0 views

Uploaded by ademargcjunior

Adaptive Linear Controller for Robotic Manipulators

- Boiler Comb
- An Application of Robust Feedback Linearization to a Ball and Beam Control Problem
- fluid tank.pdf
- IAETSD-Improvement of Dynamic and Steady State
- Project Team A
- Pid
- Boiler Combustion Control
- ClusterController IA en 15
- [1]-sdarticle (10)
- Control System
- Microcontroler Based PID_2
- In Tech Aug 2010 - PID Controller
- lec1
- CS 2 DEC 15
- lec03-2x2
- Synergetic Control
- 03-RUPESH
- Lecture 02 Electrical Networks Transfer Function
- Proc.CIAM2010[1]
- Introduction to digital system

You are on page 1of 10

VOL.

ac-28, NO. 2.

FEBRUARY

1983

Manipulators

to thepositionand

optimum control theory to the manipulator control. For

velocitycontrol of amanipulatorbyusing

an adaptivecontrollerofthe

example, [4] and [ 5 ] investigate the minimum time solution

manipulator system is

self-tuning type foreachjoint.Thecomplicated

is

along a specified path.The minimumtimeproblem

modeled by a set of time series difference equations. The

parameters of the

solved in [4] using a linearized continuous-time two-dimenmodels are determined by on-line recursive algorithms, which result from

minimizing the sum of the squared equation errors. The adaptive controller sional model which represents a gross simplification. The

of each joint is designed on the basis of the difference equation model and same problem is studied in [ 5 ] using linear programming.

a chosen performance criterion. The controller gains are calculated on-line Both reports [4], [5] present simulation studies. but the

using the model with the estimated values of system parameters. Simulapractical use of the solution algorithms is not discussed in

tion results are presented to demonstrate the applicabilityof the approach.

[4]. and [SI. The use of variable structure theory in controlSome aspects of the implementation arealso discussed.

the typicalwell-knowndrawback

of the minimumtime

solution: the exact determination of the switchmg instances

for the control input is difficult. The practical implementation of the solution is not presented in [6].

A table look-up for the inputs is constructed in [7] to

control a manipulator. The realization of this control

schemerequires tremendous memory, particularly when

the path andthe object size change. Moreover.the optimality of the performance is not evaluated. A different approach is presented in [SI by solving the eigenvalue assignment problem for the linearized model. This scheme is not

based on the minimization of a performance functional.

However. it represents a solution which can be realized if

the linearized model is sufficiently accurate.

The optimal solution to the LPQ problem is applied to

the manipulator control in [9] usingpiecewise constant

controls and a second-order linear model for a single joint.

The solution to a nonlinear optimum control problem is

approximated in [ 101 by forming a sequence of control laws

on the basis of the dynamicprogramming

equation.

Another interesting control scheme is proposed in [ 111 by

introducing a nonlinear feedback loop into thesystem such

that the nonlinear termsin the manipulator model are

cancelled; then a controller is constructed for the linear

model. The schemeassumes that the cancellation of the

nonlinear terms in the model is exact, whch hardly can be

achieved in practice.

An adaptive control scheme using a model reference is

proposed in [12]. The step response of a second-order

underdamped model is used as a reference for the output

of each joint. The gains in the position and velocity feedManuscript received April 2, 1981: revised April 29. 1982 and June 24, back loops are adjusted so that the difference between the

1982. Paperrecommended

by A. K. Bejng. Past Chairman of the

output of the actual system and that of the referenceis

Automation and Robotics Committee. This work was supported in part

by the National Science Foundation under Grant ENG 78-22192.

minimized. The gains are adjusted by the method of steep

The authors are withtheSchool

of ElectricalEngineering. Purdue

descent of the performance criterion in the parametric

University, West Lafayette, N 47907.

by a human-computer interaction in applications

such as in nuclear reactors, in space, and in underwater

explorations. It can also be directly controlled by a computer, whch can be used to automate the motion control

fast and accurately. The dynamic control of an industrial

manipulator involves the determination of the inputs

(torques or voltages) for the actuators whch operate at the

joints so that a set of desired values for the positions and

velocities of the manipulator is achieved. One of the problems in the control of a manipulatoris that the operating

conditions may change; for example, the effective inertia of

an object being moved usually changes along the trajectory

of the positions of the joints and time. T h s complicates the

operation of a controller which has been designed in advance.

During the past decade, manyschemes for thedirect

digital control of a manipulator have been proposed. Most

of the approaches are based on a mathematical model

derived on the basis of Newtonian mechanics. The control

schemes suggested include classicalcontrollers (e.g.. [ 11-[3])

as well as optimum controllers (e&. [4], [6]. [IO]). Among

the classicaldesign approaches, thecalculation

of the

torques for a nominal trajectory is presented in 111. This

control scheme requires a considerable amount of calculations and memory storage: it has been tested in practice.

Another of the early proposed techniques is the resolved

motion rate control [3] in which the joint angle rates are

computed so as to cause the endpoint of the manipulator

to move in a definite direction. More recent studies apply

163

e,

joint position, velocity, and acceleration, respectively. D( e),

a (6 X 6) symmetric matrix, includes the accelerationrelated coefficients of the joints and the effects of link

inertia. Q ( 8 ,B), a six-dimensional vector, signifies Coriolis

and centrifugal torques. G ( 8 ) , a six-dimensionalvector,

represents the torques due to the gravity. The six-dimensional vector u ( t ) is the system input, and F is a diagonal

(scaling) matrix. The expressions of D ( 8 ) , Q ( 8 , e ) , and

G ( 8 ) contain trigonometric functions. A digital simulation

due to a large number of

of (1) isverytimeconsuming

mathematical operations. Moreover, the parameter values

vary from task to task. These aspects are more pronounced

when the solution to an optimumcontrol problem (i.e., to a

Fig. 1. A six-joint manipulator.

two-point boundary value problem) needsto be calculated.

