5 views

Uploaded by Pablo Garcia

save

You are on page 1of 6

**in Finite Time for Uncertain Planar
**

Manipulators with Uncalibrated Camera

J. D. Fierro-Rojas

∗

V. Parra-Vega

∗

A. Espinosa-Romero

∗∗

∗

Mechatronics Division - CINVESTAV, M´exico

(jfierro,vparra)@mail.cinvestav.mx

∗∗

Institute for Applied Mathematics and Systems -

UNAM, M´exico

arturoe@cic3.iimas.unam.mx

Abstract: This paper considers the problem of tracking control of planar robot

manipulators through visual servoing under uncertain knowledge of the robot and

camera parameters for ﬁxed-camera conﬁguration. We designed a controller based

on a passivity-based second order sliding mode approach which achieves ﬁnite

time convergence of tracking errors speciﬁed in the screen coordinate frame by

introducing a time base generator into the sliding surface. Simulations results for

a 2 degrees of freedom direct drive manipulator with uncalibrated CCD camera

are presented to illustrate the controller’s performance.

Keywords: Control of robots, visual servoing, uncertain robot dynamics, camera

calibration, second order sliding mode control.

1. INTRODUCTION

In order for visual servo controllers can result in

satisfactory control under high performance re-

quirements, including high speed tasks and direct-

robot actuators, robot dynamics must be taking

into account. Nevertheless most of previous works

assumed the ideal performance of the joint servo

mechanism and ignored the robot dynamics. As

solutions to this problem some adaptation meth-

ods have been proposed (Shen et al., 2001), (Hsu

and Aquino, 1999) and (Bishop and Spong, 1997),

which guarantee local tracking for the dynamic

model of robot arms subject to uncertainty on the

parameters of the vision system. These schemes

yield local tracking by exploiting the fact that

the rotation matrix is constant, and formal and

rigorous stability analysis support these results.

However, these papers assume knowledge of the

analytic jacobian matrix, and furthermore, those

are singular at rotation angle θ =

π

2

. In contrast,

a ﬁrst order sliding mode (1SM) controller pro-

posed by (Fierro-Rojas et al., 2002) shows global

tracking for planar robots when all physical robot

and vision parameters are considered unknown.

Notice that our previous approach (Fierro-Rojas

et al., 2002) is not singular at θ =

π

2

, and does

not require knowledge of jacobian matrix.

In this paper, and similarly to (Fierro-Rojas et

al., 2002), we develop a second order sliding mode

(2SM) with global tracking visual feedback con-

troller for planar manipulators in an image-based

approach under unknown parameters. A change

of coordinates parameterized by a TBG is pro-

posed into the sliding surface such that ﬁnite-time

convergence of tracking error arises. However, the

uncertainty on camera parameters does not allow

to obtain chattering-free control. We stress that

the semi-continuous 2SM control yields global

exponential tracking versus the stable regime of

the pise-wise continuous 1SM control. To illus-

trate the performance of the proposed controller

we present some simulations that conﬁrms the

expected convergence behavior of the trajectory

errors in screen coordinates.

2. ROBOT-CAMERA MODEL

Consider the set-up of a planar manipulator us-

ing a vision system as depicted in Fig. (1).

In order to describe motion of the end-eﬀector

in an screen coordinate system, some coordi-

nates frames are deﬁned, namely the robot base

frame Σ

B

= ¦X

B

, Y

B

, Z

B

¦, the end-eﬀector

frame Σ

E

= ¦X

E

, Y

E

, Z

E

¦, the camera frame

Σ

C

= ¦X

C

, Y

C

, Z

C

¦, the CCD image frame Σ

I

=

¦X

I

, Y

I

¦ and the screen frame Σ

S

= ¦u, v¦, which

are refereed in the following subsection.

Fig. 1. System coordinates frames: Z

B

|Z

C

and

angle (X

B

, X

C

) = θ.

