Analisis de puma 600

© All Rights Reserved

4 views

Analisis de puma 600

© All Rights Reserved

- Kinematics Modeling and Simulation of SCARA Robot Arm
- 10.0000@Mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.Org@Generic 59BC1E48523A
- Computer Animation
- Kinematic Synthesis of Mechanisms
- Taller a Van Zada Ingles
- Differential Geometry based Control Theory
- Proceedings HM 2014
- Geometry Ch 9-10
- Eng. Dynamics as Easy as 123
- Plane Attack The IRS
- 24 Minaker Abstract
- ms_series_math
- The Standard Desrete System
- 117AC - ADVANCED KINEMATICS AND DYNAMICS OF MACHINERY.pdf
- 15-Suspension Systems and Components v2
- Inverse
- Introduction to MATLAB
- 01 Basic R
- f2-revision-chapter-10.pdf
- Info Map in 0001

You are on page 1of 5

Manipulator

A. BAZERGHI, A. A. GOLDENBERG, MEMBER, IEEE, AND

J. APKARIAN

robotic manipulator is presented. Discrepancies found between the actual

manipulator in laboratory tests and the first model presented are discussed.

The link coordinate frames are redefined in order to introduce a new

transformation for a tool frame. Modifications are made to previously

published solutions of the inverse kinematics and differential kinematics.

The actual reference orientation frame of the manipulator is formulated

such that the orientation of the end effector can be expressed in terms of

the actual angles 0, A , T.

I. INTRODUCTION

The development of mathematical models is motivated by the

complexity of robotic systems which have highly nonlinear dy-

namic characteristics, making the analysis and design of control

schemes impractical. In the development of real-time controls

and computer simulations for an industrial robot such as the Fig. 1. PUMA 600 coordinate frames.

PUMA 600 manipulator series, the problem of exact kinematic

modeling and parameter identification must be addressed. The

TABLE I

kinematic and differential kinematic models are needed for off- PUMA 600 LINK PARAMETERS

line/ on-line generation and tracking of task space trajectories of

manipulators. In addition, these models can be used for static Joint 0 r £ range

force/torque transformations between coordinate frames to allow

real-time processing information from end-effector force sensors.

'-90 0 0 0 ±2.7925

Paul et al. [1]-[3] have developed kinematic control and dif-

ferential kinematic control equations for simple manipulators. -3.892

0 0 £2 + .7504

These equations were then applied to the PUMA 600 robotic

-0.9075

manipulator with successful results. The solutions to these equa- 90 0

r3 £3 +4.040

tions failed to match the robot in actual laboratory tests, how- -1.918

ever, and were considered unacceptable for use in a simulation -90 0 r4 0 +2.9670

model. In this correspondence an addendum to [1]-[3] is pre-

+90 0 0 0 ±1.7453

sented. The additions to the algorithms presented in [1], [2] make

the kinematic and differential kinematic models match more 0 rs 0 ±4.6425

accurately the robotic manipulator's computer output.

It is assumed throughout that the reader is familiar with the £2 17.00 in £3 -.79 in

basic principles of kinematic modeling such as the specification r3 5.87 in r4 17.00 in rs = 2.22 in

of position and orientation through homogeneous transforma-

tions. The following basic notation is used herein:

R(x, lX) rotation about unit vector x by an angle lX, Using these coordinate frames the transformation matrices Ai are

T(x, d) translation along unit vector x by a distance d, defined relating the ith link frame to the coordinate frame of link

i-I. Some rules have been specified in assigning these frames

R ij rotation matrix from frame i to frame j,

[3], [4]. In the' case of PUMA 600 it was found that F6 does not

If coordinate frame of link j,

follow the same rules. The correct orientation of frame F6 was

Aj homogeneous transformation matrix from Fj -1 to

then assigned as shown in Fig. 1.

