See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/310472573

Tip-Over Stability Analysis for a Wheeled Mobile Manipulator

Article  in  Journal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · November 2016

DOI: 10.1115/1.4035234

CITATIONS READS

11 1,060

4 authors, including:

Shuai Guo Song Tao

Shanghai University Shanghai University
57 PUBLICATIONS   277 CITATIONS    18 PUBLICATIONS   79 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Intelligent Construction Robots of Prefabricated Building View project

rehabilitation robot View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Song Tao on 25 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Tip-Over Stability Analysis for a which is not considered for the fixed-base manipulator. Among
these issues, tip-over stability is the most important one [11]. For
Wheeled Mobile Manipulator wheeled mobile manipulators, tip-over instability can be caused
by reaction forces and moments from the manipulator onto the
mobile platform. The instability problem caused by this dynamic
Shuai Guo effect is of great concern for the safety of robot operation.
Key Laboratory of Intelligent Manufacturing and Robotics, Ghasempoor et al. proposed a stability measure according to
School of Mechatronics Engineering the energy level with respect to the moments acting about a sup-
port boundary [12]. Papadopoulos et al. defined a tip-over stability
and Automation of Shanghai University,
margin in term of a force-angle stability measure [11]. Rey et al.
HC204, No. 99, Road Shangda, described a scheme for real-time tip-over prediction and preven-
Shanghai 200444, China tion based on a static and dynamic force-angle measure [13]. Li
e-mail: guoshuai@shu.edu.cn et al. tackled this problem from the point of view of support
forces, and used a direct differentiation method to analyze the sys-
Tao Song1 tem differential kinematics [10]. Moosavian et al. presented a
Key Laboratory of Intelligent Manufacturing and Robotics, moment-height tip-over measure for wheeled mobile manipulators
by considering the dynamic factor of the manipulator and the sys-
School of Mechatronics Engineering
tem’s CG [14,15]. Liu et al. analyzed the track–stair interaction
and Automation of Shanghai University, for a self-reconfigurable tracked mobile robot [16]. Shigeki et al.
HC204, No. 99, Road Shangda, presented concepts of the stability degree and the valid stable
Shanghai 200444, China region based on the zero-moment point (ZMP) [17]. Korayem
e-mail: songtao43467226@shu.edu.cn et al. proposed an algorithm for determining the maximum load-
carrying capacity of a mobile manipulator considering tip-over
Fengfeng (Jeff) Xi stability based on the ZMP for obstacle environment [18]. Paul
et al. proposed a converging algorithm for globally optimal pos-
Department of Aerospace Engineering,
tures of redundant serial manipulators, which is capable of tip-
Ryerson University, over prevention without considering the joint speed and accelera-
350 Victoria Street, tion’s effect on tip-over stability [19].
Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, Canada The first underlying problem for this study is tip-over stability
e-mail: fengxi@ryerson.ca of a wheeled mobile manipulator, which is concerned about the
reaction forces and moments of the manipulator exerted onto the
Richard Phillip Mohamed mobile platform. The second problem is to identify the worst case
of stability under different factors.
Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Ryerson University, 2 Problem Formulation
350 Victoria Street,
Figure 1 shows a wheeled mobile manipulator for fuselage
Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, Canada riveting. This mobile platform consists of a frame supported by
e-mail: r3mohame@ryerson.ca four wheels and is used to carry and support an ABB industrial
manipulator. The manipulator is of a typical industrial type, i.e.,
the first three links for position control and the last three joints
A method is presented for tip-over stability analysis of a wheeled formed by a wrist for orientation control.
mobile manipulator. A wheeled mobile manipulator may tip over The dynamics factors such as mass of links, joint speed, joint
resulting from its operation. In this study, first a Newton–Euler acceleration, and force exerted on the tip may cause tip-over insta-
formulation is applied to formulate the manipulator’s reaction bility. Therefore, the problem under this study is formulated to
forces and moments exerted onto the mobile platform. Tip-over investigate the effect of the reaction forces and moments of the
criterion is derived to judge the system stability. Three load and manipulator on the tip-over stability of the entire system.
motion analyses are carried on. The first static load deals with For modeling and analysis provided below, a number of
links and payload to show the effect of the horizontal position of assumptions are made here:
the system’s center of gravity (CG). The second and third are the
inertial forces resulting from joint speeds and accelerations,
respectively. Case study is path planning with tip-over criterion
result which can make the system stable along the path. The simu-
lation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed
method. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4035234]

