0 views

Uploaded by Amino file

a

- System Dynamics
- Physics+P1+Topical+Past+Papers
- Moment of Inertia
- phy 1
- Balancing Theory
- Method of Relaxation
- Applied Mechanics by Rk Rajput
- 35942381 Engineering Mechanics
- A 655
- Analytical science - Newtons mechanics
- Roundness
- MCQ on Basic Physics
- Centre of Gravity and Moment of Inertia
- Engineering-Mechanics by north 2.doc
- 4 2 Basic Bio Mechanics
- Online Quiz Answers i a 1
- 2005 11 Pendulo Amortiguado
- An31e Vm Bal
- Part Test 1 - 21102018
- 2006 C Mech Rubric

You are on page 1of 15

net/publication/271745466

DOI: 10.1134/S1064230713040047

CITATIONS READS

13 97

3 authors:

Nizhny Novgorod State University Universität Potsdam

128 PUBLICATIONS 485 CITATIONS 22 PUBLICATIONS 213 CITATIONS

Gregory V. Osipov

Nizhny Novgorod State University

145 PUBLICATIONS 4,553 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

All content following this page was uploaded by Dmitry Balandin on 21 April 2018.

ISSN 10642307, Journal of Computer and Systems Sciences International, 2013, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 650–663. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2013.

Original Russian Text © D.V. Balandin, M.A. Komarov, G.V. Osipov, 2013, published in Izvestiya Akademii Nauk. Teoriya i Sistemy Upravleniya, 2013, No. 4, pp. 150–163.

ROBOTICS

D. V. Balandin, M. A. Komarov, and G. V. Osipov

N.I. Labachevskii Nizhnii Novgorod State University, pr. Gagarina 23, Nizhnii Novgorod, 603600 Russia

Received October 17, 2012; in final form, March 25, 2013

Abstract—Problems of controlling a spherical robot with pendulum drive are considered. A mathe

matical model of the dynamics of this robot is constructed and control laws in the form of state feed

back that provide robot motion along a given trajectory are synthesized. Results of computer simula

tion that demonstrate efficiency of the proposed control laws are presented.

DOI: 10.1134/S1064230713040047

INTRODUCTION

During last decade, works aimed at design of mobile robots, including spherical robots, applied in dif

ferent fields of human activity, have been conducted. In general a spherical robot is a spherical shell with

material bodies inside it. Different technical constructions, such as a system of rotating flywheels, a set of

moving masses, located on orthogonally related axes, as well as a pendulum, connected with the spherical

shell by a joint, and moved by a system of motors [1–3] can be used as drives. Spherical robots are referred

to the class of systems with internal moving masses [4–7] and have a number of specific features charac

teristic of these systems. First the motion of a spherical robot is performed by friction forces applied to the

spherical shell at the point of its contact with the surface on which it moves. Second the spherical shape

safely protects the inner parts of the robot against external effects and impurity. Third a spherical robot is

continually rotating, though it is always in the working state. Four as investigation conducted have shown, the

behavior of these roots is described by sufficiently complex mathematical models. However these models still

make it possible to investigate their dynamics and to develop strategies in order to control them.

This paper is devoted to investigation and synthesis of a control for a spherical robot, driven by a pen

dulum mechanism. Motion equations are derived under the assumption of a point contact of a spherical

shell with a horizontal surface. A statefeedback control that provides the approach of the center of the

spherical robot to the motion trajectory determined by a plane curve given in a parametric form is con

structed. Results of computer simulation that show the efficiency of the synthesized control laws are pre

sented.

A mathematical model of a spherical robot moving on a horizontal plane is considered. It is supposed

that the robot consists of two rigid bodies: a spherical shell and a pendulum fixed at the center of the shell

by a spherical joint (Fig. 1). The friction in the joint is not taken into account. The sphere of the radius r

has the mass М and the moment of inertia about any axis passing through the sphere center is J. The pen

dulum is a rigid body consisting of a rod whose one end is fixed in the joint at the center of the spherical

shell, and a dynamically symmetric ball is fixed at the other end. It is supposed that the rod mass is negli

gibly small compared with the ball mass, which is m. Denote by j0 the moment of inertia of this ball about

any axis, passing through its center, and denote by l the distance from the point at which the pendulum is

fixed to its center of mass, coinciding with the ball center. We assume that a motor is mounted at the center

of the spherical shell, whose stator is rigidly connected with the shell. The motor produces a torque Q rel

ative to the center of the shell, affecting the pendulum. The torque –Q with the opposite sign affects the

spherical shell.

To describe the mathematical motion model for a spherical robot, we take a fixed coordinate system

Oxyz rigidly connected with the support horizontal surface. We assume that the plane Oxy is parallel to the

support surface, the axis Oz is directed vertically upwards, and the center O is located on the horizontal

plane, passing through the center of the spherical shell. Then we take a moving coordinate system O1x1y1z1

moving rectilinearly relative to the fixed coordinate system, whose center O1 is rigidly connected with the

650

A MOTION CONTROL FOR A SPHERICAL ROBOT WITH PENDULUM DRIVE 651

center of the spherical shell. The axes of the coordinate system O1x1y1z1 are parallel to the corresponding

axes of the coordinate system Oxyz.

