Abstract
Robot manipulators have been widely used in industrial automation. In many modern robot control applications, sensory information such as visual feedback is used to improve positioning accuracy and robustness to uncertainty. This chapter introduces basic concepts and design methods that are employed for motion control of robot manipulators with uncertainty. The chapter covers both basic methods in joint-space control and advance topics in sensory task-space control.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abdallah CT, Dawson D, Dorato P, Jamshidi M (1991) Survey of robust control for rigid robots. IEEE Trans Control Syst Mag 11(2):24–30
Arimoto S (1994) A class of quasi-natural potentials and hyper-stable PID servo-loops for nonlinear robotic systems. Trans Soc Instrum Control Eng 30(9):1005–1012
Arimoto S (1996) Control theory of non-linear mechanical systems: a passivity-based and circuit-theoretic approach. Oxford University Press, New York
Arimoto S, Miyazaki F (1985)Asymptotic stability of feedback control for robot manipulators. In: Proceedings of IFAC symposium on robot control, Barcelona, pp 447–452
Arimoto S, Miyazaki F (1984)Stability and robustness of PID feedback control for robot manipulators of sensory capability. In: Proceedings of the 1st international symposium on robotics research, pp 783–799
Arimoto S, Kawamura S, Miyazaki F (1984) Bettering operation of robots by learning. J Robot Syst 1(2):123–140
Arimoto S, Naniwa T, Parra-Vega V, Whitcomb L (1994) A quasi-natural potential and its role in design of hyper-stable PID servo-loop for robotic systems. In: Proceedings of the CAI Pacific symposium control and industrial automation application, pp 110–117
Berghuis H, Ortega R, Nijmeijer H (1993) A robust adaptive robot controller. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 9(6):825–830
Braganza D, Dixon WE, Dawson DM, Xian B (2005)Tracking control for robot manipulators with kinematic and dynamic uncertainty. In: Proceedings of IEEE conference on decision and control, Seville, pp 5293–5297
Cheah CC (2003)Approximate Jacobian robot control with adaptive Jacobian matrix. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on decision and control, Hawaii, pp 5859–5864
Cheah CC, Liaw H (2005) Inverse Jacobian regulator with gravity compensation: stability and experiment. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 21(4):741–747
Cheah CC, Kawamura S, Arimoto S (1998) Feedback control for robotic manipulators with uncertain kinematics and dynamics. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Leuven, pp 3607–3612
Cheah CC, Kawamura S, Arimoto S (1999a) Feedback control for robotic manipulators with an uncertain . J Robot Syst 12(2):119–134
Cheah CC, Hirano M, Kawamura S, Arimoto S (2003) Approximate Jacobian control for robots with uncertain kinematics and dynamics. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 19(4):692–702
Cheah CC, Liu C, Slotine JJE (2004) Approximate Jacobian adaptive control for robot manipulators. In: Proceeding of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, New Orleans, pp 3075–3080
Cheah CC, Liu C, Slotine JJE (2006a) Adaptive tracking control for robots with unknown kinematic and dynamic properties. Int J Robot Res 25(3):283–296
Chien-Chern Cheah, Chao Liu, Slotine J-JE (2006b) Adaptive Jacobian tracking control of robots with uncertainties in kinematic, dynamic and actuator models. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 51(6):1024–1029
Cheah CC, Liu C, Slotine JJE (2007) Adaptive vision based tracking control of robots with uncertainty in depth information. In: Proceedings of IEEE conference on roboties and automation, Roma, pp 2817–2822
Cheah CC, Liu C, Slotine JJE (2010) Adaptive Jacobian vision based control for robots with uncertain depth information. Automatica 46:1228–1233
Cheah CC, Kawamura S, Arimoto S, Lee K (1999) PID control for robotic manipulator with uncertain jacobian matrix. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Detroit, pp 494–499
Craig JJ, Hsu P, Sastry SS (1987) Adaptive control of mechanical manipulators. Int J Robot Res 6(2):10–20
Dixon WE (2007) Adaptive regulation of amplitude limited robot manipulators with uncertain kinematics and dynamics. IEEE Trans Automat Control 52(3):488–493
Garcia-Rodriguez R, Parra-Vega V (2012) Cartesian sliding PID control schemes for tracking robots with uncertain Jacobian. Trans Inst Meas Control 34(4):448–462
Hutchinson S, Hager GD, Corke P (1996) A tutorial on visual servo control. IEEE Trans Autom Control 12(5):651–670