1 Introduction
A mobile manipulator integrates a mobile platform with an
onboard manipulator. With extended mobility, mobile manipula-
tors are being increasingly utilized in various applications, such as
aircraft manufacturing, disaster rescue, nuclear reactor mainte-
nance, and even for military use [1–4]. There are several particu-
lar issues associated with mobile manipulators [5–10]. These
issues are caused by the movement of the mobile manipulator,

1
Corresponding author.
Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the
JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received
September 11, 2015; final manuscript received November 7, 2016; published online
March 10, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Jingang Yi. Fig. 1 The wheeled mobile manipulator for fuselage riveting

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control MAY 2017, Vol. 139 / 054501-1
Copyright V
C 2017 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 (1) The ground is of horizontal even surface and no surface
shrinkage is considered.
(2) All four wheels always maintain contact with the ground.
(3) No wheel slippage is considered.
(4) The manipulator is rigidly mounted on the platform, and all
links of the manipulator are rigid.
(5) No wheel deformation is considered.
(6) The accelerations coming from wheel brakes are not
applied.
3 Modeling and Analysis
To begin, it is required to obtain the reaction forces and
moments from the manipulator to the mobile platform under any
operating condition. Then, one unified tip-over criterion is pro-
posed to measure the tip-over stability of system.
3.1 Reaction Forces and Moments. A Newton–Euler formu-
lation [20,21] is applied to model the reaction forces and moments
of the manipulator onto the mobile platform. The wrench acting
on the ith joint can be expressed as
wi ¼ Mi t_ i þ Bi þ Hi;iþ1 wiþ1 (1)
In Eq. (1), wi represents a wrench including a force vector f i
and a moment vector mi on the ith joint. Mi is a generalized mass
matrix defined with respect to the ith joint. t_ i is the vector includ-
ing linear and angular acceleration vectors of the ith joint. Bi is a
matrix representing the coupling terms including centrifugal
forces as well as gyroscopic moments. Finally, Hi;iþ1 represents a
wrench transformation matrix from the ði þ 1Þth joint to the ith
joint.
Equation (1) provides a backward recursion for computing the
forces and moments from the tip membered by n þ 1 to the base
membered by 1. For i ¼ n, the wrench of the last joint, wn , can be
computed from the wrench acting on the tip wnþ1 . This recursive
computation goes through all the intermediate joints till i ¼ 1 to
obtain w1 . The reaction wrench from the manipulator onto the
mobile platform is expressed as w1 .
3.2 Tip-Over Criterion. In Fig. 2, the ellipse represents a
mobile platform. The base frame fXM ; YM ; ZM g is attached to the
base of the manipulator. The platform frame fXP ; YP ; ZP g is