Let us write the equation of variation of the momentum and angular momentum of the spherical shell

and pendulum in the fixed coordinate system. For the spherical shell we have

··

Mξ = R – Nγ + Mgγ + P,

(1.1)

Jω· = – Q + r [ γ, P ],

where ξ and ω are vectors of the position of the center of mass of the spherical shell and its angular velocity

with the coordinates (x, y, z) and (ωx, ωу, ωz) in the Oxyz coordinate system, R is the reaction force in the

spherical joint, N is the magnitude of the reaction force orthogonal to the support surface applied to the

center of the spherical shell, P is the friction force applied to the shell at the point of contact with the sup

port surface, lying in the horizontal plane, g is the gravitational acceleration, and γ is the unit vector with

the coordinates (0, 0, –1).

The equations of variation of the momentum and angular momentum of the pendulum in the fixed

coordinate system Oxyz are

··

m ( ξ + le·· ) = – R + mgγ,

(1.2)

· = Q – ml [ e, ξ·· ] + mlg [ e, γ ],

ml [ e, e·· ] + j 0 Ω

2

where e is a unit vector, directed along the rod, from the center of joint to the center of mass of the pen

dulum with the coordinates (ex, ey, ez) in the system O1x1y1z1, and Ω is the vector of angular velocity of the

pendulum with the coordinates (Ωx, Ωy, Ωz) in the system Oxyz.

Eliminating from Eqs. (1.1) and (1.2) the reaction force R, we obtain

··

( M + m )ξ + mle·· = – Nγ + ( M + m )gγ + P,

Jω· = – Q + r [ γ, P ], (1.3)

· + ml [ e, ξ·· ] = Q + mlg [ e, γ ].

ml [ e, e·· ] + j 0 Ω

2

e· = [ Ω, e ], (1.4)

and differentiating which with respect to time, we obtain

· , e ] + [ Ω, [ Ω, e ] ] .

e·· = [ Ω (1.5)

652 BALANDIN et al.

Four vector variables ξ, ω, e, and Ω in the system of differential equations (1.3) with account of (1.4)

and (1.5) determine the dynamics of the spherical robot, moving on the horizontal surface.

To complete the mathematical model, it remains to specify how the magnitude of the reaction force of

the support surface N and the friction force P are given. Let us multiply the first equation of (1.3) by γ and

obtain

N = ( M + m )g + ( M + m )z·· + mle··z . (1.6)

In motion of the spherical shell without separation from the support horizontal surface z·· ≡ 0; therefore

the magnitude of the force is

N = ( M + m )g + mle··z , (1.7)

and the condition of motion without separation is the inequality

( M + m )g + mle··z ≥ 0. (1.8)

To write the expression for the force P, we introduce the notation vc for the instantaneous velocity of

the point of contact of the spherical shell with the support surface; then we have

·

v c = ξ + r [ ω, γ ]. (1.9)

Assume that the force P is given according to the dry friction law, i.e., for vc ≠ 0

P = – κNv c / v c , (1.10)

where N is defined according to (1.6) and κ is the dry friction coefficient. For vc = 0, there is no sliding,

the friction force becomes equal to the static friction force, and the motion is performed with account of

the nonholonomic constraint

·

ξ + r [ ω, γ ] = 0. (1.11)

In this case, the order of the system of differential equations, describing the robot motion may be

reduced. Indeed in this case we can eliminate the static friction force P from the first two equations of sys

tem (1.3). For this it is sufficient to multiply the first equation of (1.3) by the vector rγ from the right, and

then add the first and the second equations. Finally with account of nonholonomic constraint (1.11), we

obtain

2

(1.12)

Thus without sliding of the spherical sell, the dynamics of the spherical robot are described by the sys

tem of equations

2

0

e· = [ Ω, e ].

In addition without sliding, the condition

2 2

Px + Py / N ≤ κ (1.14)

should be valid, where the magnitude of the normal pressure force N is calculated according to (1.7), and

the components of the static friction force Px and Py are determined as follows:

P x = ( M + m )rω· y + mle··x ,

(1.15)

P y = – ( M + m )rω· x + mle··y .

A similar mathematical model with account a nonholonomic constraint and without control torques

(Q = 0) was constructed and analyzed in [8]. It was shown that this system is integrable and seven its inte

grals were found.

A MOTION CONTROL FOR A SPHERICAL ROBOT WITH PENDULUM DRIVE 653

We start the investigation of control problems for the spherical robot from the case of motion of the

robot on the support horizontal plane without sliding. In this case, the robot dynamics are determined by

system of equations (1.13).