When the optimum control theory has been applied to

(gain) space. The couplingtermsbetween the joints are

the construction of controllers, a common simplification of

neglected; thus, the dynamic model of the manipulator is the model (1) is to assume that the coupling terms due to

considerably simplified. Simulation studies of [ 121 demon- the other joints can be neglected [4], [6], [8],[ 121, [ 131; such

strate the feasibility of the approach. In the model-refer- a control on a joint is called in [8] independent joint

ence control scheme, the complicated model of a manipula- control. In addition, the model is usually linearized. It is

tor based on Newtonian mechanics is not directly being

accomplished in [6] and [ l l ] by introducing nonlinear

used in the design, which makes the approach drastically terms in the feedback controller, which render the model

different from the other aforementioned methods.

linear. The linearization in [4]isperformed

about the

In this paper, we propose autoregressivetimeseries

desired final state, and not about a nominal trajectory;

models for the motion of the joints of a manipulator. The such a linearization is likely to restrict the validity of the

model parameters are obtained by using the data of the linearized model.

measured input-output pairs. Then, the autoregressive

The modelsused in the controller design[I]-[12] are

model is used to determine the controller parameters on

continuous-time (analog) models such as (1) or are derived

line so that a chosen performance criterion is minimized. from (1) by various simplifying assumptions. An alternaThus, the parameters areadjusted using the explicit method tive approach is to discretize the model given in (l), e.g., by

[ 141, [ 181.

Eulers method,and then to design a controller for the

This paper first presents a commonly used mathematical discrete-time model describing the (gross) dynamics of the

model for a manipulator motion. Difficulties encountered manipulator. Interestingly, a continuous-time PID conin its use and simplifications of the model are discussed. A troller is realized in [ 131 using difference equations.

general autoregressive model is then presented. The design

If the model in (1) is first properly linearized about a

of an adaptive controller for each joint of a manipulator is nominal trajectory and then discretized by Eulers method,

outlined. The proposed control scheme is then applied to a multivariable discrete-time model is obtained in the form

the control of a robotic manipulator. Digital simulations of

the system are presented. Some aspects of the implementation are discussed.

NEWTONIAN

MODELFOR A

MANIPLkATOR

seven links, and a gripper (end piece).Fig. 1 shows a

Stanford arm with five rotational (revolute) joints and a

translational (prismatic) joint [2]. Each joint is driven by a

permanent magnet motor; the motor shafts are connected

to encoders/potentiometers for sensing the positions, and

to tachometers for sensing the velocities.

The equations for the motion of the manipulator may be

developed by the direct application of the classical (Newtonian) mechanics [l], [2]. For a manipulator with six joints,

the mathematical model may be written in the joint coordinate system as follows:

0(8)8=Q(8,8)+G(8)+Fu(t)

(1)

six-dimensional vector, and the vector e ( represents modeling errors. Experiments seem to indicate that the choice

of the sampling rate should be no less than 60 Hz ( T G 16

ms)toachieve

a sufficiently smooth control formost

motions. The direct use of (2) is difficult because the

calculation of the model parameters in the coefficient

matrices is a tedious task.

Motivated by the form of (2), an autoregressive model is

proposed here to model the motion of a manipulator and

to design a controller for the system. Such a model will be

determinedon the basis of the measured input-output

data of a manipulator system. The parametersof the model

will be determined so that the best fit of the model to the

a )

164

1983

error sense. The approach is particularly suited to control

the motion of a manipulator in repetitive tasks.

AN AUTOREGRESSIVE

MODELFOR MANIPULATOR

MOTION

A multivariable difference equation model is suggested

by (2) for the motion of a robotic manipulator. As is well

known, the parameters in such an assumed model can be

estimated on line using recursive equations. They can be

obtained by minimizing the sum of the squared (equation)

errors. The resulting equations for the algorithm are reviewed here [15], [16]. Then the algorithm for an adaptive

(self-tuningtype)controllerwillbepresentedusing

the

model with the estimated parameters.

The autoregressive model is assumed to have the same

number of inputsand outputs. The multivariabledifference equation will be written in the following general

form:

y(k)=A(q-')y(k)+B(q-')u(k-d)+h+e(k)

y(k)=BT@(k-l)+e(k).

(9)

The algorithm for the parameter estimation is constructed so that one vector at a time is estimated in 8 of (6).

The error criterion ischosen for eachvector ei of 8 as

follows:

and e,(k) is the ith component of the e vector. The

problem is to minimize E(8,) relative to the parameter

vector 8,.

The solution to the least-squares problem is furnished by

the following recursive equations [ 151, [ 171 where the caret

refers to estimated values:

d,(k)=d,(k-l)+P(k)+(k-l)

(3)

where the sampling period has been omitted in the arguments; the argument k refers to the sampling instant.

k = 0,1,2,. . .,; d is a positive integer specifying the time

delay as an integer multiple of the sampling period. The

constant m-dimensional vector h is a forcing term. which

includes the effects of the gravitationalforces. The rndimensional output vector y and the input vector u have as

the ith component the output y I and the input u, of joint i,

respectively, and i = 1,. . .,m.The equation error vector

e( - ) represents a random, zero-mean, Gaussian white noise

with the covariance R . The argument q-l is a backward

shift operator, i.e., q-'y( k ) = y(k - 1). The ( m X m)

matrices A and B are polynomials defined by

+ . . . + A,q-"

Bo + B1q-' + . . . + B,plq-n+l

A ( q - 1 ) = A&

(4)

B(q-')

(5)

model. Bo isnonsingular, and det B ( q - ' ) has allzeros

strictly outside the unit circle.

To estimate the parameters in (3), the matrix 8 and the

vector 9 are defied:

P(k-l)Q(k-l)QT(k-l)P(k-l)

p+@(k-l)P(k-l)@(k-l)

account for an exponential decaying of past data in tracking a slow drift in the parameters. P ( . ) is a (2n + 1)x(2n

+ 1) symmetric matrix.

The parameter estimates will be calculated on line using

(1 1) and (12). The estimated parameters are then used in

the model (9) to determine the feedback gains andthe

control u ( k ) .