attached to the center point of the mobile platform. gP is the
vector of the gravitational force of the mobile platform. The
manipulator is mounted at point M. The reaction wrench, denoted
by w1 ; is acting on point M from the manipulator onto the
mobile platform. When tip-over occurs, the mobile platform rolls
about a tip-over axis formed by two adjacent wheels. Two vectors
n
pi and n piþ1 represent two adjacent wheels of the mobile
platform, forming a tip-over axis ei;iþ1 . dM is the vector from the
Fig. 2 Forces and moments on a mobile platform
054501-2 / Vol. 139, MAY 2017
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 3 Four-wheel mobile platform
origin OP to point M, representing the mounting position of the
manipulator. di;iþ1 is a vector from point M to the tip-over axis
ei;iþ1 , while li;iþ1 is a vector from OP to the tip-over axis ei;iþ1 .
The tip-over moment (TOM) about the tip-over axis ei;iþ1 can
be derived considering all the afore-mentioned forces and
moments as
TOMi;iþ1 ¼ mM  ei;iþ1 þ ðf M  di;iþ1 Þ  ei;iþ1 þ ðgP  li;iþ1 Þ  ei;iþ1
(2)
Generally, for a n wheel mobile manipulator, there are n
tip-over axes, i.e., n TOM values. The maximum TOMi;iþ1 value
represents that around axis ei;iþ1 the system affords the biggest
tip-over moment. If this maximum TOM value is positive, the sys-
tem is tipping over. If this maximum TOM value is negative, the
system is stable with a tip-over moment margin jTOMj. For a
four-wheel mobile manipulator, the corresponding parameters in
Eq. (2) can be obtained from Fig. 3.
For convenience, the X-axis is defined along with the line
between the origin OP and the first wheel 4 p1 . The coordinates of
each support point of the evenly distributed wheels can be
expressed as
     T
4 i1 i1
pi ¼ r  cos  2p ; r  sin  2p ; 0 i ¼ f1; 2; …; 4g
4 4
(3)
ei;iþ1 , li;iþ1 di;iþ1 are defined as
ei;iþ1 ¼ ð4 piþ1  4 pi Þ=j4 piþ1  4 pi j (4)
li;iþ1 ¼ 4 pi  ð4 pi  ei;iþ1 Þei;iþ1 (5)
4 4
di;iþ1 ¼ ð pi  dM Þ  ðð pi  dM Þ  ei;iþ1 Þei;iþ1 (6)
In this study, when index number i is equal to 4, i þ 1 is
rounded back to 1.
4 Load and Motion Analysis
Different dynamic factors are considered to study their effect
on tip-over stability. Static load is for gravitational forces,
whereas joint speeds are for centrifugal forces and gyroscopic
moments. Furthermore, joint accelerations are for the inertia
forces and moments. Afterward, the worst case of tip-over stabil-
ity can then be identified.
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 4 (a) TOM results over workspace for static case and (b) TOM results in terms of system CG
4.1 Static Load. The purpose of considering static load is to
investigate the effect of gravitational forces due to the payload
and the weights of the links. The wrench s w1 on joint 1 can be
obtained by using the recursive Eq. (1)
s
w1 ¼ s wg1 þ wp1 (7)
where
s
wg1 ¼ M1 s t_ 1 þ H1;2 M2 s t_ 2 þ H1;2 H2;3 M3 s t_ 3
! Y n
Yn
þ  þ Hi1;i Mn s t_ n (8)
i¼1
 