Consider first the problem of arrangement of the motion along a chosen trajectory, described by the

center of the spherical shell. Let us define the motion trajectory of the sphere center by a curve in a para

metric form x = x0(t), y = y0(t), where x0(t) and y0(t) are twice continuously differentiable functions

of time.

P r o b l e m 1. Find the vector of control torques Q providing motion of the robot along a given trajec

tory. In the statement of this problem, it is also assumed that at the initial time instant t = 0 we have the

relations

0

ω x ( 0 ) = – y· ( 0 )/r,

0

ω y ( 0 ) = x· ( 0 )/r, (2.1)

ω z ( 0 ) = 0.

To solve this problem, using relation (1.5), we resolve the system of differential equations (1.13) with

respect to ω· and Ω· and thus obtain

ω· = A 1 ( Ω, e ) + B 1 ( e )Q,

Ω · = A ( Ω, e ) + B ( e )Q, (2.2)

2 2

·e = [ Ω, e ],

where Ai and Bi, i = 1, 2, are 3 × 3matrices, and the vector Q is the control acting on the spherical robot.

The explicit expressions for these matrices are not specified here because of their extreme bulkiness. In

motion of the center of mass of the robot along the trajectory in view of nonholonomic constraint (1.11),

0

we have given angular velocity ω0(t) and acceleration ω· (t) of the spherical shell with the components

0 0 0 0 0

ω x ( t ) = – y· ( t )/r, ω y ( t ) = x· ( t )/r, ω z ( t ) = 0,

(2.3)

0 0 0

ω· x ( t ) = – y·· ( t )/r,

0

ω· y ( t ) = x·· ( t )/r,

0

ω· z ( t ) = 0.

Denote u0(t) = ω· (t) and express Q from the first vector equation of (2.2), in which ω· = u0(t):

0

–1 –1 0

Q = – B 1 ( e )A 1 ( Ω, e ) + B 1 ( e )u ( t ). (2.4)

It is clear that the necessary condition of this representation of the control torque Q is that the matrix B1 is

invertible. Assume first that this condition holds (in what follows, we consider the case when for some val

ues of e, the specified matrix is not invertible). Thus we actually constructed a control in the form of feed

back with the variables Ω and e that provides motion of the ball along a given trajectory. For this control

the system motion is determined by the following equations:

ω· = u ( t ),

0

Ω · = A ( Ω, e ) – B ( e )B –1 ( e )A ( Ω ) + B ( e )B –1 ( e )u 0 ( t ), (2.5)

2 2 1 1 2 1

e· = [ Ω, e ].

Let us recall that the control constructed in this way provides motion along a given trajectory if the ini

tial position of the robot center and its initial velocity correspond to the trajectory x = x0(t), y = y0(t).

Assume now that this correspondence does not take place, i.e.,

0 0

x ( 0 ) ≠ x ( 0 ), y ( 0 ) ≠ y ( 0 ),

(2.6)

0 0

ω x ( 0 ) ≠ – y· ( 0 )/r, ω y ( 0 ) ≠ x· ( 0 )/r.

654 BALANDIN et al.

Nevertheless the conditions of absence of sliding at the initial time instant are satisfied

ω x ( 0 ) = – y· ( 0 )/r,

ω y ( 0 ) = x· ( 0 )/r, (2.7)

ω z ( 0 ) = 0.

P r o b l e m 2. Find the vector of control torques Q providing approach of the robot to a given trajec

tory. In the statement of this problem, as above, we suppose that ωz(0) = 0.

We can provide the approach to a given trajectory using an additional control, namely

0 0

u 1 = a ( y – y ( t ) ) – br ( ω x – ω x ( t ) ),

(2.8)

0 0

u 2 = – a ( x – x ( t ) ) – br ( ω y – ω y ( t ) ),

where a and b are certain positive parameters. Setting formally u 3 = 0 and introducing a vector us with

components u 1 , u 2 , u 3 , we can write the general expression for the control torque

–1 –1 0

Q = – B 1 ( e )A 1 ( Ω, e ) + B 1 ( e ) ( u ( t ) + u s ). (2.9)

The substitution of this control law in (2.2) results in

ω· = u ( t ) + u s ,

0

Ω · = A ( Ω, e ) – B ( e )B –1 ( e )A ( Ω ) + B ( e )B –1 ( e ) ( u 0 ( t ) + u ), (2.10)

2 2 1 1 2 1 s

·e = [ Ω, e ].

Let us show that the constructed control provides asymptotic approach of the robot center to the given

trajectory. Let us introduce new variables characterizing the deviation from this trajectory

x̂ = x – x 0 ( t ), ŷ = y – y 0 ( t ),

0 0

(2.11)

ω̂ x = ω x – ω x ( t ), ω̂ y = ω y – ω y ( t ).

