Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425

Singularity analysis of fine-tuning Stewart

platform for large radio telescope
using genetic algorithm
a,*
Y.X. Su , B.Y. Duan a, B. Peng b, R.D. Nan b

a
School of Electro-Mechanical Engineering, Xidian University, Xi’an 710071, China
b
Beijing Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100012, China
Received 1 April 2001; accepted 28 June 2001

Abstract
A new singularity analysis method for general six degree-of-freedom (DOF) Stewart plat-
form using genetic algorithm (GA) is proposed in this paper. The Jacobian matrix of Stewart
platform is first deduced, then the square of determinant of the Jacobian matrix is selected as
the objective function, and the minimal of this objective function is searched in the workspace
of Stewart platform by the GA. The singularity of Stewart platform depends on this minimal
objective function: if this value is zero, the singularity of Stewart platform will take place,
otherwise, the Stewart platform is singularity-free. The effectiveness of this new genetic sin-
gularity analysis method is validated by the singularity analysis of a six-DOF fine-tuning
Stewart platform for the next generation large radio telescope. The results have shown that the
fine-tuning Stewart platform is singularity-free, which has laid a solid base for the requirement
of high precision trajectory tracking for the next generation large radio telescope.
Ó 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Stewart platform; Mechatronics; Singularity analysis; Genetic algorithm; Large radio telescope

1. Introduction

Radio astronomers from around the world have focused recently on the need for
a new radio telescope which is 2 orders of magnitude greater than the biggest op-
erational telescopes, increasing sensitivity by a factor of 100, which would enable a
direct observation of the formation and evolution of galaxies from gases in the

*
Corresponding author. Fax: +86-29-823-2281.
E-mail addresses: yxsu@mail.xidian.edu.cn (Y.X. Su), byduan@xidian.edu.cn (B.Y. Duan).

0957-4158/03/$ - see front matter Ó 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 5 7 - 4 1 5 8 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 5 1 - 4
414 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425

universe [1]. To fulfill this goal, the next generation large radio telescope (LT, now it
is SKA, the square kilometer array) project was undertaken throughout the world
[2,3]. To make full use of the karst formation in Guizhou Province of China, a large
spherical radio telescope array of Arecibo telescope [4], with about 30 large spherical
reflector antennas and each antenna with the diameter of up to 300–500 m, was
proposed in China in 1996 [2].
For the sake of overcoming the shortcomings of the original design of Arecibo
telescope, Duan [5] proposed a completely new design project integrating mecha-
tronics and optics technologies. In this project, the fixed back-up structure weight
of 800 ton of Arecibo telescope as thrown away and replaced by a moving cabin
structure which weighed only 20–30 ton, and was driven by six large span cables to
implement trajectory tracking of the feed. It is well known that, for the large span
cable-controlled system, it is difficult to guarantee the high precision required by
trajectory tracking (state error less than 4 mm). Based on this design project, Su and
Duan [6] developed a fine-tuning Stewart platform to fulfill the high requirements of
feed tracking for a large spherical radio telescope, and the large span cables only
manage the coarse trajectory tracking control. The feasibility of this modified
mechatronics design project has been validated with numerical simulation, just as
shown in Fig. 1.
In recent years, great interest has been devoted to Stewart platform, even though
the first industrial applications were restricted only to flight simulators [7]. Both an
increase in applications and the advantages of parallel geometry over serial open
chains have been strong incentives to the development of the theory and practice of
Stewart platform [6–17]. Among these, the singularity of Stewart platform is still an
open problem [11–16]. The physical notion of a singularity in kinematics refers to
configurations in which a mechanism’s number of degrees-of-freedom (DOF)
changes instantaneously. For serial chains that have an end-effector frame attached
to the final link, a kinematic singularity is a configuration in which the end-effector

Fig. 1. Modified optomechatronics design of the next generation large radio telescope.
 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425 415

loses one or more DOF of motion. This means that there are certain directions in
Cartesian space along which the device is instantaneously not free to move, no
matter what the joint rates are. In contrast, in parallel manipulator, these singular
configurations result in the gain of one or more DOF. This means that the structure
is no longer rigid and there are certain directions in Cartesian space along which the
device cannot support a force or movement [11]. Gosselin and Angeles [12] classified
the singularity of the Stewart platform into the following three categories:

1. the set of points where different branches of the inverse-kinematic problem meet,
2. the set of points where different branches of the forward-kinematic problem meet,
and
3. the case when the Jacobian matrix is indeterminate.