~.,

An additional frame in Fig. 1 is referred to as the reference

pi position vector coordinates of frame i with respect

orientation frame Fq, [6]. This frame represents the reference with

to frame j,

respect to which the orientation of the manipulator's end-effector

C(), S () cos 0, sin O.

and tool frames are defined.

II. ASSIGNMENT OF COORDINATE FRAMES The transformations {Ai} allow us to define the position and

orientation of the end-effector frame relative to the base frame

The PUMA 600 manipulator is a six-degree-of-freedom manip- using the following transformation 16:

ulator consisting of seven links with six rotary joints. To obtain

the Cartesian position and orientation of the end-effector frame

with respect to the base frame (Fo ) given the joint variables, we s2 (1)

follow the methods developed by Denavit and Hartenberg [4] for o

assigning coordinate frames to each link as shown in Fig. 1.

The vector pg= [Pxpypz]T specifies the position of the origin

of the end-effector coordinate frame with respect to the refer-

Manuscript received January 4, 1983; revised June 1983. This work was ence-base frame Fo and n~ = [nXnynz]T, s2 = [sxSySz]T and

supported by the NSERC under Grant A4664.

A. Bazerghi and 1. Apkarian are with the Department of Electrical Engineer-

ag = [aXayaz]T are the components of the projections of the

ing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. base three unit vectors of F6 with respect to Fo.

A. A. Goldenberg is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Uni- The transformation matrices A i are functions of the joint

versity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. variables 0i and the link parameters Ii' lXi' and ri which are

484 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOL. SMC-14, No.3, MAY/JUNE 1984

'F6

/'

/

/

/ 'X~

/

/

4 ~//

I

I

link length

link twist (2) s~ a~ p~) = (ROT p~). (9)

link distance.

o 0 1 000 1

It was found that some of the link parameter values used in [1] The A j are obtained in [1] and A 6T takes into account '5 and the

do not match those of the actual PUMA 600. The correct values new transformation A ET. Through these transformations, one

for these parameters were experimentally obtained and are given can now obtain the position and orientation of the tool with

in Ta~le I. Note that /3 has a negative value and '5 is nonzero. respect to the base frame.

Keeping the matrices A 1-A 5 as described in [1], we can introduce For the computer simulation program of PUMA 600 [5], this is

'5 into the transformation matrix 16 by redefining A 6 as follows: a more viable alternative since it allows the user to define any

tool size at arbitrary orientations. This method is used in the

Ali = R(Z5' 90) . R(Z5' ()6) . T(Z5' (5). (3) actual manipulator when operated in its TOOL mode command.

In case no tool is specified, the tool frame is defined such that the

Then

null tool orientation is taken as having an orientation 0, A, T of

-S6 -C6 0 0 (90, - 90, 0) [6] with respect to the reference orientation frame,

C6 -S6 0 0 and the origin of the tool frame coincides with the origin of the

Ali = (4) end-effector frame (F6).

0 0 1 '5

0 0 0 1 III. KINEMATIC EQUATIONS

and the solution to the inverse kinematics problem can be per-

formed. These transformations are nontrivial to solve using the The transformation matrix X in (8) allows us to express the

outline in [1] and [3] since a nonzero value of '5 introduces orientation of the tool frame FT with respect to the base frame

transcendental equations in the entries of transformations U Fo. The reference frame Fep is defined in reference to frame Fo as

n = 1,2,· . ·,6. To avoid the redefinition of the U transforma-

tions, F6. was made to coincide with F5 ('5 = 0) a~ done in [1], o

and a tool and end-effector transformations A 6T and AGE were o (10)

introduced as shown in Fig. 2. 1

The following transformations are now defined:

Th~ orie~tati<?n of FT with respect to Fep is expressed in terms

of orientation, approach, and twist (0, A, T) angles. This results

(1~

~)

0 0

1 0 from three consecutive rotations about Fep, namely, 0 about Yep'