g
s_
ti ¼ (9)
0 i¼1
!
Y
nþ1
wp1 ¼ Hi1;i wpðnþ1Þ (10)
i¼1
where wpðnþ1Þ ¼ ½0; 0; mpayload g; 0; 0; 0 . Equation (8) T
represents the wrench caused by all the links. Equation (10) repre-
sents the wrench caused by the payload. Since the gravitational
forces of the links and the payload are always downward, the three
out-of-plane wrench components (f1Z , m1X , m1Y in Fig. 2) pertain-
ing to the tip-over instability only correlate with the horizontal
positions of link CGs and the manipulator’s tip. Simulations are
carried out over the manipulator workspace. The manipulator is
mounted onto the wheeled mobile platform and the collision
between the two is not permitted; hence, no negative Z movement
of the manipulator is allowed.
Figure 4(a) shows the results for the static case. TOM in terms
of system CG is shown as Fig. 4(b). The four black lines are tip-
over axes. The maximum TOM of the whole workspace is
2185:54N  m, while the tip is at the furthest position from the
center of the platform on X  Y plane. When the tip of manipula-
tor is far away from the center of the platform, there is more mass
of manipulator close to the boundary of the platform, so TOM
value is big. The minimum TOM of the whole workspace is
2960:72N  m, while system’s CG including payload are near
the origin point. The stability of the system depends on the CG
position of system.
4.2 Joint Speeds. The purpose of considering joint speeds is
to investigate the effect of the coupling term due to centrifugal
forces and gyroscopic moments on tip-over stability. In this
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
section, all joint accelerations are set to zero. The wrench in this
case is determined as
v
w1 ¼ s w1 þ v wC1 þ v wv1 (11)
where s w1 is already derived in Eq. (7) for the static case, v wC1
and v wv1 due to joint speed are given as
v
wC1 ¼ M1 v t_ C1 þ H1;2 M2 v t_ C2 þ H1;2 H2;3 M3 v t_ C3 þ   
!
þ Hi1;i Mn v t_ Cn (12)
i¼1
!
Y
n
v
wv1 ¼ B1 þ H1;2 B2 þ H1;2 H2;3 B3 þ    þ Hi1;i Bn (13)
2 3
X
i1
v_ 6 xk  ðxk  bk Þ 7
t Ci ¼ 4 5 (14)
1
0
Equations (12) and (13) show that v w1 is obtained by accumu-
lating the coupling term of each link through corresponding
wrench transformations to the base. Terms v wC1 and v wv1 contain
centrifugal forces and gyroscopic moments. While the vertical
parts of centrifugal forces will contribute to f1Z , the horizontal
parts will contribute to m1X and m1Y ; therefore, the tip-over stabil-
ity will be affected. In addition, gyroscopic moments will also
contribute to reaction moment m1X and m1Y .
Figure 5(a) shows the result for joint speeds ¼ [175, 175, 175]
deg=s, i.e., joints 2 and 3 rotating in the same directions. In this
case, the maximum TOM is 3215:57N  m, and the minimum
TOM is  1347:59N  m, while the mean TOM is 1584:36N  m.
Figure 5(b) shows the result for joints 2 and 3 rotating in the oppo-
site directions. In this case, the maximum TOM is 2023:52N  m,
and the minimum TOM is 1347:59N  m, while the mean TOM
is 355:54 N  m. Though the minimum TOM in two cases is
equal, it can be seen from other two values and these figures
that the latter has a smaller TOM than the former over the
whole workspace. The reason is that the opposite joint rota-
tions of joints 2 and 3 will reduce the absolute angular veloc-
ity of link 3, hence reducing centrifugal force f 3C and
gyroscopic moment m3C .
Figure 6(a) shows the case of only joint 1 rotation. Joint 1 speed
will create centrifugal forces on all links, all in horizontal direc-
tion, solely contributing to reaction moments m1X and m1Y , which
MAY 2017, Vol. 139 / 054501-3
 Fig. 5 TOM over workspace for joint speed case: (a) joint speeds [175, 175, 175] deg=s and (b) joint speeds [175, 175, 2175]
deg=s

