulator is used as an example to illustrate this methodology. The methodology provides an analytical analysis of the velocity forces which insures that the globally optimal solution to the associated optimization problem is found.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Purely quadratic approximations to a linear speed-torque curve

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

PUMA 560 DCS for ∣ω∣=∣f∣=∣m∣=0. The intercepts for this surface are {8.5m∕s2,76.5rad∕s2,0.375m∕s}.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

PUMA 560 configuration and worst-case directions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

A spherical coordinate for translational(angular) velocity space

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

PUMA 560 DCC. The option 1, 2, 3a, and 3b curves were obtained by evaluating the DCE at η∊{0,0.5,1,2,3,4,6,8,10,12.5,15,30,50.6,100,1000,∞}.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

PUMA 560 DCC from C(ϑ). The option 1–3b and case 4 curves were obtained by evaluating the DCE at η∊{0,0.5,1,2,3,4,6,8,10,12.5,15,30,50.6,100,1000,∞}.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

PUMA 560 DCS for ∣f∣=∣m∣=0 and ∣ω∣=η∣v∣ where η∊{0,1,4,8,15}

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

PUMA 560 DCS for ∣f∣=∣m∣=0 and ∣ω∣=η∣v∣ where η∊{1,4,8,15,∞}

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.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
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
Sign In