Obviously any method of singularity analysis, which is to be mathematically

consistent, should be ascribed to the singularity of the Jacobian matrix for inverse
kinematics. So, one method to compute the singular configurations is to form the
Jacobian symbolically and take the determinant of this matrix. The result can then
be equaled to zero and the solution of this equation will give the singular positions
[11,16]. However, this is not practical as each Jacobian element is quite complicated
[11] and Kim and Chung [16] developed an alternative Jacobian matrix using local
structurization method [17] for the singularity analysis of six-DOF Stewart plat-
forms.
In this paper, in order to guarantee effective control of the trajectory tracking, a
simple singularity analysis method for a general Stewart platform is proposed using
genetic algorithms (GAs) with their characteristics of high efficiency and global
optimization [18]. The square of the determinant of the Jacobian matrix is selected as
the objective function and the minimal value of this objective function is found in the
trajectory workspace using GA. The singularity of the Stewart platform depends on
the minimum of this objective function: if this minimum is zero, then there are
certain singularities, otherwise, the Stewart platform is singularity-free. The genetic
singularity analysis method is used to analyze the singularity of the fine-tuning
Stewart platform for the next generation large radio telescope.
The paper is organized as follows. The Jacobian matrix of Stewart platform is
developed in Section 2. A real-coded GA is presented in Section 3, where a niching
technique and dynamic mutation operator are applied to realize the GA. The ef-
fectiveness of this genetic singularity analysis method is validated by the fine-tuning
Stewart platform for the next generation large radio telescope in Section 4. Some
favorable conclusions are drawn in Section 5.

2. Jacobian matrix

The general six-DOF fine-tuning Stewart platform for the next generation large
radio telescope is illustrated in Fig. 2. It consists of a moving platform, a base
platform, and six linear actuators, each of which is composed of a ballscrew
416 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425

Fig. 2. Fine-tuning Stewart platform for the next generation large radio telescope.

assembly mounted axially with a dc motor, connecting the moving platform and base
platform together with spherical and universal joints, respectively.
Motion of the moving platform with respect to the base platform is produced by
driving the motors to shorten or extend the actuator lengths, and the proper coor-
dination of the actuator length trajectories enables the moving platform to perform
the complex trajectory with high accuracy.
The following frame is developed. The inertial reference frame O-XYZ is fixed on
the base, and the movable coordinate system p-xyz is assigned to the moving plat-
form, with their origins at the centers of the two circular platforms, respectively, as
shown in Fig. 2.
ðxp ; yp ; zp Þ and ðw; h; /Þ are defined as the position of the original p of the movable
frame p-xyz referred to the inertial reference system O-XYZ and the angular rotation
to the Z; Y ; X axes of the inertial reference frame O-XYZ, separately.
For the ith electrical linear actuator li , the coordinate of the center Ai which is
connected to the fixed base platform in the fixed frame O-XYZ is Ai ðXi ; Yi ; Zi Þ, and
the coordinate of the center Bi which is connected to the moving platform in the
movable coordinate system p-xyz is Bi ðxi ; yi ; zi Þ.
With the rotation coordinate transformation, the relative coordinate Ci ðXri ;
Yri ; Zri Þ of the center Bi ðxi ; yi ; zi Þ with respect to the fixed frame O-XYZ can be ex-
pressed as
T T T
ðXri ; Yri ; Zri Þ ¼ R  ðxi ; yi ; zi Þ þ ðxp ; yp ; zp Þ ; ð1Þ
where R is the following rotation matrix:
2 3
cos w cos h  sin w cos h sin h
R ¼ 4 sin w cos / þ cos w sin h sin / cos w cos /  sin w sin h sin /  cos h sin / 5
sin w sin /  cos w sin h cos / cos w sin / þ sin w sin h cos / cos h cos /

ð2Þ
Therefore, given the position of the moving platform referred to the base, the ap-
propriate length of the electrical linear actuator can be calculated by the following
expression:
 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425 417
 1=2
2 2 2
li ¼ ðXi  Xri Þ þ ðYi  Yri Þ þ ðZi  Zri Þ ð3Þ

The Jacobian matrix of Stewart platform defines the relationship between the
velocity of six legs in joint space and the velocity of moving platform in workspace
[6,11]. The following notation is specified: P_ is the velocity of the moving platform,
which can be defined as the velocity of the center of the moving platform as
T
V ¼ ½_xp ; y_ p ; z_ p  (mm/s), and the angular velocity of the moving platform to the three
Z; Y ; X axes as x ¼ ½w_ ; h_; /_ T (rad/s), so P_ can be described by