ADAPTIVE

CONTROLLER

OF SELF-TUNING

TYPE FOR

A MANIPULATOR

u'Ru. and R is a positive semidefinite symmetric matrix; Q

e = [ AI , . . . , A , ; Bo,...,B, - l ; h ] F = [ e l , . . . . e , , ] (6) is a positive definite symmetric weightingmatrix; and yd( .)

where the superscript denotes the transposition. Then for describes the desired path vector as a sequence of discrete

points. The expectation operation isconditioned onthe

i = 1,. . .,m,

available measurements up to and including time k - 1.

The admissible controls u(k) which can be considered in

e,= [ aI, , : ~ ~ , a , ! , . a , : ; ~ ~ , a ~ * ; ~ ~ , ;

[ are the ones that are functions of

the minimization of I ku]

bp,;..,bp,,;...b:,-' ,....b:,-';h,]'

(7) the measurements y( r - 7 ) for 7 2 1 and the past controls.

The problemis to minimizetheperformance criterion

@(k-l)= [yF(k-l) ;..,yr(k-n);

(13) relative to the admissible controls while satisfying the

T

u F ( k - d ) ; . . , ~ ' ( k - d - n + 1 ) ; 1 ] . following constraint equation:

(8)

y(k)=dT(k)Q(k-l)+e(k).

(14)

165

the previous section.

An autoregressivemodel for the single input-output

relation of joint i can be obtained from (3)-(7) by setting

m = 1 (independent joint control); it assumes the following

form:

1 ' 1

I

U

CONTROL

SCHEME

PRRRMETERS

1I

y,(k)=

[a{lyi(k-j)+bj,-'ui(k-d-j+l)]

j=l

yo

+ h i + ei(k).

(18)

The problem is solved by expressing the predicted value

d ) in terms of the available information up to time

k - 1, substituting it into equation (13), and performingthe

minimization of I k [ u ] with respect to u ( k ) . The control

which minimizes (13) is determined by the following equation [ 151, [ 161:

y(k

y i ( k )=8:+,(k - l ) + e i ( k )

Ru(k)+BTQIP(k+dlk-l)-yd(k+d)]=O

where

8,= [ai,;..,aYl; b ~ , - - - 7 b ~ - ' ; h j ] T

(20)

+ , ( k - l ) = [yi(k-l);..,yi(k-n);

(15)

ui(k - d ) ; . ,,u,(k - d - n

(in the sense of least-squares error) of y ( k + d ) given the

past measurements and controls up to and including the

time ( k - 1). The r-step ahead predictedvaluemaybe

calculatedrecursivelyusing

the prediction equations obtained from (14) for r = 0,l; - , d :

(19)

+ 1); 117-.

(21)

the parameter vector 8, for the joint i model is based

on (1 1) and (12). Equation (14) with the estimated parameter valueswill then be used to determinean adaptive

controller for joint i. For each joint i, performance crite);(k+rlk-1)=8T(k-l)c$(k-1+rlk-1)

(16) rion I,k(u) of the form shown in (13) is minimized with

respect to admissible controls. The resulting equation (15)

is the basis of the control algorithm. A numerical example

is next presented to illustrate the approach.

NumericalExample I : The set of nonlinear coupled

differential equations in (1)wasused

in simulating the

dynamics of a manipulator. The numerical values of the

parameters in these equations were those of the JPL arm

[2]. The maximum speed is about 98 in/s for the gripper of

the manipulator along the trajectory. The measurements

The algorithms for the adaptive control scheme consist of

were generated by digital simulation of (1) using 0.0025 s

(1 1) and (12) for the parameter estimation and (14)-(17)

for the subinterval of integration. These values were superfor computing the controller gains. The block diagram of

imposedby sample values from a white Gaussian noise

the manipulator system with the controller is shown in Fig.

process with zero mean and variance u2. In this example, u

2. Two case studies will next be presented to illustrate the

was chosen as 0.005 rad for the rotational movement and

applicability of the control scheme.

0.05 in for the translational motion.

An adaptive controller is designed such that the average

Case Study 1

of the mean-squared errors and the control energy appropriately weighted is minimized, wherethe errors refer to

Separate Joint Control (SISO): The problem is to design the deviations of the actual values of the motion from the

an adaptive controller for each joint so as to make the desired values. Then, the resulting controller is to be tested

angular motion of each joint follow a desired path speci- by digital simulation.

fiedby discrete points. It is assumed that interactions

For the system, the input is the voltage ui applied to the

between the joints are small. Thus, coupling terms in the joint motor, and the output is the velocity ui of the joint.

autoregressive modelof the manipulator system are omitted, On the basis of the simulation studies, the autoregressive

and each joint will becontrolled independently of the model was chosen for n = 2, d = 1, and a,' = 0, i.e.,

other.

The problemwillbesolvedby

applying the explicit u , ( k )= a?u,(k -2)+bOui(k - 1)

method of designing an adaptive controller for each joint.

+ b f u i ( k - 2 ) + h , + e i ( k ) (22)

In this case, the equations for the control algorithms are

di of

166

where the parameter 0, = [a:, by,b:; hi]= istobedetermined. The performance index is chosen as follows:

EXPECTED[ ST.LINE I

SIHULATION.SINGLE-VRR

I~(uj)=E([Yi(k+1)-u~*(k+1)]2

+ ~ i [ u i ( k ) ] ' / ~ , ( k - 1 ) ) (23)

where E{ * /+i( k - 1)) denotes the expected value given the

measurement Gi(k - 1). The desired trajectory is specified

at discrete points by uf*(k + 1) = of(k + 1)+ ci[y,d(k- 1)

- y , ( k - l)]/T where u f ( k 1) is the desired velocity at

step ( k + 1) and the last term with constant ci accounts for

the correction in the error of the position y,( .) in the

sampling interval k - 1.

The input u , ( k ) is selected so as to minimize the performance index in (23):

u i ( k )=

6:

[Yf*(k+l)-d:ui(k-l)

( 6:)2 + E i

- i ; ~ ~ ( k - l ) - i , ] . (24)

The control algorithm can then be written on the basis

of (24).