AGE = 1 (5) A about the new xep' and T about the new zep. This transforma-

0

tion is given by RepT:

0 0

(11)

A

ET

= (RET

000 ~¥). (6)

So) (1

. 0

A 6T = AGE· A ET · (7) Co 0

Thus the final transformation relating the tool frame to the base COCT + SOSAST - COST + CTSOSA SOCA)

frame is given as follows, usi~g (1) and (7):

RepT = CAST CTCA - SA (12)

(

(8) - SoC T + COSAST SOST + COCTSA COCA

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOL. SMc-14, No.3, MAY/JUNE 1984 485

and thus Since the tool transformation (7) is fixed, an expression for 16

in (1) can be obtained from (8) as follows:

ROT = R O$ . R$T

0

s20 a~ pg).

0 1

(23)

SOCA) 6 6T

ROT = SOCT - COSAS T - SOST - COCTSA -COCA

( Having obtained 16 from (13), the task of solving the inverse

CAST CTCA -SA

kinematics problem can be dealt with in much the same manner

(13) as presented in [1] with the following exceptions:

from where 0, A, T angles can be calculated as shown in the next p, r3

a) (Jl = tan -1--:- - tan -1 (24)

section. Px ±Vd2 - rl

B. Solution to Forward Kinematics

with

The forward kinematic problem is defined as follows. Given

the joint angles OJ, obtain the position of the tool with respect to d2 = P; + p}:. (25)

Fo and its orientation relative to F . In contrast to what was mentioned in [1], the minus sign of

The position of the tool is obtained in a straightforward

manner by simply calculating the transformation matrix X given (± Vd 2 - rl) corresponds to a right shoulder configuration of

by (9). The first three elements of the fourth column in (9) the manipulator, and the plus sign corresponds to a left shoulder

denoted by P~ are the position of the tool frame with respect to configuration.

base frame.

The orientation of the tool frame is expressed in 0, A, Tangles

with respect to F<t>. The transformation from FT to base frame Fo

b) Since 13 has a negative value rather than the positive

value mentioned in [1], the calculation of 3 has to be slightly

modified, with the final result being

°

is given by (13). One has to solve for 0, A, and T to satisfy (13). -I d

In trying to obtain explicit solutions of 0, A, and T, we must 03 = tan- 1 _ 3 + tan- 1 (26)

use the arctan function (ATAN2 in a computer simulation) in r4 ±Vc 2

- d2

order to obtain an angle value in the [ - 'IT, 'IT] range. By examin- where

ing the ROT matrix (13), the following algorithm is proposed to

solve for 0, A, and T. c 2 = 4/~rl + 4/~/~ (27)

1) If R~j = ± 1, then A = +90° and T = 0°, respectively;

and

this is a singular case, where if A = ± 90°, then 0 and T become

collinear. In this case, the PUMA 600 robot sets the T angle to d = f? + fl - r1 - I~ - I~ (28)

zero and recalculates O.

2) If Rbj =1= 1, then T = ATAN2(R~~/R~}) if 90° ~ A ~ fl = C1Px + SIPv (29)

-90° and

f2 = -pz (30)

T = T + 180° otherwise. (14)

and

Also

f12 + fl- r1 - I~ - I~ = 2/2r4S3 + 2/2/3c3 = d. (31)

A = ATAN2( - R~j/( Rb~ST + R~}CT )). (15)

Here, for a left shoulder configuration, the plus sign corre-

3) Note that sponds to the below elbow configuration, and the minus sign to an

above elbow configuration. If the manipulator is in a right shoulder

°

(16) configuration, the plus and minus signs take the reverse cor-

and respondence to that of the left shoulder configuration. Angles 2 ,

(J4' (Js, and (J6 can be obtained by the method outlined in [1].

(17)

D. Solution to Forward Differential Kinematics

Therefore,

The forward differential kinematic problem is defined as fol-

(18) lows. Given the joint rates 8 = (()1 O2 . . . ()6) T, calculate the linear

and angular velocities of the tool frame with respect to the base

also frame.