Fig. 6 Centrifugal forces and gyroscopic moments derived from joint speed cases: (a) joint 1 rotation, (b) joint 2 rotation, (c)
joint 3 rotation, and (d) all three joint rotations

increases TOM. Figures 6(b) and 6(c) show the cases when joints
2 or 3 rotates individually. The resulting centrifugal forces in these
two cases do not include downstream link and they are not com-
pletely in the horizontal direction; hence, the contribution to TOM
is reduced. The joint 2 rotation will create centrifugal forces on
links 2 and 3, while joint 3 rotation will only create force on link 3.
The stability for joint 3 rotation will be better than that for joint 2
rotation. The direction of only one joint speed will not affect the
centrifugal forces. Figure 6(d) shows the case of all joints rotating
simultaneously. The first two joint rotations will create a centrifu-
gal force and a gyroscopic moment on link 2. All the three joint
rotations will create a centrifugal force and a gyroscopic moment
on link 3, which is determined from the absolute angular velocity
of link 3. Hence, the centrifugal force and gyroscopic moment are
bigger when the directions of joints 2 and 3 speeds are the same
and smaller when they are opposite. Therefore, one observation is
that the rotation of two coplanar joints would worsen the tip-over
stability if they rotate in the same directions.
4.3 Joint Accelerations. The purpose of considering joint
accelerations is to investigate the effect of inertia forces and
moments on tip-over stability. In this section, all joint speeds are
set to zero as well. In this case; a w1 can be determined as
a
w1 ¼ s w1 þ m wa1 (15)
where m wa1 due to joint accelerations is given as
m
wa1 ¼ M1 m t_ 1 þ H1;2 M2 m t_ 2 þ H1;2 H2;3 M3 m t_ 3 þ   
!
Y n
þ Hi1;i Mn m t_ n (16)
i¼1
where m t_ i is the vector of linear and angular acceleration.
Figure 7(a) shows the results for joint accelerations ¼ [200,
200, 200] deg=s2 , i.e., joints 2 and 3 both rotating in the positive
direction, while Fig. 7(b) shows the results for joints 2 and 3

054501-4 / Vol. 139, MAY 2017 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 7 TOM over workspace for joint acceleration case: (a) joint accelerations [200, 200, 200] deg=s2 and (b) joint
accelerations [200, 2200, 2200] deg=s2

Fig. 8 Forces and moments derived from joint acceleration: (a) joint 1 acceleration, (b) joint 2 acceleration, (c) joint 3 accelera-
tion, and (d) all three joint accelerations

rotating in the negative direction. It can be seen that the latter has
a smaller maximum TOM (334:84N  m) value than the former
one (1430:18N  m). The reason is that the directions of joints 2
and 3 acceleration affect tip-over. The positive joint accelerations
of joints 2 and 3 would increase TOM just as what gravitational
acceleration does, while the negative joint accelerations would
reduce it just like inducing gravitational acceleration.
Figure 8(a) shows the wrench for joint 1 acceleration. The first
joint acceleration will create inertia forces and moment on all
links. The joint 1 acceleration contributes little on TOM value
because inertia moments caused by joint 1 acceleration which is
in X  Y plane do not contribute to TOM. Figure 8(b) shows the
wrench for joint 2 acceleration. It will create inertial forces and
moments on links 2 and 3, respectively. Positive joint 2 accelera-
tion causes positive f2CX and f3CX , which would increase m1Y , i.e.,
increasing TOM. A negative joint 2 acceleration causes negative
f2CX and f3CX , which would decrease m1Y , i.e., reducing TOM. As
shown in Fig. 8(c), joint 3 acceleration would yield a similar
result. Figure 8(d) illustrates the situation for all three joint accel-
erations. The first joint acceleration will create an inertial force
and moment on link 1. The first two joint accelerations will create
an inertial force and moment on link 2. All three joint accelera-
tions will create an inertial force and moment on link 3, having
the same effects as that of link 2. These forces are generated by
three absolute angular accelerations. Absolute angular accelera-
tions of joint 1 only has a component in either positive or negative
Z direction and creates an inertial force and an inertial moment on
all links. Absolute angular accelerations of joint 2 have an addi-
tional component in Y direction. Positive acceleration generates
an inertial force component in the positive X direction and an iner-
tial moment in the positive Y direction on link 2, which will
increase TOM. Negative acceleration creates an inertial force
component in the negative X direction and an inertial moment in
the negative Y direction, which will reduce TOM. The effect
of joint 3 is similar to that joint 2. One observation is that the
accelerations of the joints rotating up and down in a vertical plane
would worsen the tip-over stability if these joint accelerations are
the same with gravitational acceleration; conversely, the accelera-
tions would improve it if they are opposite to gravitational
acceleration.

Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control MAY 2017, Vol. 139 / 054501-5

Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


Fig. 9 The points and path for aircraft riveting
Fig. 10 TOM results for time segment fixed case
5 Case Study
The proposed method is now applied for an application to
robotic riveting. Since aircraft parts are large, wheeled mobile
robotic riveting is ideal that can provide the mobility to cover
required large workspace. During operation, it is important to
ensure tip-over stability for safety reason. This is a general involv-
ing gravity, joint speeds, and accelerations. So, the total reaction
wrench is expressed
w1 ¼ s wg1 þ wp1 þ v wC1 þ v wv1 þ m wa1 (17)
For aircraft riveting, the tip of manipulator moves in a point-to-
point mode as shown in Fig. 9. Points 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 repre-
sent the riveting positions, and the red lines show the links of
manipulator. The sequence of the whole path is as follows: Start
point—point 1—point 2—point 1—point 3—point 4—point 3—
point 5—point 6—point 5—point 7—point 8—point 7—point 9—
point 10—point 9—point 11—point 12—point 11—Start point.
The joint angles, speeds, and accelerations can be obtained with
time segment as 1 s for segment fixed case. With these parameters,
TOM can be computed and Fig. 10 shows the results.
While the manipulator is moving near points 2, 6, 8, and 12, the
mobile manipulator is unstable. This time segment fixed case will
lead to tip-over, so the joints speeds and accelerations should be
changed to achieve a stable path planning. With conclusion given
in Sec. 4.2, TOM results can be reduced with small joint speed.
Similarly, TOM result can be increased but should be always con-
trolled to a negative one, thus can save time. This method is called
054501-6 / Vol. 139, MAY 2017
Downloaded From: http://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 11 TOM results for alterable time segment case
adaptive time segment. Figure 11 shows the result with this
method. Along the whole path the manipulator is completely sta-
ble. The total elapse time for the time segment fixed case is 19 s,
while that of the adaptive time segment case is 19.1 s. Therefore,
the system stability can be greatly enhanced at the expense of
only slightly increasing the elapse time by 0.1 s.
6 Conclusions
In this paper, a new generalized formula is derived for tip-over
stability analysis considering the reaction forces and moments,
and three cases are simulated. The static, joint speed, and joint
acceleration cases are simulated with the conclusion that the hori-
zontal position of the whole mobile manipulator’s CG, the abso-
lute angular velocity, and the direction of angular acceleration
determine the stability condition. The worst case of tip-over sta-
bility is studied, and the placement of the manipulator and acces-
sory on the mobile platform is optimized, as reported in Ref. [22].
Furthermore, a mobile manipulator has been built and a series of
tests have been conducted. The results show that the system
exhibits overall tip-over stability within the given range of static
loads, joint speeds, and accelerations. At last, the mobile manipu-
lator’s stability is simulated with a real case of riveting operation.
It reveals that the system stability can be enhanced through proper
trajectory planning using an adaptive time segment scheme.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by the Shanghai Municipal Science
and Technology Commission Grant Nos. 14111104502 and
15550721900.
References
[1] Liu, Y., and Liu, G., 2010, “Interaction Analysis and Online Tip-Over Avoid-
ance for a Reconfigurable Tracked Mobile Modular Manipulator Negotiating
Slopes,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, 15(4), pp. 623–635.
[2] Korayem, M. H., Shafei, A. M., and Shafei, H. R., 2012, “Dynamic Modeling
of Nonholonomic Wheeled Mobile Manipulators With Elastic Joints Using
Recursive Gibbs–Appell Formulation,” Sci. Iran., 19(4), pp. 1092–1104.
[3] Chen, M. W., and Zalzala, A. M. S., 1997, “Dynamic Modeling and
Genetic-Based Trajectory Generation for Non-Holonomic Mobile Manipula-