In new variables with account of nonholonomic constraint (1.1) and relations (2.8), we obtain

. .

x̂ = rω̂ y , ŷ = – rω̂ x ,

. . (2.12)

ω̂ x = aŷ – brω̂ x , ω̂ y = – ax̂ – brω̂ y .

This implies

. .

ω̂ x = – r ( bω̂ x + aω̂ x ),

. . (2.13)

ω̂ y = – r ( bω̂ y + aω̂ y ),

and accordingly

.. .

x̂ = – r ( bx̂ + ax̂ ), (2.14)

.. .

ŷ = – r ( bŷ + aŷ ),

which proves the asymptotic convergence to the required trajectory.

It is worth noting that in contrast to (2.4) to form control (2.9), it is necessary to know additionally the

current coordinates of the center of the robot and its angular velocity. One more important remark is con

nected with the fact that control laws constructed in this section are substantiated when the following two

assumptions hold: (1) the matrix B1 is invertible; and (2) the robot moves without sliding.

A MOTION CONTROL FOR A SPHERICAL ROBOT WITH PENDULUM DRIVE 655

OF THE SINGULAR MATRIX B1, AS WELL WITH ACCOUNT OF SLIDING

The analysis of the matrix B1 has shown that it has a block structure

⎛ ηB 11 0 ⎞

B1 = ⎜ ⎟, (3.1)

⎝ 0 B 22 ⎠

where B11 is a 2 × 2matrix, which has the inverse matrix for any unit vector e, B22 = –J–1, η = ρez + s,

and the dimensionless parameters ρ and s depend on the mass and geometric robot parameters

r j0

ρ = , s =

2 + 1. (3.2)

l ml

It is obvious that if the inequality s > ρ holds or

2

j 0 + ml > mrl, (3.3)

then ρez + s > 0 and the matrix B1 is invertible for any unit vector e.

If s ≤ ρ, then the matrix B1 is singular for ez = –s/ρ, and consequently the control law in form (2.9)

proposed above is not applicable in general. It is interesting how to arrange the robot control in this case.

–1

Instead of the matrix B 1 , we consider the matrix of the form

˜ ( e ) = B T ( e ) [ B ( e )B T ( e ) + εI ] –1 ,

B (3.4)

1 1 1

where ε is a small positive number. It is clear that the matrix B

–1

vector e. Now as the robot control law, we use relation (2.9), in which the matrix B 1 is replaced by the

matrix B˜ , i.e.,

˜ ( e )A ( Ω, e ) + B

Q = –B ˜ ( e ) ( u 0 ( t ) + u ). (3.5)

1 s

The substitution of this control law into the first equation of system (2.2) results in the equation

–1

ω· = u ( t ) + u s + ε ( K + εI ) [ A 1 ( Ω, e ) – ( u ( t ) + u s ) ],

0 0

(3.6)

T

where K = B1(e) B 1 (e). Comparing this equation with the first equation of (2.10), we notice that their right

sides differ by ε(K + εI)–1[A1(Ω, e) – (u0(t) + us)]. For sufficiently small ε and values of the vector e dif

ferent from those for which the matrix B1 becomes singular, this quantity has the same order as ε. In addi

tion if the matrix B1 does not become singular for any admissible vector e, then control (3.5) differs from

the control of the form (2.9) by a quantity of order ε. Thus the control of form (3.5) can be considered as

an approximate control that should provide motion of the robot along a given trajectory.

Consider now the problem of arrangement of motion control of the robot with account of its sliding on

some parts of the trajectory.

On these parts, the motion of the spherical robot is described by the equations (1.3); therefore in gen

eral the control of form (3.5) does not guarantee the approach of the robot to a given trajectory. Neverthe

less it is this control law that can be recommended for application since in the case of relatively short inter

vals of sliding with the corresponding deviation from the given trajectory this control in the subsequent

transition to “pure” (without sliding) rolling of the robot provides its approach to the specified trajectory.

Let us pass to dimensionless variables and parameters with account of the following relations:

–1 –1 –1 –1

t' = T t, ξ' = r ξ, ω' = Ω 0 ω, Ω' = Ω 0 Ω, (4.1)

656 BALANDIN et al.

2 –1

where Ω 0 = g/l. Thus the typical time scale is T = Ω 0 = l/g , and the length scale is r. In the new vari

ables (primes at variables are omitted for brevity) the mathematical model of robot motion (1.3) takes

the form

Jˆ ω· = – q + ρ [ γ, p ],

–1

··

( 1 + μ )ρξ + e·· = ( 1 + μ )γ – nγ + p,

(4.2)

· + [ e, e·· ] = ρ 2 q – ρ [ e, ξ·· ] + [ e, γ ],

ˆj 0 Ω

e· = [ Ω, e ]

with the substitution of

· , e ] + [ Ω, [ Ω, e ] ]

e·· = [ Ω (4.3)

into the second and third equations of this system,

j0

J , ˆj = r

Jˆ =

2

0 ,

2

ρ = , μ = M

,

mr ml l m

(4.4)

Q , P , N .

q =

2 2

p = 2

n = 2

mr Ω 0 mlΩ 0 mlΩ 0

If the robot motion on the horizontal surface takes place without sliding, then its dynamics is deter

mined by Eqs. (1.13) or in the dimensionless form

Jˆ ω· + ( 1 + μ ) [ γ, [ ω· , γ ] ] – ρ [ γ, e·· ] = – q,

–1

ˆj 0 Ω· – ρ [ e, [ ω· , γ ] ] + [ e, e·· ] – [ e, γ ] = ρ 2 q, (4.5)

e· = [ Ω, e ]

with substitution of (4.3) in the first and second equations of this system.