The described controller was tested by digital simulation

studies. The desired path specified by discrete points was

selectedas:

1) a straight line, and 2) a circle in the

Cartesian coordinate system. The control scheme was programmed on CDC 6500. Due to the D/A conversion, a

constraint lui(k)l < 40 V was imposed. The constant ci is

-1.m I

1

chosen as 0.5. The weighting factor ci isset equal to

.am .1m .m .w

.m

.m

TIM(SEC1

[by(k - l)] ', which varies with time; it provides a relative

(b)

weighting between the control u , ( k ) and the error [ ui(k +

1)- uf*(k + l)]. The forgetting factor p in (12) is set equA Fig. 3. (a) Trajectory of joint 3 in joint coordinates: Example I , 1). (b)

Trajectory of joint 4 injoint coordinates: Example1. 1).

to 0.95 for every joint. The initial values of the parameters

are 8 =1, &'= h: = 0, hi= 0, and Pi(0)= lo4 I . The

WECTEO(ST.LINE1

parameters are estimated using ( 1 1) and (12), and the

-SIMILRTION.SINGLE-VRR

control is computed as in (24).

I ) The Desired Path a Straight Line: The task is to move

37.m

the end effector (hand) from point P1 to point P 2 in 0.6 s.

The path of the gripper is a straight line in the Cartesian

(space) coordinate system. It is desired that the speed of

the end effector follows an isosceles triangle at a constant

acceleration (deceleration) starting from the zero initial

speed until it reaches a maximum speed in 0.33 s, and then

decelerates to zerospeed at the terminal state P2. The

numerical values chosen for P1 and P 2 were P 1 = (42.5,

1s.m

2.4,23.2) and P 2 = (- 12.3, - 10.5, 20.0)expressedin

inches; thedesired rotational motion is 84" for the end

5.m I

-5n.m

-w.m

-S.m

-d.m

-1;.m

-1d.m

effector.

X-RXIS (INCH1

The simulation results for the system with the

adaptive

Fig. 4. Gripperpositioninspacecoordinates:Example I , 1).

self-tuning type controller are shown in Fig. 3(a), (b) in the

joint coordinates, and the trajectory for the gripper in the

space coordinates in Fig. 4. The estimate of by is graphed

in Fig. 5.

2) TheDesired Path a Circle: The secondtask of the

gripper is to follow a circlewith a diameter of25

in

the

centered at point (-30, 8.5, 20 in).whilekeeping

desired angular speed constant. The plane of the circle is

specified in the Cartesian coordinate system by x =

Fig. 5. Estimatedparameter by for joint I ; Example 1, 1).

-30 in. The hand starts at the point (-30. 8.5. 32.5 in)

I

'J

~~

~~

167

EXPECTECICIRCLEI

SIMULRTION,SINGLE-VRR

.m

rn

.w

TIMEISECI

.lem

.m

EXPECTEOICIRCLEI

-SIMULRTION,SINGLE-VRR

.m

.m

.1m

.m

.w

TIHE[SEC)

(a)

.wl

I

.m

(b)

Trajectory of joint 4 in joint coordinates;Example 1,2).

-MPECTEDICIRCLEI

"'"1

a .m

for the manipulator system with the controller when different weights (0-4 lb) are moved along the same desired

path. Simulation results for different loads and repetitive

motions are not shown here because they looked similar to

the ones in Figs. 3 and 6 .

Our simulations indicate that the system performs well

when the separate joint control is applied, even at high

speeds. The main advantage of a separate joint control is

that it is simple. Moreover, the controller can be implemented using microprocessors or a small computer.

-SIMILRTION.SINGLE-VRR

17.mU

N

1l.m-

Case Study 2

5.m

-0.50

-.a

5.60

11.60

17.60

25.60

task here is to determine an adaptive control scheme for

Fig. 7. Gripper position in space coordinates; Example 1 2).

the manipulator jointssuch that the motion of the manipulator jointsfollow a desired path asclosely as possible. The

desired trajectory to be followed is described at discrete

points by a six-dimensional vector y d ( k ) ,the components

of which are determined as described in Example 1.

The problem is solved using a multivariable autoregressive model of (3) for the motion of the joints. In order to

.lcm 1'

I

restrict the complexity of the multivariable model, the

.m

.1m

.w

mcll

.&

T M I SEC I

variables of the model may be decomposedinto two groups

Fig. 8. Estimated parameter by for joint I ; Example I , 2).

on the basis of the mechanical structure of the manipulator. The first three joints with appropriate links are mainly

with zero speed. The trajectory for the orientation rotates associated with the positional movement, and the last three

joints representing the skeleton for the hand with the

90" during the 0.8 s period.

The graphs describing the behavior of the system with orientation. The coupling terms between the variables of

the adaptive controller are computed; the simulation re- the two groups are neglected. The termdescribing the

sults are shown in Fig. 6(a), (b) in the joint coordinates, interactions between the variables of each group are inand in Fig. 7 in the space coordinates. The estimate of by is cluded. Thus, the matrices Aj in (4) are written as

graphed in Fig. 8.

In both cases, the adaptability of the controller can be

observed, particularly at the high speed of the manipulator

system. Initially, the system response oscillates whiletrying

to follow the desired value, and then settles down. More- wherej = 1; * , nand A,, and A j , are both 3 x3 matrices

over, the graphs demonstrate how the system learns the with nine unknown entries to be estimated. For example, if

values of the parameters along the path by on-line adjust- the output is the velocity v ( -), the vector is decomposed as

Y - M I S (INCH)

.(Ea0

I

168

2, FEBRUARY 1983

matrices Bj in ( 5 ) can be chosen to be diagonal in order to

avoid the redundancy [17].