P_ ¼ ½V ; x ¼ ½_xp ; y_ p ; z_ p ; w_ ; h_; /_ 
T T
ð4Þ

and l_ is the velocity of linear actuator in joint space, which can be expressed as

T
l_ ¼ ½l_ 1 ; l_ 2 ; l_ 3 ; l_ 4 ; l_ 5 ; l_ 6  : ð5Þ

Then the relationship of l_ to P_ can be defined as

P_ ¼ J  l_ ; ð6Þ

where J is the 6 6 Jacobian matrix.

The Jacobian matrix can be determined by differentiating of Eq. (3) with respect
to time, that is,
 
oli oli oli oli oli oli
J¼ ði ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; 6Þ: ð7Þ
oxp oyp ozp ow oh o/

For simplicity, the following symbols are used to develop the Jacobian matrix:

Ai1 ¼ Xi  Xri ;
Bi1 ¼ Yi  Yri ; ð8Þ
Ci1 ¼ Zi  Zri ;
Ai2 ¼ swchxi  cwchyi ;
ð9Þ
Ai3 ¼ cwshxi þ swshyi þ chzi ;
Bi2 ¼ ðcwch  swshs/Þxi  ðswc/ þ cwshs/Þyi ;
Bi3 ¼ cwchs/xi  swchs/yi þ shs/zi ; ð10Þ
Bi4 ¼ ðsws/ þ cwshc/Þxi  ðcws/ þ swshc/Þyi  chc/zi ;
Ci2 ¼ ðcws/ þ swshc/Þxi  ðsws/  cwshc/Þyi ;
Ci3 ¼ cwchc/xi þ swchc/yi  shc/zi ; ð11Þ
Ci4 ¼ ðswc/ þ cwshs/Þxi þ ðcwc/  swshs/Þyi  chs/zi :
418 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425

Hence, the elements of the Jacobian matrix can be described as follows:

oli
¼ Ai1 =li ;
oxp
oli
¼ Bi1 =li ;
oyp
oli
¼ Ci1 =li ;
ozp ð12Þ
oli
¼ ðAi1 Ai2 þ Bi1 Bi2 þ Ci1 Ci2 Þ=li ;
ow
oli
¼ ðAi1 Ai3 þ Bi1 Bi3 þ Ci1 Ci3 Þ=li ;
oh
oli
¼ ðBi1 Bi4 þ Ci1 Ci4 Þ=li :
o/

3. Real-coded GAs

GAs are heuristic search algorithms based on the mechanics of natural selection
and natural genetics. GAs were initially proposed by Holland [18], and have been
widely used in a variety of fields such as combinatorial optimization problems [18–
22]. GAs are optimization methods inspired by natural evolution, and perform a
multiple directional search by maintaining a population of potential solutions. The
population-to-population approach attempts to make the search avoid local optima.
The population undergoes a simulated evolution: At each generation the relatively
good solutions are reproduced, while the relatively bad solutions are eliminated.
GAs use probabilistic transition rules to select solutions for reproduction and
elimination so as to guide their search toward regions of the search space with likely
improvement. This leads to stronger and stronger generations which evolve towards
the solution of the problem. Fig. 3 shows the searching procedure of simple GAs.
To apply GAs to solve the optimal issue, one has to consider the following issues
[18]:

1. the coding scheme;

2. the methodology to produce the initial population;
3. the fitness function;
4. the genetic operators such as selection, crossover and mutation.

3.1. Real-coded scheme

How to encode a solution of the problem into a chromosome is the key issue for
GAs. Choosing an appropriate encoding strategy to represent the candidate solutions
to the problem at hand is the foundation for applying GAs to solve real world prob-
lems [18]. Strategy selection depends highly on the nature of the problem variables.
At present, there are two schemes to accomplish this definition of the chromo-
some, that is, the binary coded scheme and real-coded scheme [21]. Since, any ar-
 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425 419

Fig. 3. Basic procedure of simple GAs.

bitrary contiguous region in the search space cannot be represented by a single

Holland’s schema and since the feasible search space can usually be of any arbitrary
shape, it is expected that the crossover operator used in binary GAs may not always
be able to create feasible offspring solutions from two feasible parent solutions.
However, the real-coded scheme of variables in a GA and a search operator that
respects contiguous regions in the search space may be able to perform better than
the binary encoded scheme in constrained optimization problems with contiguous
search space [22].
Hence, real-coded scheme is selected to define the string of a chromosome. Each
of the above-mentioned position and orientation variables is designated to six
floating point numbers, the first gene of each string determines the sign of each
substring. For this application, the following definition is used: if this gene is 0–4, the
substring is negative and if this gene is 5–9, the substring is positive. The remaining
genes determine the size of the substring. The second gene is the most significant
digit, while the last gene is the least significant digit. Each substring consists of six
floating point numbers, the six substrings cascade to compose the chromosome
which represents the solution to the optimization problem.