(19) The solution to this problem can be approached by first

establishing a relationship between the differential translations

and and rotations mentioned in [2] and [3] and linear and angular

veloci ties of the tool frame.

(20)

Define uj to be the unit vector along Zj' Pj6 the vector from

Therefore, the origin of Fj. to F6, vj 6 the linear velocity of the origin of F6

resulting from OJ + 1 with all other (Jk = 0, k =1= j + 1 and ""6 the

R~~(CT) + R~}( -ST) = So' (21) angular velocity of frame F6 resulting from ()j+ 1 (Fig. 3). Then it

follows that

We can obtain 0 from (18) and (21) as

Vj6 = u j X Pj6 ()j + 1 (32)

o= ATAN2(So/Co)' (22)

"'j6 = U j . OJ + L: (33)

C. Solution to Inverse Kinematics Therefore,

The inverse kinematic problem is defined as follows. Given the 5

orientation and position of the tool frame X in (8), obtain the -0 On

1'60_ '"

- 1...J U j P j 6 fJj + 1 (34)

joint configuration angles. )=0

486 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOL. SMc-14, No.3, MAY/JUNE 1984

~.

Then, (39) becomes

d~

6

= (R 000Ii 16

06 . (41)

velocities v introduced by w «(,,) X p = v) are already accounted

for in the initial velocity v supplied. This allows for easy transfer

between forward and inverse differential kinematics such that the

results completely match.

To obtain the inverse differential kinematics solutions, we

followthe method outlined in [2]. This method is developed for a

six-link ~UMA 600 with no offset at the end effector (r5 = 0) or

Fig. 3. Schematic representation of end-effector velocities. any tool attached to it. It is trivial though to compensate for these

changes in the following way.

a) Given the angular velocity of the tool (,,)T' since A 6T is fixed,

and then the angular velocity of frame F6 with respect to base frame

5 is given by

wg = L uj . ()j+l (35)

(42)

)=0

where ilj, the skew operator corresponding to the unit vector uj b) The linear velocity vg of frame F6 can be obtained from the

projected in frame Fo , is defined as tool's linear velocity v~ as follows:

0

0 -uj0z Uj y (43)

uj0z -uj0x

0 (36) Having obtained wg

and vg,

we can proceed to solve the

-uJ.v

0

»t.

0

0 inverse differential kinematic control problem using the method

in [2], [3].

Expanding (34) and (35), we obtain

IV. CONCLUSION

A kinematic model of the PUMA 600 which exactly matches

(37)

the actual manipulator was developed. In [1], [2], some link

parameters were not properly accounted for, and tool specifics

where Jo is the Jacobian matrix [2], [3] defined with respect to the were omitted. In this correspondence we redefined the link coor-

base frame. dinate frames and introduced a new transformation for the tool

Having defined the link transformation matrices (A 1-A 6 ) , the which took into account the value of r5 (end-effector offset), thus

Jacobian Jo can be obtained in a straightforward manner as allowing modeling any size of tool. Some modifications were also

described by (32)-(36) with the exception that the last transfor- made on the solutions of the inverse kinematics so that no

mation A 6 mentioned in [2], [3], [5] must be redefined as follows: discrepancies occurred when the manipulator was in left/right or

below/ above configurations. The actual reference orientation

A6= A 6 • A 6T (38) frame of the manipulator was also formulated in which the

orientation of the tool is expressed in 0, A, T angles. The orienta-

where A 6 T is defined in (7). tion angles were not previously discussed, and their inverse

solution was outlined in this correspondence. Some modifications

E. Solution to Inoerse Differential Kinematics to the differential kinematics solutions were also introduced so

The inverse differential kinematic problem is defined as fol- that the tool frame is properly taken into consideration.

lows. Given the linear and angular velocities of the tool frame,

With these changes, a simulation model was implemented [5].

obtain the joint rates 6.