The autoregressive model was chosenso that n = 2, d = 1

on the basis of simulation studies. The model was assumed

in the following form:

u(k)=~,o(k-2)+B~u(k-1)+B,u(k-2)+h+e(k)

(26)

the gravitational forces; u ( k - 1) = [ u l ( k - l), u,(k l), .,u6(k - I)]= represents the voltages applied to the

motors of the joints; e ( k )= [ e , ( k ) ,e 2 ( k ) ; .,e6(k)lTis

the equation error vector; and each ei(k ) , i = 1,. . .,6 represents a white Gaussian zero-mean noise process which is

independent of u ( k - m ) , u(k - rn) for rn 2 1 and e j ( k )

for j * i. The matrices A , , Bo, and B , are described in

conjunction with expression (25). The matrix A , in (4) was

selected as a null matrix to simplify calculations.

Equation (26) may be written as (9) where 8 and @( k - 1)

are defined as follows:

p 2 1

by1

I b:,

TIME(SEC1

(a)

EXPECTED( ST. LINE 1

-SIHULFlTItlN~flUTI-VFR

h l p

(27)

-l.m

+(k-1)= [u,(k-2);..,u,(k-2),

u l ( k - 1);

.1ym

. , U 6 ( k- 1);

2mI

.w

TIHE(SEC1

.m

.m

(b)

Trajectory of joint 4 in joint coordinates; Example2, 1).

u , ( k - 2 ) ; . . , u g ( k - 2 )(;218I)T .

Theperformance criterion ischosen in the following

form:

I k ( U ) = E{llu(k

.m

+ l)-ud*(k + 1)11;

--_

EXPECTED[ST.LINEl

I

.m

-SIMULFlTII1N.NULTI-VRR

+llu(k)ll2R/+@ - 1))

(29)

E' am

up* is computed as described in example 1; R is chosen

~ ~ 2is, a diagonal matrix; and Q = I .

equal to ~ \ ~ owhich

By minimizing (29), the controller algorithm will become

specified:

u*(k)=[h;++]-'B,[ud*(k+1)-A2u(k-1)

-B,u(k-1)-h].

s.m

-5D.m

(30)

computations of the parameter estimate b and (30) for the

on-line computation of the controls.

Numerical Example 2: The simulation of the dynamics

of a manipulator was performed with the same numerical

values as in Example 1. The problem was also posed as in

Example 1.

+.M

+t.m

X-RXIS

-28.m

-16.00

-1o.w

(INCH)

the multivariable model given by (26)-(28). In the parameter vector 8, the six unknowns in each rowof (27) were

estimated as a group. The initial conditions for the estimation are A^,= I , Bo = h, = 0, h= 0, and P(0) = lo4 I. The

values of the controller were obtained from (30). The

169

-EXPECTED[CIRCLEI

-SIMULRTION,HULTI-VRR

amw

d 23.03N

>

X

17.m-

U

N

1l.m-

-8.50

-.m

6 . ~17.50

0

11.m

23.50

Y-RXIS(INCH)

___-_

EXPECTED(CIRCLE1

-SIMULRTIl3N.MULTI-VRR

.W

-2.m

.m

.1m

.sol

.w

.m

.m

TIMEISECI

(b)

Trajectory of joint 4 in joint coordinates;Example 2, 2).

Cartesian coordinate system.

1) Desired Path a Straight Line: For a straight line, the

simulations resulted in the trajectories which are graphed

in Fig. 9 for joints 3 and 4 in the joint coordinate system.

The trajectory of the gripper is shown in Fig.10 in the

Cartesian coordinate system.

2) The DesiredPatha Circle: The desired path is the

same circleas in part 2) of Example 1. The simulation

results are shown in Fig. 11 for the joint coordinates, and

in Fig. 12 for the Cartesian space coordinates.

DISCUSSION

Autoregressive difference equations are introduced here

to model the motion of the joints in a robotic manipulator.

The inputs in the model are the motor voltages, and the

outputs are selected as the velocities or the positions of the

manipulator joints. It is also possible to select the output

variables in the Cartesian coordinate system; thus, the

model can include the transformation between the Cartesian and jointcoordinates.

not require a priori

knowledge of the manipulator system such as the configuration and the numerical values of the physical parameters. The sampling period for the time series model can be

selected relatively long without sacrificing the accuracy of

the model. In the experimental work on the Stanford arm,

which is still going on, the sampling period of 56 ms was

selectedwhen the control schemedescribedwas

implemented using on-line calculations in LSI-11 (modified Unimation controller) with floating-point arithmetic. The same

CPU was used to control three joints, and three model

parameters per joint were estimated. Thenumberof

mathematical operations imposed this lower bound on the

sampling period.

For the design of a controller, the desired trajectory for

the manipulator is specified in the performance index, (13),

at discrete points. It maybe obtained, for example,by

moving the arm manually, while registering the output of

the encoders. Alternatively, the prespecified discrete points

describing the desired path in the Cartesian coordinates

can be transformed into the joint coordinate system.

It is known that a self-tuning controller designed using

the model with estimated parameters converges, under

certain conditions, to the optimal controller obtained for

the modelwith the true parameter values [ 181. In the

manipulator control, however, the adaptive controller of

the self-tuning type is introduced to control the transient

behavior, instead of the steady-state values. The convergence of the parameter estimates and controller gains may

not beachieved during the finite timeoverwhich

the

motion takes place (adaptive controller). In repetitive tasks,

the last estimates of the parameters from the previous run

can be used as the initial estimates. Thus, the controller of

the robotic manipulator is trainable in repetitive tasks,

resulting in a more accurate performance.

In the numerical examples, the estimates of the parameters converge faster in the single variable model than in the

multivariable model. When the trajectories are compared

in the cases in whichmost estimated parameters have

reached the steady-state values, the simulation results for

I70

the multivariable case in the examples show no clear improvements relative to the results obtained for the single

variable case. It is possible that adaptive feature of the

closed-loop single variable model accounts, at least partly,

for interacting effects.

The recursive algorithms used in the proposed control

scheme require only a small amount of memory space. The

mathematical operations are simple and fast to compute;

however, the time for the on-line calculations of the controller gains is relatively long, for example,as compared to

the case of constant controller gains.