Let us consider certain specific features of the investigated mathematical model. First note that this

model is correct only when the condition of robot motion without separation (1.8) holds; i.e., the inequality

n = 1 + μ + e··z ≥ 0 (4.6)

holds. Second note that on some time intervals the motion has sliding and the robot dynamics are

described by system (4.2), and on the other time intervals the motion is without sliding, and the robot

dynamics are described by system (4.5). The change of the motion mode is determined as follows. Assume

first that we deal with a mode without sliding. Then the velocity of the point of contact of the robot with

·

the horizontal plane is zero vc = ξ + [ω, γ] = 0, and in addition the friction force p is the static friction

force; i.e. we have the inequality

2 2

p x + p y /n ≤ κ, (4.7)

where n is determined in accordance with (4.6), and px and py have the form

p x = ( 1 + μ )ρω· y + e··x , p y = – ( 1 + μ )ρω· x + e··y . (4.8)

The transition to the motion mode with sliding takes place when condition (4.7) is violated. In this

case, the velocity vc becomes different from zero, and

p = – κnv c / v c . (4.9)

The change of motion mode, i.e., the transition to the motion mode without sliding takes place when

the velocity vc becomes zero and condition (4.7) holds.

A MOTION CONTROL FOR A SPHERICAL ROBOT WITH PENDULUM DRIVE 657

In what follows, we use the control law in the form (3.5). To represent the control torque q, instead of

the change of variables in expression (3.5), it is convenient to resolve system (4.5) with respect to the high

est derivatives

ω· = A 1 ( Ω, e ) + B 1 ( e )q,

Ω · = A ( Ω, e ) + B ( e )q, (4.10)

2 2

·e = [ Ω, e ],

where A i and B i are dimensionless analogs of the matrices Ai and Bi, and then form the control law

ˆ ( e )A ( Ω, e ) + B

q = –B ˆ ( e ) ( u 0 ( t ) + u ), (4.11)

1 s

where Bˆ (e) = B (e)[ B (e) B (e) + εI]–1, the vector function u0(t) determines the given robot motion, and

T T

1 1 1

us determines the additional stabilizing control. The components of these control actions in the dimen

sionless variables are

0 0

u 1 ( t ) = ω· x ( t ) = – y·· ( t ),

0

0

u 2 ( t ) = ω· y ( t ) = x·· ( t ),

0 0

(4.12)

0

u 3 ( t ) = ω· z ( t ) = 0,

0

0 0

u 1 = a' ( y – y ( t ) ) – b' ( ω x – ω x ( t ) ),

0 0

u 2 = – a' ( x – x ( t ) ) – b' ( ω y – ω y ( t ) ), (4.13)

u 3 = 0,

–2 –1

where a' = ar Ω 0 and b' = br Ω 0 .

To numerically simulate the process of approach of the center of the spherical robot to the given tra

jectory (problem 2), it is necessary to specify the trajectory in the form of a pair of functions x0(t) and y0(t),

0 0 0 0

and it is supposed that ω x (t) = – y· (t) and ω y (t) = x· (t) are also determined, and in accordance

0 0

with (4.12), the functions u 1 (t) and u 2 (t) are given. Then it is necessary to present the initial conditions

·

for system (4.2): ω(0), ξ(0), ξ (0), Ω(0), and е(0). When the parameters of the system Jˆ , ˆj 0 , ρ, μ, a', and

b' are given, we can integrate the system numerically.

Note that in the numerical integration of the motion equations, instead of formula (4.9), it is advisable

to use somewhat different formula

vc

p = – κn

, (4.14)

vc +

where is a small positive number (e.g., 10–4). The time instant at which the velocity vc becomes zero

should be connected with the condition |vc| < . If this condition holds at some time instant, and in addi

tion condition (4.7) holds, then the transition to motion without sliding takes place, otherwise, there is

node change of the motion mode.

5. COMPUTATIONAL EXPERIMENTS

Let us describe the conducted computational experiments. The first computational experiments were

connected with the “regular” case; i.e., with the case when inequality (3.3) holds or for dimensionless

parameters the relation s = ˆj 0 + 1 > ρ takes place. Let us specify the following values of the parameters:

Jˆ = 2/3, ˆj 0 = 4, ρ = 4, μ = 1,

(5.1)

–4

a' = 1, b' = 1, ε = 10 .