3.2. Produce initial population

Because the real-coded scheme is used, the solution space coincides with the
chromosome space. The strategy to produce the initial population is a probabilistic
420 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425

methodology [18]. Considering the diversification of the initial population, the initial
values of the position and orientation should be distributed in the solution space as
evenly as possible.

3.3. Fitness function

Just as mentioned above, the singularity of general six-DOF Stewart platform can
be analyzed by the minimal of the determinant of Jacobian matrix. For the re-
quirement of the GAs, the minimal objective function can be determined as follows:

Minimize f ðP Þ ¼ ðdetðJ ÞÞ2

ð13Þ
Subject to pi 2 S; i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; 6;

where S represents the workspace of the general Stewart platform, and pi stands
T
for the corresponding position and orientation, that is P ¼ ½p1 ; p2 ; p3 ; p4 ; p5 ; p6  ¼
T
½xp ; yp ; zp ; w; h; / .
GAs are optimal searching methods to find the maximum fitness of the individual
chromosome, so it is necessary to transform the minimal objective function into the
maximum fitness function [18]. The maximum fitness function can be expressed by
the following transformation:
1
F ðP Þ ¼ ; ð14Þ
f ðP Þ þ k

where k is a preset constant, which avoids the operation of GA cannot proceed when
the minimum value of f ðP Þ is 0.

3.4. Genetic operator

A genetic operator is the key to implement the GAs, and it includes the following
three basic operators: selection, crossover and mutation [18].

3.4.1. Selection operator

Selection operator is carried out based on the fitness value of individuals, and
those chromosomes that have high fitness values are copied to a potential population
pool. Here, the tournament selection operator is used where two solutions are chosen
from the population and one with high fitness is chosen. The above procedure is
repeated until the number of individuals reaches the requirement of the population.
In order to maintain diversity in a population, a niching technique [22] is used.
When comparing two feasible solutions (m and n), a normalized Euclidean distance
dmn is measured between them. If this distance is smaller than a critical distance d, the
solutions are compared with their objective function values. Otherwise, they are not
compared and another solution n is checked. The normalized Euclidean distance can
be defined as [22]
 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425 421
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
!2ffi
u
u1 X N
x
ðmÞ
 x
ðnÞ
¼t
j j
djmn : ð15Þ
N j¼1 xUj  xLj

This way, the solutions that are far away from each other are not compared to
each other and diversity among feasible solutions is maintained.

3.4.2. Crossover operator

Crossover is the main operator whose role is to offer a means for chromosomes to
mix and match their desirable qualities through a random process. Crossover causes
a structured, yet randomized exchange of genetic information between solutions,
with the possibilities that ‘‘good’’ solutions can generate ‘‘better’’ ones.
The means of crossover are closely integrated to the encoding scheme [21,23].
Because the real-coded scheme is used, the crossover operator in this paper can be
defined as [23]
P 0 ¼ aP1 þ ð1  aÞP2 ; ð16Þ
where P 0 is the offspring after crossover operation, P1 and P2 are the two parents to be
implemented the crossover operation, and a is a user-defined constant which belongs
to ð0; 1Þ.