Ioannou P, Sun J (1996) Robust adaptive control. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Kelly R (1993) Comments on adaptive PD controller for robot manipulators. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 9:117–119
Kelly R (1997) PD control with desired gravity compensation of robotic manipulators: a review. Int J Robot Res 16(5):660–672
Kelly R (1998) Global positioning of robot manipulators via PD control plus a class of nonlinear integral actions. IEEE Trans Autom Control 43(7):934–938
Kelly R, Santibanez V, Loria A (2005) Control of robot manipulators in joint space. Springer–Verlag, London
Koditschek DE (1987)Adaptive techniques for mechanical systems. In: 5th Yale workshop on applications of adaptive systems theory, New Haven, pp 259–265
Lee KW, Khalil H (1997) Adaptive output feedback control of robot manipulators using high gain observer. Int J Control 67(6):869–886
Lewis FL (1996) Neural network control of robot manipulators. Intell Syst Appl 11(3):64–75
Liang X, Huang X, Wang M, Zeng X (2010) Adaptive task-space tracking control of robots without task-space- and joint-space-velocity measurements. IEEE Trans Robot 26(4):733–742
Middleton RH, Goodwin GC (1988) Adaptive computed torque control for rigid link manipulators. Syst Control Lett 10:9–16
Niemeyer G, Slotine JJE (1991) Performance in adaptive manipulator control. Int J Robot Res 10(2):149–161
Ortega R, Spong MW (1989) Adaptive motion control of rigid robots: a tutorial. Automatica 25(6):877–888
Ortega R, Loria A, Kelly R (1995) A semi-globally stable output feedback PI2D regulator for robot manipulators. IEEE Trans Autom Control 40(8):1432–1436
Paden B, Panja R (1988) A globally asymptotically stable PD+ controller for robot manipulator. Int J Control 47(6):1697–1712
Sadegh N, Horowitz R (1990) Stability and robustness analysis of a class of adaptive controllers for robotic manipulators. Int J Robot Res 9(3):74–92
Slotine JJE (1985) The robust control of robot manipulators. Int J Robot Res 4(2):49–61
Slotine JJE, Li W (1987) On the adaptive control of robot manipulators. Int J Robot Res 6(3):49–59
Slotine JJE, Li W (1991) Applied nonlinear control. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Spong MW (1992) On the robust control of robot manipulators. IEEE Trans Autom Control 37(11):1782–1786
Spong MW, Hutchinson S, Vidyasagar M (2006) Robot modeling and control. Wiley, New York
Takegaki M, Arimoto S (1981) A new feedback method for dynamic control of manipulators. ASME J Dyn Syst Meas Control 103:119–125
Tomei P (1991) Adaptive PD controller for robot manipulators. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 7:565–570
Wang H, Xie Y (2009) Prediction error based adaptive Jacobian tracking of robots with uncertain kinematics and dynamics. IEEE Trans Automat Control 54(12):2889–2894, art. no. 5332275
Wang H, Liu YH, Zhou D (2007) Dynamic visual tracking for manipulators using an uncalibrated fixed camera. IEEE Trans Robot 23(3):610–617
Wen JT, Bayard D (1988) New class of control laws for robotic manipulators Part 2. Adaptive case. Int J Control 47(5):1387–1406
Ziegler JG, Nichols NB (1942) Optimum settings for automatic controllers. ASME Trans 64:759–768
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix 1
Preliminaries on control theories:
Consider the following nonlinear system:
where x ∈ R n is a vector of state of the system and f (.) is a nonlinear function.
Definition A1
The equilibrium points of the system Eq. 109 are defined as the state vectors x e of x for which if at specific time t 0 , x = x e, then x will remain unchanged for all t > t 0 . In other words, at equilibrium points the state of the system satisfies f (x e ) = 0.
It is often important to know whether the equilibrium point is stable or not. In the following, a definition of stable equilibrium point is put forward:
Remark A1
It can be always assumed that the equilibrium point is zero by using change of variable y = x – x e .
Definition A2
The equilibrium point x e = 0 of the system Eq. 109 is said to be stable if for any ε > 0, there exists δ > 0 such that if ‖x(0) − 0‖ < δ, then ‖x(t) − 0‖ < ε for all t > 0. It can be mathematically represents as follows:
To examine the stability of the equilibrium point, the Lyapunov theory can be utilized. The main advantage of the Lyapunov theory is that the stability of the system can be determined without solving the differential equations of the system. Moreover, the Lyapunov theory can be used to design controllers that stabilize nonlinear systems.