658 BALANDIN et al.

y

0.6

κ = 0.7

κ = 0.2

0.4

0.2

−0.2

x

Then consider two versions of trajectories along which it is required to arrange the robot motion: (1) a

straight line; and (2) a circle.

Let us define the parameters of the trajectory in the form of a straight line as follows

0 0

x ( t ) = αt, y ( t ) = 0, (5.2)

where α is a given parameter. It is obvious that these relations imply

0 0 0 0

x· ( t ) = ω y ( t ) = α, y· ( t ) = – ω x ( t ) = 0,

0

u 1 ( t ) = ω· x ( t ) = – y·· ( t ) = 0,

0 0

(5.3)

0

u 2 ( t ) = ω· y ( t ) = x·· ( t ) = 0,

0 0

0

u 3 ( t ) = ω· z ( t ) = 0.

0

0

Thus the desired robot motion is performed along the x axis with a constant motion velocity x· (t) equal

to α. Let us specify the initial conditions for the system of differential equations (4.2)

0 0

ω x ( 0 ) = ω x ( 0 ), ω y ( 0 ) = ω y ( 0 ) – 0.05, ω z ( 0 ) = 0,

0 0

x ( 0 ) = x ( 0 ), y ( 0 ) = y ( 0 ) + 0.5, z ( 0 ) = 0,

(5.4)

0 0

x· ( 0 ) = x· ( 0 ) – 0.05, y· ( 0 ) = y· ( 0 ), z· ( 0 ) = 0,

e x ( 0 ) = 0, e y ( 0 ) = 0, e z ( 0 ) = – 1, Ω ( 0 ) = 0.

Put the parameter α = 0.1. The deviation from the desired trajectory is estimated by the quantity

δ = δ(t)

2 2

δ(t) = ( x ( t ) – x0 ( t ) ) + ( y ( t ) – y0 ( t ) ) . (5.5)

Figures 2–6 present results of numerical simulation of the approach of the spherical robot to the

motion along straight line (5.2) for two values of the sliding friction coefficient: κ = 0.7 (solid line) and

κ = 0.2 (dashed line). In Fig. 2, the dotted line shows the desired trajectory, and the solid line and dashed

A MOTION CONTROL FOR A SPHERICAL ROBOT WITH PENDULUM DRIVE 659

δ

0.6

κ = 0.7

κ = 0.2

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

t

Fig. 3. Variation of the magnitude of deviation of the shell center from the desired trajectory in the motion along the

straight line.

νc

0.7

κ = 0.7

κ = 0.2

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

t

Fig. 4. Variation of the magnitude of the velocity of the point of contact of the shell in the motion along the straight line.

line specify the motion trajectories of the center of the spherical robot for two different friction coeffi

cients. Figures 3 and 4 show the dependence of time of the magnitude of the deviation δ(t) from the

desired trajectory and the value |vc(t)| of the velocity of point of contact with the horizontal surface. These

figures imply that for the bigger friction coefficient, there is no sliding the approach to the desired trajec

tory occurs faster than in the case of the smaller friction coefficient. In addition in the latter case, on the

initial leg of the trajectory, the motion with sliding is performed. Figures 5 and 6 present the time depen

dences of the control torques q1 and q2 and components of the vector e for κ = 0.7.

Assume that the robot parameters correspond to (5.1). The motion trajectory of the robot center is set

in the from

0 0

x ( t ) = ν cos ( βt ), y ( t ) = ν sin ( βt ). (5.6)

660 BALANDIN et al.

4

3

2

1

q1

0

−1

−2

−3

−4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

q2

0

−0.2

−0.4

−0.6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

t

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

−0.2

ex

−0.4

−0.5

−0.8

−1.0

1.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.5

0

ey

−0.5

−1.0

1.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.5

0

ez

−0.5

−1.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

t

0 0 0 0

x· ( t ) = ω y ( t ) = – νβ sin ( βt ), y· ( t ) = – ω x ( t ) = νβ cos ( βt ),

0

u 1 ( t ) = ω· x ( t ) = – y·· ( t ) = νβ sin ( βt ),

0 0 2

(5.7)

0

u 2 ( t ) = ω· y ( t ) = x·· ( t ) = – νβ cos ( βt ) ,

0 0 2

0

u 3 ( t ) = ω· z ( t ) = 0.

0

A MOTION CONTROL FOR A SPHERICAL ROBOT WITH PENDULUM DRIVE 661

y

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

κ = 0.7

κ = 0.16

0

−2.0 −1.5 −1.0 −0.5 0 0.5

x

Fig. 7. Actual and desired trajectories of the motion along the circle.

δ

0.5

κ = 0.7

κ = 0.16

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

x

Fig. 8. Variation of the magnitude of deviation of the shell center from the desired trajectory in the motion along the circle.