3.4.3. Mutation operator

Another important genetic operator is mutation, which involves the modification
of the value of each ‘‘gene’’ of a solution with some probability. Even though se-
lection and crossover operation effectively search and recombine extant notions,
occasionally they may become overzealous and lose some potentially useful genetic
information. The role of mutation operator is to mutate to certain genes of the in-
dividuals, to resume the lost useful information.
Because the real-coded strategy is used, the dynamic mutation operator [23] is
selected to implement the mutation operation. For a given parent X, if the element xj
of it is selected for mutation, the resulting offspring is X 0 ¼ ½x1 ; . . . ; x0j ; . . . ; x4 , where
x0j is randomly selected by the following two possible choices [23]:
x0j ¼ xj þ Dðt; Uj  xj Þ or xj  Dðt; xj  Lj Þ: ð17Þ

The function Dðt; yÞ is given as follows:

b
Dðt; yÞ ¼ yrð1  t=GÞ ; ð18Þ
where r is a random number with the range of ½0; 1, t is the present generation, G is
the maximum generation of the genetic iteration, and b is a preset parameter de-
termining the degree of nonuniformity.
The function Dðt; yÞ returns a value in the range ½0; 1 such that the value of Dðt; yÞ
approaches 0 as t increases. This property causes the operator to search the space
uniformly initially (when t is small) and very locally at later stages [23].
The maximum iteration generation is selected as the stop criterion.
422 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425

4. Results

The effectiveness of the proposed genetic singularity analysis method is validated

by the singularity analysis of a Stewart fine-tuning platform for the next generation
large spherical radio telescopes [6]. Its structural parameters are listed as follows:
Ra ¼ 2800 mm, Rb ¼ 2500 mm, h ¼ 1800 mm, a ¼ 10°, b ¼ 120°. In which, Ra and
Rb represent the radii of the base and moving platforms, respectively. a stands for the
splay angle between the adjacent joints, and b represents the angle between the center
of the two pair joints, illustrated in Fig. 2.
Given the structural parameters of the Stewart platform, the extreme reachable
workspace can be easily determined by the method proposed by Huang et al. [24].
Using this method, the workspace of the fine-tuning Stewart platform can be ex-
pressed as follows:
x 2 ½500; þ500; y 2 ½500; þ500; z 2 ½1500; 2000 ðmmÞ;
ð19Þ
w 2 ½25; þ25; h 2 ½25; þ25; / 2 ½25; þ25 ðdegÞ:
The real-coded GA control parameters can be summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Control parameters of real-coded GA
Relative parameters Value
Fitness function k ¼ 0:01
Crossover a ¼ 0:5
Mutation b ¼ 5:0; r ¼ 0:3
Length of chromosome chro l ¼ 6 6 ¼ 36
Size of population pop size ¼ 100
Maximum generation G ¼ 100

Fig. 4. Position corresponding to the maximum fitness function with iteration.

 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425 423

Fig. 5. Orientation corresponding to the maximum fitness function with iteration.

Fig. 6. Variation of the minimal determinant of Jacobian matrix with iteration.

In the iteration of the real-coded GA, the corresponding position and orientation
to the maximum fitness function among the generations are shown in Figs. 4 and 5,
respectively. With the development of the iteration of the GA, the minimal deter-
minant of the Jacobian matrix of the fine-tuning Stewart platform for the next
generation large radio telescope is shown in Fig. 6.
It can be seen from the above figures that the genetic singularity analysis method
for the general Stewart platform is highly efficient and can be accomplished in
424 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425

practice with convenience. Only 10 iterations are occurring the minimal objective
function can be converged.
In the whole workspace, the minimal determinant of the Jacobian matrix of the
fine-tuning Stewart platform is expressed as follows:
detðJ Þmin ¼ 9:30578: ð20Þ
It can be seen from the above minimal determinant of the Jacobian matrix that the
designed fine-tuning Stewart platform for the next generation large radio telescope is
singularity-free, which has laid a solid base for the high precision requirement of the
trajectory tracking.

5. Conclusions

The complexity of singularity analysis of general Stewart platform has trans-

formed to an optimization problem, and a real-coded GA is proposed in this paper.
The square of the determinant of the Jacobian matrix is selected as the objective
function, and a niching technique and dynamic mutation operator are employed to
accomplish the GA. According to the numerical simulation of the fine-tuning
Stewart platform for the next generation large radio telescope, the following con-
clusions can be drawn:

1. A new genetic singularity analysis method for general six-DOF Stewart platform
is proposed in this paper. Once the workspace of the Stewart platform is deter-
mined, then the minimal determinant of the Jacobian matrix can be searched
by GAs. The singularity of Stewart platform depends on this minimal value: if
it is zero, then there are certain singularities, otherwise, the Stewart platform is
singularity-free.
2. The genetic singularity analysis method for general Stewart platform is highly ef-
ficient and convenient for practical applications with an example of the singular-
ity analysis of the fine-tuning Stewart platform for the next generation large radio
telescope.
3. The designed fine-tuning Stewart platform for the next generation large radio tele-
scope is demonstrated to be singularity-free using the above genetic singularity
analysis method, which has laid a solid base for the high precision requirement
of the trajectory tracking.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their appreciation for the financial support of
the National Natural Science Foundation with nos. 59675040 and 50075065 and the
Key Project of Innovation Program in Chinese Academy of Sciences, China. The
authors are also very thankful to the anonymous referees for the numerous remarks
and suggestions which have led to significant improvements of this paper.
 Y.X. Su et al. / Mechatronics 13 (2003) 413–425 425