The controller equations (15) and (24) describe a feedback controller with time-varymg gains, and as such, it is a

proportional controller with time-varying gain. The timevarying gain for the variable of joint 1 is the inverse of the

estimate 6: shown in Figs. 5 and 8. If an integrating effect

is desired in the controller, the performance index should

be chosen so as to include a term ~ l l u ( k ) -u ( k - 1)11*.

Indeed, different features in the controller may be obtained

by properly selecting the performance criterion. Because of

the time-varying gains of the controller (15), a direct comparison to the existing control schemes, many of which use

PID controllers with constant gains,is difficult, and is

hardly objectively possible.

The adaptive controller proposed represents a new approach to control a robotic manipulator. Its adaptive feature makes the manipulator controller more versatile and

trainable. It will perform well under diversifiedcircumstances, particularly in repetitive tasks. Since the control

problem of a robotic manipulator is usually of the finite

time type, the proposed adaptive controller may not always

exhibit the self-tuning property of the asymptotic optimality. The adaptive self-tuning type controller is here applied

successfully to a finite time control problem, which is

different from the usual applications of such controllers.

CONCLUSIONS

An adaptive controller of the self-tuning typeis proposed here for each joint of a robotic manipulator. The

controller is determined by minimizing the expected value

of a quadratic criterion subject to the constraint of an

autoregressivedifference equation (model)and available

measurements. Thus, this controller makes the output of

each manipulator jointfollow a desired trajectory specified

at discrete points. The proposed control scheme does not

require a priori knowledge of the physical parameters of

the manipulator or its configuration.

The algorithms for the adaptive controller are designed

by the explicit method. Theestimates of the model parameters and the controller gains are computed recursively on

line. Hence, the requirement on computer memory is relativelysmall, although many mathematical operations are

necessary for the on-line operation.

Simulation studies on the manipulator system have been

presented to demonstrate the applicability of the adaptive

control scheme. Numerical examples demonstrate that the

joint control is comparable to the performance of the

system which was obtained on the basis of a multivariable

modelwith coupling terms.Some aspects of the implementation of the control algorithm have been discussed.

REFERENCES

computer controlled artn, Ph.D. dissertation. Stanford Univ., Stanford. CA, Aug. 1972.

A. K. Bejczy, Robot arm dynamics and control, JPL Tech.

Memo. 33-669, Feb. 1974.

D. E. Whitney. Revolved motion rate control of manipulators and

human prostheses, IEEE Trans. Man-Machine S p . , vol. MMS-IO,

pp. 47-53, June 1969.

M. E. Kahn and B. Roth. The near-minimum time control of

open-loop articulated kinematic chains. J . Dynamic Syst., Meas.,

Contr. ( A S M E ) . pp. 164-172, Sept. 1971.

J. Y. Luh and M. Walker, Minimum-time along the path for a

mechanical arm. in Proc. 1977 IEEE Con/. Decision Contr.. New

Orleans, LA. Dec. 1977, pp. 755-759.

K. K. D. Young, Controller design for a manipulator using theory

of variable structure svstems, IEEE Trans. S p t . , Man, Cpbern.,

vol. SMC-8. pp. 101-109, Feb. 1978.

J. S . Albus. A new approach to manipulator control: The cerebellar model articulation controller (CMAC), J. Dynamic Syst., Meas.,

Contr. ( A S I M E ) .pp. 220-227, Sept. 1975.

W. J. Book. 0. Maizzc-Neto, andD. E. Whitney. Feedback

control of two beam, two joint systems aith distributed flexibility,

J . &nomic Syst. Mens., Contr., pp. 424-431, Dec. 1975.

W. E. Snyder and W . A. Gruver. Microprocessor implementation

of optimal control for a robotic manipulator system. in Proc. 18th

IEEE Con/. Decision Contr., vol. 2, Fort Lauderdale, FL. Dec. 1979.

G. S. Saridis and C-S. Lee, An approximation theory of optimal

Syst.. Man,

control for trainable manipulators, IEEETrans.

Crbern.. vol. SMC-9. pp. 152-159. Mar. 1979.

H. Hemami and P. C. Camana, Nonlinear feedback in simple

locomotion systems. IEEE Tram. Automat. Contr., pp. 855-860.

Dec. 1979.

S . Dubowsky and D. T. DesForges, The application of model-referenced adaptive controlto robotic manipulators, J. b n a m i c

SW., Mens.. Contr. ( A S M E ) , vol. 101, pp. 193-200, Sept. 1979.

D. E. Whitney. Force feedback control of manipulator fine motions. J. Dynamic Sysr., Meas.. Conrr. ( A S M E ) . pp. 91-97. June

1977.

K. J. Astrom, U. Borinson, L. Ljung, and B. Wittenmark. Theory

and application of self-tuning regulators, Automarica. pp. 457-476,

1977.

U. Borinson, Self-tuning regulators fo a class of multivariable

systems, Automatica, vol. 15, pp. 209-2fj. 1979.

H. N. Koivo, A multivariable self-tuning controller, Dep. Elec.

Eng., Tampere Univ. Technol., Tampere, Finland, Rep. 31! 1979.

R. L. Kashyap and R. E. Nasburg, Parameter estimation in

multivariate stochastic difference equations, IEEE Trans. Automar.

Contr.. vol. AC-!?, pp. 784-791, 1974.

P. J. Gawthrop. On the stability and convergence of a self-tuning

controller, Int. J. Conrr., vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 973-998, 1980.

M. Vukobratovic, D. Hristic, and D. Stokic, Dynamic control of

industrial manipulators. Industr. Robot, pp. 104-109, June 1981.

M. Takegark and S . Arimoto, An adaptive trajectory control of

manipulators, lnt. J . Confr.. vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 219-230, 1981.

was born in

Ilmajoki, F d a n d . He received the diploma in

electrical engineering from the Finland Technical

University, Helsinki. the MS. degree from Indiana University, Bloomington. and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering in 1963 from Cornell

University. Ithaca, N Y .