0 0

ω x ( 0 ) = ω x ( 0 ), ω y ( 0 ) = ω y ( 0 ) – 0.05, ω z ( 0 ) = 0,

0 0

x ( 0 ) = x ( 0 ) + 0.4, y ( 0 ) = y ( 0 ), z ( 0 ) = 0,

(5.8)

0 0

x· ( 0 ) = x· ( 0 ) – 0.05, y· ( 0 ) = y· ( 0 ), z· ( 0 ) = 0,

e x ( 0 ) = 0, e y ( 0 ) = 0, e z ( 0 ) = – 1, Ω ( 0 ) = 0.

We set β = 0.05, ν = 2. Figures 7–9 present the results of numerical simulation of the approach of the

spherical robot to the motion along circle (5.6) for two values of the sliding friction coefficient: κ = 0.7

(solid line) and κ = 0.16 (dashed line). In Fig. 7 the dotted line shows the desired trajectory, and the solid

line and the dotted line specify the motion trajectories of the center of the spherical robot for two different

662 BALANDIN et al.

νc

0.7

κ = 0.16

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

x

Fig. 9. Variation of the magnitude of the velocity of the point of contact of the shell in the motion along the circle.

y

κ = 0.6

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

−0.10 −0.05 0 0.05 0.10

x

Fig. 10. Actual and desired motion trajectories in the nonregular case.

friction coefficients. Figures 8 and 9 show the time dependences of the magnitude of the deviation δ(t)

from the desired trajectory and the magnitude of |vс(t)| the velocity of the point of contact with the hori

zontal surface. For the bigger friction coefficient, there is no sliding and the approach to the desired tra

jectory is performed faster than in the case of the smaller friction coefficient.

Finally consider the case when the inequality s = ˆj 0 + 1 > ρ is not valid. Among robot parameters, we

change only one: ˆj = 2.9, i.e., s = 3.9 and s < ρ = 4. Figures 10 and 11 present the results of numerical

simulation of the approach of the robot center to the given trajectory (the circle denoted by the dotted line

in Fig. 10) for κ = 0.6. Figure 11 presents the time dependence of the magnitude of deviation δ(t) from the

desired trajectory.

A MOTION CONTROL FOR A SPHERICAL ROBOT WITH PENDULUM DRIVE 663

δ

0.10

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

t

Fig. 11. Measurement of the magnitude of deviation of the sell center from the desired trajectory in the nonregular case.

CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, problems of dynamics of a spherical robot with a pendulum drive were studied. State

feedback control laws for the robot that provide asymptotic approach of its center of mass to a given tra

jectory were formed. The results of computer simulation, illustrating different specific features of con

trolled movements of the spherical robot, were presented.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, pr. no. 130100603.

REFERENCES

1. M. Nagai, “Control System of a Spherical Robot,” Master Thesis. Finland, Espoo: Lulea University of Tech

nology (2008).

2. G. C. Schroll, “Dynamic Model of a Spherical Robot from First Principles,” Master Thesis. USA, Colorado:

Colorado State University (2010).

3. Yu. G. Martynenko and A. M. Formal’skii, “A Control of the longitudinal motion of a singlewheel robot on an

uneven surface,” Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Teor. Sist. Upr., No. 4, 165–173 (2005) [Comp. Syst. Sci. 44 (4), 662–

670 (2005)].

4. F. L. Chernous’ko, “Analysis and optimization of motion of a body controlled by a moveable inner mass,” Prikl.

Mat. Mekh. 70 (6), 915–941 (2006).

5. F. L. Chernous’ko, “Optimal periodic motion of a twomass system in a resisting environment,” Prikl. Mat.

Mekh. 72 (2), 202–215 (2008).

6. N. N. Bolotnik and T. Yu. Figurina, “Optimal control of a rectilinear motion of a rigid body on an uneven plane

by moving two inner masses,” Prikl. Mat. Mekh. 72 (2), 216–229 (2008).

7. N. N. Bolotnik, T. Yu. Figurina, and F. L. Chernous’ko, “Optimal control of a rectilinear motion of a system of

two bodies in a resisting environment,” Prikl. Mat. Mekh. 76 (1), 3–22 (2012).

8. A. V. Borisov and I. S. Mamaev, “Two nonholonomic integrable constraints of rigid bodies,” Nelineinaya

Dinamika 7 (3), 559–568 (2011).