References

[1] Memorandum of an Agreement to Cooperate in a Technology Study Program Leading to a Future

Very Large Radio Telescope’, signed by participants from Australia, Canada, China, India, the
Netherlands, the USA. Available at http://www.nfra.nl/skai/memorandum.htm.
[2] Nan RD. A proposal of international LT program. Beijing, China: Beijing Astronomy Observatory;
1996.
[3] Leggs TH. A proposal new design for a large radio telescope. Astronomy Astrophys Suppl 1998;
130:369–79.
[4] A proposal for the second Arecibo upgrading program. National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center,
USA, March 1986.
[5] Duan BY. A new design project of the line feed structure for large spherical radio telescope and its
nonlinear dynamic analysis. Mechatronics 1999;1:53–64.
[6] Suand YX, Duan BY. The mechanical design and kinematics accuracy analysis of a fine tuning stable
platform for the large spherical radio telescope. Mechatronics 2000;10(7):819–34.
[7] Stewart D. A platform with six degrees of freedom. Proc Inst Mech Eng 1965;15:371–86.
[8] Khalil W, Besnard S. Self calibration of Stewart–Gough parallel robots without extra sensors. IEEE
Trans Robotics Automat 1999;15(6):1116–25.
[9] Lee MK, Park KW. Kinematic and dynamic analysis of a double Stewart platform for enlarging
workspace and avoiding singularities. IEEE Trans Robotics Automat 1999;15(6):1024–34.
[10] Hunt KH, McAree PR. The octahedral manipulator: geometry and mobility. Int J Robotics Res
1998;17(8):868–85.
[11] Cleary K, Arai T. A prototype parallel manipulator: kinematics, construction, software, workspace
results, and singularity analysis. In: Proc IEEE Int Conf on Robotics and Automation, Sacramento,
California. April 1991. p. 566–71.
[12] Gosselin CM, Angeles J. Singularity analysis of closed-loop kinematic chains. IEEE Trans Robotics
Automat 1990;6(3):281–90.
[13] Park FC, Kim JW. Singularity analysis of closed kinematic chains. Trans ASME J Mech Des
1999;121(March):32–8.
[14] Hao F, Michael McCarthy J. Conditions for line-based singularities in spatial platform manipulators.
J Robotic Syst 1998;15(1):43–55.
[15] St-Onge BM, Gosselin CM. Singularity analysis and representation of the general Gough–Stewart
platform. Int J Robotics Res 2000;19(3):271–88.
[16] Kim D, Chung W. Analytic singularity equation and analysis of six-DOF parallel manipulators using
local structurization method. IEEE Trans Robotics Automat 1999;15(4):612–22.
[17] Han K, Chung WR, Youm Y. New resolution scheme of the forward kinematics of parallel
manipulators. Trans ASME J Mech Des 1996;118:214–9.
[18] Holland JH. Adaptation in nature and artificial systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1992.
[19] Su YX, Duan BY, Zheng CH. Genetic design of kinematically optimal fine tuning Stewart platform
for large spherical radio telescope. Mechatronics 2001;11(7):821–35.
[20] Boudreau R, Gosselin CM. The synthesis of planar parallel manipulators with a genetic algorithms.
Trans ASME J Mech Des 1999;4:533–7.
[21] Gen M, Cheng R. Genetic algorithms and engineering design. New York: Wiley; 1997.
[22] Agrawal KDS. A niched-penalty approach for constraint handling in genetic algorithms. In:
Dobnikar A, Steele NC, Pearson DW, Albrecht RF, editors. Proc Int Conf on Artificial Neural Nets
and Genetic Algorithms. New York: Springer; 1999. p. 249–55.
[23] Michalewicz Z. Genetic algorithms+data structures ¼ evolution programs. 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer;
1994.
[24] Huang T, Wang J, Whitehouse DJ. Closed form solution to workspace of hexapod-based virtual axis
machine tools. ASME J Mech Des 1999;121:26–31.