2.1 Camera Model and Forward Kinematics

The position of the robot end-eﬀector in the screen

coordinate frame Σ

S

, based on the perspective

projection model (Hutchinson et al., 1996) is given

by

1

x =

u

v

=

αλ

f

λ

f

−z

−1 0

0 1

R

f(q)

−

c

O

b1

c

O

b2

+

−α 0

0 α

O

I

+ O

X

, (1)

where α > 0 is the scale factor in pixels; z > 0

is the distance of separation of the planes X

C

−

1

For a detailed procedure to obtain the explicit relation-

ship see for instance (Kelly et al., 1996).

Y

C

∈ Σ

C

and X

B

−Y

B

∈ Σ

B

; λ

f

> 0 is the focal

length; R = R(θ) ∈ IR

2×2

denotes the rotation

matrix of Σ

B

with respect to Σ

C

; f(q) is the

direct kinematics function;

C

O

B

= [

c

O

b1

,

c

O

b2

]

T

is the position of Σ

C

with respect to Σ

B

; O

I

is

the position of the intersection of the optical axis

with respect to Σ

I

; and ﬁnally, O

X

= [O

x

1

, O

x

2

]

T

denotes the origin of Σ

I

in the Σ

S

coordinate

system.

2.2 Diﬀerential Kinematics

By diﬀerentiating equation (1) we obtain the

velocity of the end-eﬀector with respect to the

screen frame

˙ x =α

λ

f

λ

f

−z

−1 0

0 1

RJ ˙ q

=R

α

J ˙ q (2)

where J = J (q) is the Jacobian matrix of the

manipulator and

R

α

= α

λ

f

λ

f

−z

−1 0

0 1

R. (3)

2.2.1. Inverse diﬀerential kinematics Accord-

ing to the equation (2), the following mapping

appears

˙ q = J

−1

R

−1

α

˙ x (4)

to establish an explicit dependence of joint veloc-

ity coordinates in terms of image velocity vector.

Proposition 1. For any vector z ∈ IR

2

the product

J

−1

R

−1

α

z can be represented in the following

linear form

J

−1

R

−1

α

z = Y

v

(q, z) θ

v

(5)

whose elements of Y

v

(q, z) ∈ IR

2×p

2

do not depend

neither on the rotation matrix nor links length,

and θ

v

∈ IR

p

2

×1

is composed of parameters of the

rotation matrix and parameters of the Jacobian

matrix.

2.3 Robot Dynamics

In the absence of friction or other disturbances,

the dynamics of a serial n−link rigid, non-

redundant, fully actuated robot manipulator can

be written as follows

2

H (q) ¨ q + C (q, ˙ q) ˙ q + G(q) = τ (6)

2

Without loss of generality, our controller can be applied

with similar results if we consider dynamic friction, for

instance the LuGre model.

where q ∈ IR

n

is the vector of joint displacements,

τ ∈ IR

n×1

stands for the vector applied joint

torques, H(q) ∈ IR

n×n

is the symmetric positive

deﬁnite manipulator inertia matrix, C(q, ˙ q) ˙ q ∈

IR

n

stands for the vector of centripetal and Corio-

lis torques, and ﬁnally G(q) ∈ IR

n

is the vector of

gravitational torques. Two important properties

of robot dynamics useful for stability analysis are

the following.

Property 1. The time derivative of the inertia

matrix, and the centripetal and Coriolis matrix

satisfy a skew-symmetric matrix

X

T

1

2

˙

H (q) −C (q, ˙ q)

X = 0, ∀X ∈ IR

n

(7)

Property 2. Robot dynamics are linearly param-

eterizable in terms of a known regressor Y

b

=

Y

b

(q, ˙ q, ¨ q) ∈ IR

n×p

1

and a vector θ

b

∈ IR

p

1

of

robot parameters as follows

H (q) ¨ q + C (q, ˙ q) ˙ q + G(q) = Y

b

θ

b

(8)

The time base generator concept, necessary to

achieve ﬁnite-time visual tracking, and the prob-

lem statement are discussed in the following sec-

tion.