Translated by K. Kii

- System DynamicsUploaded byGthulasi78
- Physics+P1+Topical+Past+PapersUploaded byLeo Dennis
- Moment of InertiaUploaded byRahmatullah Rahmat
- phy 1Uploaded by165ballerz
- Balancing TheoryUploaded byVijay Patel
- Method of RelaxationUploaded bysthitadhi91
- Applied Mechanics by Rk RajputUploaded bysarthak
- 35942381 Engineering MechanicsUploaded bygopinathme
- A 655Uploaded byantonio87
- Analytical science - Newtons mechanicsUploaded bySalauddin Mk
- RoundnessUploaded byramesh55555
- MCQ on Basic PhysicsUploaded byBala Murugan
- Centre of Gravity and Moment of InertiaUploaded byPriyesh Malviya
- Engineering-Mechanics by north 2.docUploaded bynvnrev
- 4 2 Basic Bio MechanicsUploaded byAde Rahmawati Nurbekti
- Online Quiz Answers i a 1Uploaded byShawnJerryNemo
- 2005 11 Pendulo AmortiguadoUploaded bymimorayden
- An31e Vm BalUploaded byettypasewang
- Part Test 1 - 21102018Uploaded bybE SpAciAl
- 2006 C Mech RubricUploaded byLucy
- wordproblems.docUploaded byMusesSML
- ch3-4.pptxUploaded bysawmag123
- AL Applied Mathematics 1995 Paper1+2(E)Uploaded byeltytan
- Applied Mech. ii.docxUploaded byJanaki Raman
- Inertia PracticeUploaded byjohnny
- program of physics i & oral questions (1).pdfUploaded byfrandi93
- Phys202_L12Uploaded byBhavani Chandra Unique
- 99.pdfUploaded byIoan Doroftei
- applied speech outlineUploaded byapi-299120816
- TermsUploaded byMathivanan Krishnan

- 01391010.pdfUploaded byAmino file
- morinaga2014_2Uploaded byAmino file
- alouges2010_4Uploaded byAmino file
- f07Uploaded byHimanshu Mishra
- Kyushu Mechanic Entrance ExamUploaded byAmino file
- Bernoulli EquationUploaded byPradip Gupta
- Lecture c2 c3Uploaded byAmino file
- 10.1109@cdc.1994.411344Uploaded byAmino file
- Control of Position a main poUploaded byAmino file
- Murray 1994Uploaded byAmino file
- 10.1007_BF00375605Uploaded byAmino file
- li1990Uploaded byAmino file
- qqq2rUploaded byAmino file
- As Me JournalUploaded byAmino file
- 280633967 George F Simmons Differential Equations With Applications and Historical Notes 2nd Edition McGraw Hill 1991Uploaded byAmino file
- 03_Procedure of MEXT ScholarshipUploaded byAmino file
- KIkuUploaded byAmino file
- li2008.pdfUploaded byAmino file
- f13Uploaded byAmino file
- 10.2307@27642248Uploaded byAmino file
- Presentation SpheretalUploaded byAmino file
- Nonholonomic formUploaded byAmino file
- Mirz3Uploaded byAmino file
- Mirza junUploaded byAmino file
- 06 2016 MEXT Scholarship Univ RecommendationUploaded byAmino file
- lsefse ffUploaded byAmino file
- Analysis of Surfactant Laden LiquidLiquid DispersionUploaded byAmino file

- Module 2Uploaded byAshner Novilla
- Moment of InertiaUploaded byanurag3069
- Physics Form 4 NotesUploaded byNelsonMoseM
- TODAS as RESPOSTAS_Product Design Engineering_ How Things Work - PhysicsUploaded byElaine Barros
- eenergi 2Uploaded byPrincess Fricilia
- 9702 Circular Motion AllUploaded byAsha D'sa
- Kinematics answersUploaded byNickolas Rogers
- Toy Car Motion LabUploaded bypixelhobo
- Motion Along a Straight LineUploaded byRonald A. Sato
- Scope and Excitement of PhysicsUploaded byvilasinikn
- Chpt 16 Lecture PowerpointUploaded byfakdfjkl
- Geometric Design1Uploaded byRonald Darwin
- Classical mechanics problems - MIT courseUploaded byViet_Brian
- Rigid Body RotationUploaded byAjith Benarmin
- g484 Module 1 4.1.1 Newtons LawsUploaded byOMEDINED
- Motion of a Mass on a SpringUploaded byJonathan Majaw
- QS6 ManualUploaded byLuis Jaramillo
- T2-1 T.pdfUploaded byManav Nair
- Exam 1 Key, Physics 121 A15Uploaded byAndrew Li
- Aristotle's Theory of TOPOSUploaded byGregorio de Gante
- physics 5054Uploaded byUsama
- Gradient & Area Under GraphUploaded byKugahn Aesen
- GyroscopeUploaded bydvarsastry
- Moments and Products of Inertia, Inertia TensorUploaded byAbhijit Kar Gupta
- 10 IGCSE Physics Study Stack_Forces & MotionUploaded bypixelhobo
- Concept Map Physics STPMUploaded byOne_sofian2715
- ElectromagnetismUploaded byAlmari Santos
- Axis Basic ControlUploaded byLuis Gustavo Piovezam Reis
- day 3 velocity and acceleration practiceUploaded byapi-259781257
- 01Honors Physics - Direct and Inverse RelationshipsUploaded byAbha Srivastava