tors,” Control Eng. Pract., 5(1), pp. 39–48.
[4] Vysin, M., and Knoflicek, R., 2003, “The Hybrid Mobile Robot,” 2003 IEEE
International Conference on Industrial Technology, pp. 262–264.
[5] Korayem, M. H., Shafei, A. M., and Seidi, E., 2014, “Symbolic Derivation of
Governing Equations for Dual-Arm Mobile Manipulators Used in Fruit-Picking
and the Pruning of Tall Trees,” Comput. Electron. Agric., 105, pp. 95–102.
[6] Tsai, C. C., Cheng, M. B., and Lin, S. C., 2006, “Dynamic Modeling and Track-
ing Control of a Nonholonomic Wheeled Mobile Manipulator With Dual
Arms,” J. Intell. Rob. Syst., 47(4), pp. 317–340.
[7] Tang, C. P., Miller, P. T., Krovi, V. N., Ryu, J.-C., and Agrawal, S. K., 2011,
“Differential-Flatness-Based Planning and Control of a Wheeled Mobile
Manipulator-Theory and Experiment,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics,
16(4), pp. 768–773.
Transactions of the ASME
 [8] Chitta, S., Cohen, B., and Likhachev, M., 2010, “Planning for Autonomous
Door Opening With a Mobile Manipulator,” IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation, pp. 1799–1806.
[9] Jiao, J., Cao, Z., Zhao, P., Liu, X., and Tan, M., 2013, “Bezier Curve Based
Path Planning for a Mobile Manipulator in Unknown Environments,” IEEE
International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, Qingdao, China,
Dec. 12–14, pp. 1864–1868.
[10] Li, Y., and Liu, Y., 2005, “Kinematics and Tip-Over Stability Analysis for the
Mobile Modular Manipulator,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part C, 219(3),
pp. 331–343.
[11] Papadopoulos, E. G., and Rey, D. A., 1996, “A New Measure of Tipover Stabil-
ity Margin for Mobile Manipulators,” IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation, pp. 3111–3116.
[12] Ghasempoor, A., and Sepehri, N., 1995, “A Measure of Machine Stability for
Moving Base Manipulators,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Automation, pp. 2249–2254.
[13] Rey, D. A., and Papadopoulos, E. G., 1997, “On-Line Automatic Tipover Pre-
vention for Mobile Manipulators,” Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 1273–1278.
[14] Moosavian, S. A. A., and Alipour, K., 2006, “Moment-Height Tip-Over Mea-
sure for Stability Analysis of Mobile Robotic Systems,” IEEE International
Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 5546–5551.
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control
DownloadedViewFrom:
publicationhttp://dynamicsystems.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/
stats on 09/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
[15] Ali, S., Moosavian, A., and Alipour, K., 2007, “Tip-Over Stability of Sus-
pended Wheeled Mobile Robots,” IEEE International Conference on Mecha-
tronics and Automation, pp. 1356–1361.
[16] Liu, Y., and Liu, G., 2009, “Track—Stair Interaction Analysis and Online Tip-
over Prediction for a Self-Reconfigurable Tracked Mobile Robot Climbing
Stairs,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, 14(5), pp. 528–538.
[17] Sugano, S., Huang, Q., and Kato, I., 1993, “Stability Criteria in Controlling
Mobile Robotic Systems,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems, Vol. 2, pp. 832–838.
[18] Korayem, M. H., Azimirad, V., Nikoobin, A., and Boroujeni, Z., 2010,
“Maximum Load-Carrying Capacity of Autonomous Mobile Manipulator in an
Environment With Obstacle Considering Tip Over Stability,” Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol., 46(5–8), pp. 811–829.
[19] Moubarak, P., and Ben-Tzvi, P., 2013, “A Globally Converging Algorithm for
Adaptive Manipulation and Trajectory Following for Mobile Robots With
Serial Redundant Arms,” Robotica, 31(08), pp. 1299–1311.
[20] Xi, F. F., 2009, “Computational Dynamics,” Graduate Course Lecture Notes,
Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
[21] Bianco, G. L., 2009, “Evaluation of Generalized Force Derivatives by Means of
a Recursive Newton–Euler Approach,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 25(4), pp. 954–959.
[22] Song, T., Xi, F., Guo, S., and Lin, Y., 2016, “Optimization of a Mobile Platform
for a Wheeled Manipulator,” ASME J. Mech. Rob., 8(6), p. 061007.
MAY 2017, Vol. 139 / 054501-7