Before presenting the Lyapunov theory, a certain class of functions is introduced as follows:
Definition A3
A continuous function V : R n × R + → R is a locally positive definite function (lpdf) if for some ε > 0 and some continuous, the following conditions hold:
where B ε is a ball of size ε around the origin which is mathematically expressed as B ε = {x ∈ R n : ‖x‖ < ε}.
In addition, V is a positive definite function (pdf) if the condition (II) is true for all x ∈ R.
If in condition (II) V (x, t) ≥ 0, then V (x, t) is a (locally) positive semi-definite function.
Remark A2
If V (x) = x T Mx, where M is a real symmetric matrix, then V is a pdf if and only if M is a positive definite matrix.
Theorem A1
Lyapunov stability theorem: Suppose x e = 0 is an equilibrium point of the system Eq. 109. Let V(x, t) be a nonnegative function with derivative \( \dot{V} \) V along trajectories of the system dynamics:
-
(i)
If V (x, t) is a locally positive definite function and \( \dot{V} \) is a locally positive semi-definite function in x and for all t, then the origin of the system is locally stable.
-
(ii)
If V (x, t) is a locally positive definite function and \( \dot{V} \) is a locally positive definite function in x and for all t, then the origin of the system is locally asymptotically stable.
-
(iii)
If V (x, t) is a positive definite function and \( \dot{V} \) is a positive definite function in x and for all t, then the origin of the system is globally asymptotically stable.
If the function V (x, t) exists in the above theorem, then it is called a Lyapunov function.
Remark A3
The Lyapunov stability theorem only provides sufficient conditions for the stability of nonlinear systems; hence, the failure of finding a Lyapunov function does not prove the instability of the nonlinear system
In the case that \( -\dot{V}\left(x,t\right) \) is a positive semi-definite function, the Lyapunov stability theorem cannot provide any information on the asymptotic stability of the system. To deal with the stability of nonlinear autonomous systems when \( -\dot{V}(x) \) is a positive semi-definite function, LaSalle’s invariance principle has been presented.
Lemma A1
LaSalle ’ s invariance principle : Let V : R n → R be a positive definite function such that \( \dot{V}(x)\le 0 \) in compact set Ω. Let D be the set of all points in Ω where \( \dot{V}(x)=0 \) . Therefore, every solution of the system \( \dot{x}=f(x) \) starting in Ω approaches to the largest invariant set inside D. In particular, if D contains no trajectories other than x = 0, then 0 is locally asymptotically stable.
LaSalle’s invariance principle enables one to conclude asymptotic stability only for autonomous systems. For non-autonomous systems, Barbalat’s lemma can be used.
Lemma A2
Barbalat ’ s lemma : If a function V (t, x) satisfies the following conditions:
-
(i)
V (x, t) is lower bounded.
-
(ii)
\( \dot{V}\left(x,t\right) \) is negative semi-definite.
-
(iii)
\( \dot{V}\left(x,t\right) \) is uniformly continuous in time or equivalently \( \ddot{V}\left(t,x\right) \) is bounded. Then, \( \dot{V}\left(x,t\right) \) goes to zero as t → ∞.
Appendix 2
Parameters of dynamic Eq. 4 of the two-link robot manipulator which is depicted in Fig. 1:
Elements of inertia matrix M(q) are
Elements of matrix \( C\left(q,\dot{q}\right) \) are given as
Elements of gravitational force matrix are
where \( \mathfrak{g} \) is the gravity due to acceleration.
Appendix 3
Part of the proof of the task-space control law Eq. 55:
Differentiating the Lyapunov candidate V (expressed in Eq. 58) with respect to time gives
Substituting the closed-loop Eq. 57 into Eq. 116, using property 2 and simplifying, yields
Using Eq. 14, \( \dot{V} \) can be written as follows:
Since \( s\left(\tilde{x}\right) \) is bounded, there exist constants c 0 > 0 and c 1 > 0 so that
Substituting inequality Eq. 119 into Eq. 118 yields
Let \( \tilde{J}(q) \) be the Jacobian estimation error which is defined as \( \tilde{J}(q)=J(q)-\widehat{J}(q) \). Hence, Eq. 120 can be written with respect to J(q) and \( \tilde{J}(q) \) as follows:
Since the Jacobian matrix contains trigonometric functions of q, ‖J(q)‖ ≤ b J and Eq. 121 can be rewritten as
where γ is defined in Eq. 56. Since
therefore, Eq. 122 is simplified as follows:
Equation 124 can be written as follows:
such that
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag London
About this entry
Cite this entry
Cheah, C.C., Haghighi, R. (2014). Motion Control of Robot Manipulators . In: Nee, A. (eds) Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_93-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_93-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4976-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference EngineeringReference Module Computer Science and Engineering