The results matched the measurements taken from real-time tests

In [2], [3] a method to obtain the inverse Jacobian for differen-

of the PUMA 600 at the University of Toronto Automation and

tial translations and rotations without resorting to inverting the

Robotics Laboratory.

6 X 6 Jacobian matrix (37) is presented. The Jacobian can be

singular at more than one point in space.

The differential dT matrix of any homogeneous transforma- APPENDIX

tion T can be expressed in terms of the differential change of its

-C6 0

~)

elements [2], [3], or in terms of the linear velocity v = (VXv)Pz) T,

and the angular velocity w = (wxwywz ) T. (-S - S6 0

U6 = {: 1

11 16 IS as given In (1), then 0

0 0

dsg (39)

o C

( - S6 S

-CSC6 s, s)

-Cs

ssr

Us = - S6SS -SsC6 - Csrs

Given the angular velocity (,,), the skew symmetric differential C6 - S6 0 0

rotational matrix can be expressed as 0 0 0 1

C4SS rs )

(40) U = - S4S6CS + C4C6 - S4CS C6 - S6 C4 St SS S4 S S rS

4

S6SS SSC6 Cs csrs1+ r4

0 0 0

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOL. SMc-14, No.3, MAY/JUNE 1984 487

- C3(C4CSS6 + S4C6 ) + S3S6 S S - C3(C4CSC6 - S4 S6) + S3SSC6 C3C4SS + S3CS C3C4SS'S + S3(CS'S + '4)+ [3 C3)

U = - S3( C4CSS6 + S4C6) - C3S6SS - S3(C4CSC6 - S4S6) - C3SSC6 S3C4SS- C3CS S3C4SS'S - C3(Cs's + '4) + [3 S3

3

( - S4S6 CS + C4C6 -~~4-~~ ~~ ~~~+~

o 0 0 1

C2 [S3 S 6 S S - C3(C 4CS S6 + S4C6 ) ] + S2 [S3(C4CSS6 + S4C6 ) + C3S6SS ] C2[S3 S S C6 - C3(C4CSC6 - S4S6)] + S2[S3(C4CSC6 - S4C6) + C3SSC6]

U = [S3S 6 S S - C3(C4CSS6 + S4C6)] - C2 [S3 (C4CSS6 + S4C6) + C3S6SS ]

S2 S2 [S3 S SC6 - C3 (C4CSC6 - S4S6)] - C2 [S3(C4CSC6 - S4C6) + C3SSC6 ]

2

( - S4S6CS + C4C6 - S4CS C6 - S6C4

o o

C2 [ C3C4 s, + S3CS]- S2[ S3C4 s, - C3CS ] C2 [C3C4S S ' S + S3(Cs's + '4) + [3 C3]

S2 [C3C4SS + S3CS ] + C2 [S3C4S S - C3CS ] - S2 [S3C4S S' S - C3(Cs's + '4) + '3 S3] + C2 '2

S4SS S2 [C3C4S S ' S + S3(Cs's + '4) + [3 C3]

o + C2[S3C4S S' S - C3(Cs's + '4) + [3 S3] + [2 S2

S4 S S' S + '3

1

Therefore,

- C23(C4CSS6 + S4C6) + S23 S6S S - C23 (C4CSC6 - S4S6) + S23 S S C6 C23C4s, + S23 CS C23C4S S' S + S23(C S' S + '4)+C23/3 + 12C2 )

U = - C23(S6 S S) - S23 (C4CSS6 + S4C6) - C23SSC6)- S23(C4CSC6 - S4S6) - C23CS + S23 C4s, - C23(Cs's + '4) + S23(C4S S's + 13) + 12S 2

2

( C4C6 - S4C5 S6 - S4CSS6 - S6C4 S4S 5 S4 SS r5 + '3

o o o 1

Classification, Connectivity Analysis and

nx = C1[S23 S6S5 - C23(C4C5S6 + S4C6)] + S1[S4C5 S6 - C4C6] Visualisation for Data Interpretation