He worked at Stroemberg Oy in Finland from

1957 to 1960. He was a Rotary Fellow in 1958 to

1959. and had a Woodrow Uilson FelloLvship in

1960 to 1961. He has been associated with Purdue

AC-28, NO. 2,

FEBRUARY

Professor in the School of Electrical Engineering. He held the position

(grant) of Senior Researcher at the Finnish Academy of Technical Sciences from 1973 to 1974. He has been involved in research on min-max

problems, optimal control and estimation of time delay equations, and

stochastic modeling of water pollution in rivers. He coauthored a paper

which showed for the first time that DO measurements and the knowledge

of the DO and BOD models suffice to estimate BOD and DO without the

need for measuring BOD in a lab, which takes several days. His recent

work includes the design and testing of a microprocessor-based feedback

system to automatically control mean arterial blood pressure by means of

vasodilator drugs. His research interests are centered on computer (microprocessor) control, robotic manipulators, and applications of system

theory to biomedical problems such as blood pressure control.

Dr. Koivo received the D. Ewing Award in 1979 from the School of

Electrical Engineering, Purdue University, for excellence in teaching. He

is a member of Eta Kappa Nu and Sigma Xi.

171

1983

in

Taichung, Taiwan, Republic of China,on December 28, 1951. He received the B.S. degree in

electrical engineering from the National Taiwan

University, Taiwan, in 1973, the M.S. degree in

electrical engineering from the University of

Hawaii, Honolulu, in 1978. He is presently a

candidate for the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering at Purdue University, West Lafayette,

IN.

From 1975 to 1976 he served as an Instrument

Engineer at Chinese Technical Consultant Inc., Taipei, Taiwan. From

1976 to 1978 he was a Teaching Assistant in the Department of Electrical

Engineering, University of Hawaii. Since 1978he has served as a Research

and Teaching Assistant in the School of Electrical Engineering, Purdue

University. His current research interests include modeling and control of

robotic manipulators, system identification, adaptive control, and computer control.

OMAR B. HIJAB

control problem of Feldbaum, i.e., the LQG optimal control problem in

the presence of Bayesianparameteruncertainty.Thesolutionof

this

probleminvolves two parts, one relating to filtering and one to control.

Although tve establish our fittering result in complete generalityin the last

section,most of the paper concentrateson the finite parameter case to ease

the exposition. Thecontrolresultthat we establish is incomplete in the

sense that the smoothness of the optimal cost function is assumed rather

than proved. Nevertheless, our results and methods are such that we arrive

atanewproof

of the classicalseparationtheorem

showing thatthe

well-known LQG feedback law is optimal within the widest possibleclass of

admissible controls.As this new proof avoids all talk of dependence of the

sigma algebra on the control, weak ~~Iutions,

measure transformation

techniques, etc., we feel that this result will help to clarify what is involved

in the classical separation theorem.

where xj is normally distributed with mean my and variance ?, j = 1; . , N , and E ( . ) and r](*) are standard

Brownianmotions.

For notational simplicity, we take

u, x , y all to be scalars. All the results that appear here and

their proofs remain valid, mutatis mutandis, in the general

vector case. Here, i is a random variable taking values in

{ 1,. . ., N } and aj,.bj,cj, g j , j = 1, * . N are scalar continuous functions of time.

To each control u associate the cost

e ,

I. INTRODUCTION

time and 5 L 0, j = 1,. . N , are scalars. Throughout, i will

denote the above random variable, while j and k w

l

i be

integers. In this paper we derive an expression for the control

u*( that minimizes J among all controls that depend on the

observations y( -). If N = 1, we are reduced to the usual

LQG situation and hence, the results described here may

be viewed as an extension or generalization of the separation principle to this multimode1 situation.

The above problemis important for at least two reasons.

First, it is a special caseof the problem of adaptive control,

when the unknown parameter is restricted to a finite set.

Second, there are many systems (such as helicopters) that

display multiregime behavior in an essential way. For these

situations, the above formulation of the problem is a

natural optimal regulator design philosophy.

a ,

e )

d x = a , x d t + b i u d t +xg( iOd )[ = x ?

(1.1)

dy = cixdt + dr]

( 14

y(0)=0

March 29, 1982. Paper recommended by S. I. Marcus, Past Chairman of

the Stochastic Control Committee. This work was supported in part by

the U.S. Office of Naval Research under the Joint SeMces Electronics

Program Contract N00014-75-C-0648while the author was a Research

Fellow at the Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138.

The author was at the Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138. He is now with the Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

44106.

0018-9286/S3/0200-0171$01.00

01983 IEEE

- Boiler CombUploaded byyoseppirnawan
- An Application of Robust Feedback Linearization to a Ball and Beam Control ProblemUploaded byE Daniel Reyes
- fluid tank.pdfUploaded byMunther Mohd
- IAETSD-Improvement of Dynamic and Steady StateUploaded byiaetsdiaetsd
- Project Team AUploaded byBecirspahic Almir
- PidUploaded byJose Garza Castillon
- Boiler Combustion ControlUploaded bySergio Gonzales
- ClusterController IA en 15Uploaded byDangQuangTrung
- [1]-sdarticle (10)Uploaded bydaniedb
- Control SystemUploaded byCzar Reslin
- Microcontroler Based PID_2Uploaded byparchure123
- In Tech Aug 2010 - PID ControllerUploaded byMicuko Ošinoko
- lec1Uploaded byBenjaminVazquez
- CS 2 DEC 15Uploaded byShivprasad Kabbure
- lec03-2x2Uploaded byjacobwatson
- Synergetic ControlUploaded byrostamkola1229
- 03-RUPESHUploaded bySaurabh Pandey
- Lecture 02 Electrical Networks Transfer FunctionUploaded byAhmad Raza
- Proc.CIAM2010[1]Uploaded bySameer Al-Subh
- Introduction to digital systemUploaded byMuhammad Syifa
- Robust High Fidelity Needle Insertion in Soft Tissues Implemented on a Teleoperation SystemUploaded byArash Arjmandi
- ell225_inrodUploaded byprammy doy
- Quad Copter Simulink PaperUploaded byNguyễn Thành Trung
- 05461647Uploaded byAbdallah Omar Al Ayoubi
- Im 3415711578Uploaded byAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- 1-s2.0-S0389430400000916-mainUploaded bysuzanavila
- Location-Based-Management-for-Construction-Planning-Scheduling-and-Control-convertido_Seccion1.docxUploaded byAxl Benavente
- Model-Reference Adaptive Control BasedUploaded byEzzeldin Balla Mohamed
- Process ControlUploaded byHozaifa Mohammed
- instrumentquestions-110228054321-phpapp01Uploaded bySadhana Verma