"» = S1[S23 S6S5 - C23(C4C5S6 + S4C6)] - C1[S4C5 S6 - C4C6] A; OLLERO AND 1. AGUILAR-MARTIN

». = C23S6S5 + S23(C4C5S6 + S4C6)

Abstract-Self-learning classification of data and connectivity analysis

SX = C1[S23 S5C6 - C23(C4CSC6 - S4S6)] + S1[S4C5 S6 - S6C4] using probabilistic and fuzzy concepts are compared with subjective and

Sy = S1[S23 S5C6 - C23(C4C5C6 - S4S6)] - C1[S4C5S6 - S6C4] visual rearrangement of data. Both methodologies are fully described and

results are compared on two examples: crisp binary data and normalized

SZ = C23S5C6 + S23 (C4C5C6 - S4S6) real data.

a y = S1[C 23C4S5 + S23C5] + C1S4S5 A. I ntroduction

az = C23C5 - S23 C4 S5 Multivariable data analysis is required when a structure is to be

detected on a set. This enables the observer to have a different

Px = C1[C23C4S5'5 + S23 (C5'5 + '4) + C23/3 + 12Cz ]

look at the same set where the elements, no longer appear by

- S1 (S4 S5'5 + '3) themselves, but by their cross relations. Statistical analysis gives

an interpretation of the unhomogeneity of the set in terms of

p.'¥' = S1[ C23( C4S5'5 + 13) + S23(C5'5 + '4) + IzCz] features directly linked to probabilistic populations. Clustering,

or automatic classification adds to that interpretation a decision

+ C1(S4 S5'5 + '3) process, or mapping, which assigns to each element x Ega class

pz = C23( C5'5 + '4) - SZ3 ( C4S5'5 + 13) - IzSz. C, such that x E C; The set of classes {C} i E I is therefore a

partition fJlJ of the set Q.

B. Classification and Partitions [9J

REFERENCES A classifier is a system that performs the mapping w ~ 0.

[1] R. P. Paul, B. Shimano, and G. E. Mayer, "Kinematic control equations The partition f!JJ = {C, }~=1 is equivalent to the set X =

for simple manipulators," IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., vol. SMC-11,

pp. 449-455, June 1981.

{ Xi( W ) } ~= 1 of the characteristic functions of each class, that is

[2] - , " Differential kinematic control equations for simple manipulators," 1,

IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., vol. SMC-11, pp. 456-460, June 1981.

if w E C,

~(w)=O

[3] R. P. Paul, Mathematics, Programming and Control. Cambridge, MA: , if w e C,

MIT Press, 1981.

[4] J. Denavit and R. S. Hartenberg, "A kinematic notation for lower pair

mechanisms based on matrices," J. Appl. Mech., pp. 215-221, June 1955. Manuscript received April 11, 1983; revised October 1983.

[5] A. Goldenberg, "Software development for simulation of a robotic-manip- A. Ollero is with Escuela Tecnica Superior de Ingenieros Industriales de

ulator," Univ. of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, Mech. Eng. Tech. Rep., Vigo, Universidad de Santiago, Vigo (Pontevedra), Spain