- 2010_TelemedicinaUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Manipulação Em Tempo Real de Sinais Eletrooculograficos Para o Controle de Um Teclado VirtualUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_CaracterizacaoEletroEletronicaAparelhoEletroporacaoMESAvaliacaoASuaAdequacaoNormaNBR6060Uploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_How Unreliable Power Affects the Business Value of a HospitalUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Risco Do Uso Do Eletrocautério Em Pacientes Portadores de Adornos MetálicosUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Maximum Respiratory Pressure Measuring System- Calibration and Evaluation of UncertaintyUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Prótese Mioelétrica de Membro SuperiorUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Transdutor de Pressão, Baseado Nas Características de Fase Do Efeito GMI, Destinado a Aplicações BiomédicasUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_UmPadraoMedicaoEnergiaPulsoDesfibriladorUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_DesfibriladorAutomáticoPortatil-ConsideraçõesdeProjetoUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Requisitos de Segurança Para Iluminação de Centros CirúrgicosUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Selectable Gain Amplifier for Inductive Sensor Used to Measure Human MotionUploaded byademargcjunior
- OCT and DSP Sprabb9Uploaded byEduardo Bartolome
- 2009_Wi-Fi Em Ambientes HospitalaresUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_mejoramiento de Algoritmo Clásico de Detección de Complejos Qrs en Señal ElectrocardiográficaUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_AvaliacaoConfortoQualidadeAmbientesHospitalaresUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_ControleUmidadeTemperaturaIncubadoraNeonatalUsandoControlePreditivo_CBA2010Uploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Avaliação Da Qualidade de Energia Elétrica de Um Centro CirúrgicoUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Eletromagnetismo - A Interferência Causada Em Equipamentos Médico-HospitalaresUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Breve História Da EletrocardiografiaUploaded byademargcjunior
- 998 3765 Healthcare Energy Efficiency for Hospital PortugueseUploaded byadriano_falavinha9186
- 2010_Coração Artificial e Dispositivos de Assistência Circulatória No Brasil e No MundoUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Elaboração de Um Modulo Simplificado Para Captacao de Sinais EletromiograficosUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Ambiente Computacional Para Ensino de Radiologia e Diagnóstico Por Imagem- Sistema Tutor Para Treinamento de Residentes e Levantamento de Termos TécnicosUploaded byademargcjunior
- Ressonancia MagneticaUploaded byLarissa Borges
- 2010_Amplificador de Eletromiografia Com ÁudioUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Automating Emergency Power Supply System Testing in HospitalsUploaded byademargcjunior
- 2010_Assessing the Health of Your Healthcare Facility’s Electrical Power Distribution SystemUploaded byademargcjunior
- Radiologia Intervencionista - Revista Brasileira de Física MédicaUploaded byGustavo Vasconcelos
- 2010_Acionamento Por Sinais Eletriomiograficos de Software Para Comunicação AssistivaUploaded byademargcjunior

- 35 Yearbook EngUploaded byqanaq
- Imp Sums Icse x --Quadratic EquationsUploaded bylovanya_joshi
- Beam Deflection FinalUploaded bysspagnol24
- 238954741-Mathematic-in-Action.pdfUploaded byagatheagathe
- Lesson PlanUploaded byErika Jung
- ccUploaded byStefan Bianca
- am06-xferfcns_16Sep06.pdfUploaded byWaqas Qamar
- 105 lesson planUploaded byapi-273542496
- OR quizUploaded byMr Nerd
- Perturbation methods.pdfUploaded byMark Fernando
- An efficient iterative method for computing deflections of Bernoulli–Euler–von Karman beams on a nonlinear elastic foundationUploaded byThieu
- Kisi-kisi Sem 1 Kls 8 Tahun 2011 (1)Uploaded byLala 'imroatus Salamah'
- Applied DifferentialUploaded byEmanuel Martínez
- EM 1110-2-1914 Design, Construction and Maintenance of Relief WellsUploaded bymote34
- Rahman ~ Advanced FM IXUploaded byAnonymous mNJoAxCZ
- TheoryUploaded byRick Hunter
- Algebra 2 TEKS From TEAUploaded byganesh8sundaresan
- 06652372.pdfUploaded byOmar Chayña Velásquez
- 8 EnvironmentalUploaded byVinay Prabhakar
- Board-of-Aeronautical-Engineering-SB-1.pdfUploaded byCruz Plus
- Electricity 1Uploaded byAlexander Wijesooriya
- SSC 10th Maths Code a Solution UpdatedUploaded bySunil Singh
- J.N. Reddy_An Introduction to the Finite Element Method, 3rd Edition.pdf(1).docxUploaded byÍthalo Santana
- Matrics and Determinants Solved ExamplesUploaded byShweta Babu Prasad
- Ansexam1.pdfUploaded byAbdulhamidElgasaier
- Around The Cauchy-Kowalewski and Ovsyannikov-Nirenberg Theorems_-_Sergei Kuksin.pdfUploaded byAndres Granados
- 2Uploaded byJishan Ahmed
- Euler Differential Equation PDFUploaded byNate
- SE11 The basics of plotting functions.pdfUploaded byFabinho Juntá Ká Afer Tuxá
- 8-St Lines and CirclesUploaded byMd Rizwan Ahmad