Apr. 1982. J. Aguilar-Martin is with Laboratoire d'Automatique et d'Analyse des

[6] PUMA Robot Manual, Unimation. Systemes du CNRS, Toulouse, France

- Kinematics Modeling and Simulation of SCARA Robot ArmUploaded byIjmret Journal
- 10.0000@Mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.Org@Generic 59BC1E48523AUploaded byGindiMan
- Computer AnimationUploaded byNikita Ahuja
- Kinematic Synthesis of MechanismsUploaded byHarshan Arumugam
- Taller a Van Zada InglesUploaded byRomario Alberto Villero Pacheco
- Differential Geometry based Control TheoryUploaded byD.Viswanath
- Proceedings HM 2014Uploaded bygoranb87
- Geometry Ch 9-10Uploaded byEmily Todd
- Eng. Dynamics as Easy as 123Uploaded byZolBahriRazali
- Plane Attack The IRSUploaded byJoshua J. Israel
- 24 Minaker AbstractUploaded byMari Muthu
- ms_series_mathUploaded bySarath Htaras
- The Standard Desrete SystemUploaded bysmanoj354
- 117AC - ADVANCED KINEMATICS AND DYNAMICS OF MACHINERY.pdfUploaded byvenkiscribd444
- 15-Suspension Systems and Components v2Uploaded byHanieyzMy
- InverseUploaded byNITESH
- Introduction to MATLABUploaded byMakhdoom Ibad Hashmi
- 01 Basic RUploaded byArthit Thetkham
- f2-revision-chapter-10.pdfUploaded byIzudin Hasan
- Info Map in 0001Uploaded byDetermer
- invkin.pdfUploaded byRavi Sharma
- DLL-Gen-Math-Week-4Uploaded byJerry Abalos-Gulong Obinguar-Gabac Lpt
- Course3-Lesson01.pdfUploaded byArvionz
- Ch 5 TorsionUploaded byKutsu Shida
- 520153 June 2017 Examiner ReportUploaded byMohd Zawawi
- 0c96051efdfd8cbfe4000000Uploaded byAnonymous 3G7cYv
- Cheaper Matrix ClocksUploaded bydouzebis
- Bbmp1103- Edward - CopyUploaded byNur Fazalina
- SyllabusUploaded byvicky60702000
- hw4Uploaded byNayim Mohammad

- LinearUploaded byLuqman J. Cheema
- PYQ CHAPTER 1 AND 2Uploaded byAmer Ihsan
- Lecture Notes Em FieldsUploaded bydorathi
- Lecture 7Uploaded bySsheshan Pugazhendhi
- kelm403.pdfUploaded bySoniya Sahu
- Measures of Central Tendency FinalUploaded byVirencarpediem
- List of Perfect NumbersUploaded byMinhaj Babu
- notes_co905_12Uploaded byGerasimos Politis
- Herrmann 1989Uploaded byCésar Augusto Cardona Parra
- Hermite-hadamard InequalityUploaded byTho Nguyen
- Fundamentals of Physics-Halliday,Resnick,WalkerUploaded byRival Mapulusikau
- 2014 t2 Trial Ssi JbUploaded bymasyati
- e 174460Uploaded byanon_33416438
- (Chicago Lectures in Mathematics) Robert J. Zimmer-Essential Results of Functional Analysis -University of Chicago Press (1990)Uploaded byPaulo Gonzalez
- ece308-5Uploaded byTina Ian
- Pseudo-spectral MethodsUploaded bySaima Nasir
- Solution Manual for Introduction to Aircraft Structural Analysis 2nd Ed - MegsonUploaded byMasoomeh Akbarzadeh
- Lab 5Uploaded byryanritchie35
- 42111_DynamicOptimizationUploaded byAlexander Vener
- goekenUploaded byDiego Vialle de Angelo
- MAE331Lecture8.pdfUploaded byPranav Bhardwaj
- MIT18Uploaded byjoiedevie
- Seismic Imaging From Classical to TomographyUploaded byRizka
- 4. Mathematics - IJMCAR - Numerical Solution of System of SecondUploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 18sensi1Uploaded byPotnuru Vinay
- MODULE 1-Simultenous Linear and EquationsUploaded byAnonymous PPYjNtt
- Fall CourseUploaded byMaci Costa
- Lec 1 Admath Review TaylorUploaded byMiguel Villarroel
- Boundary MethodsUploaded byHarshit Bansal
- PC235W13 Assignment4 SolutionsUploaded bykwok