3. TIME BASE GENERATOR

In (Parra-Vega and Hirzinger, 2000), a well-posed

TBG algorithm is proposed to guarantee ﬁnite-

time convergence of robot manipulators. For com-

pleteness we present the basics of TBG-based con-

trol (Parra-Vega and Hirzinger, 2000). Consider

the following ﬁrst order time-varying ordinary dif-

ferential equation

˙ y = −λ(t)y (9)

where

λ(t) = λ

0

˙

ξ

(1 −ξ) + δ

(10)

where λ

0

= 1+, < 1, and 0 < δ < 1. The time

base generator ξ = ξ(t) ∈ C

2

must be provided

by the user so as to ξ goes smoothly from 0 to 1

in ﬁnite-time t = t

b

> 0, and

˙

ξ =

˙

ξ(t) is a bell

shaped derivative of ξ such that

˙

ξ(t

0

) =

˙

ξ(t

b

) ≡ 0.

In this conditions, the solution of (9) is y(t) =

y(t

0

)[(1 − ξ) + δ]

1+

, with λ(t

b

) > 0. Note that

y(t

b

) = y(t

0

)δ

1+

> 0 can be made arbitrarily

small in arbitrary ﬁnite time t

b

. Also note that

the transient of y(t) is shaped by ξ(t) over time.

Thus, if our controller yields a closed-loop equa-

tion similar to (9), for y the position tracking

errors of the robot, then ﬁnite-time convergence

arises.

4. PRELIMINARY CONTROLLER DESIGN

4.1 Problem Statement

We consider the problem of designing a vi-

sual servo controller for the dynamic model

of robot manipulators under uncalibrated cam-

era and unknown physical robot parameters,

that guarantees ﬁnite-time tracking of a given

time-varying image-based trajectory denoted by

(x

T

d

(t), ˙ x

T

d

(t), ¨ x

T

d

(t))

T

∈ IR

3n

, with the following

assumptions:

Assumptions 1. Image coordinates x, and ˙ x are

available.

Assumptions 2. Inertial robot parameters are un-

known, and the camera is not calibrated.

The ﬁx camera is modelled as a static operator (1)

that relates screen and joint coordinates. Thus,

there exists a functional that relates image errors

and joint errors. Then, we are interested in design-

ing a joint output error manifold s

q

, in terms of

visual error manifold s

x

, which satisﬁes a passivity

inequality 's

q

, τ

∗

` with respect to the virtual joint

input τ

∗

. To this end, we need to derive the robot

dynamics in s

q

coordinates, and the passivity in-

equality will dictate the control structure as well

as the storage function. To proceed we ﬁrst derive

the known parametric case (the camera is cali-

brated), and afterwards we present the unknown

parametric case (the camera is not calibrated)

that satisﬁes the problem above.

4.2 Visual Error Manifold

Consider the following nominal reference with

respect to the screen frame

˙ x

r

= ˙ x

d

−λ(t)∆x + s

d

−K

i

υ (11)

˙ υ =sign(s

δ

) (12)

where ˙ x

r

is base on a time-varying continuous

state-independent TBG gain λ(t), x

d

and ˙ x

d

de-

note the desired position and velocity of the end-

eﬀector with respect to the screen frame, respec-

tively, and

s

δ

=s −s

d

(13)

s =∆˙ x + λ(t)∆x (14)

s

d

=s(t

0

) exp

−κt

(15)

with the integral feedback gain K

i

> 0 whose

precise lower bound is to be deﬁned yet; κ > 0; the

sgn(y) is the discontinuous signum(y) function

of y ∈ IR

n

; ∆x = x − x

d

is the image-based

end-eﬀector position tracking error; s

d

= s(t

0

) ∈

C

1

⇒ s

δ

(t

0

) = 0. In this way, the derivative of

(11) becomes

¨ x

r

= ¨ x

d

−λ(t)∆˙ x −

˙

λ(t)∆x + ˙ s

d

−K

i

sign(s

δ

) (16)

Then, the visual error manifold (screen coordi-

nates extended error) is given by

s

x

= ˙ x − ˙ x

r

=s

δ

+ K

i

t

t

0

sgn(s

δ

)(ζ)dζ (17)

Note that if s

δ

= 0 then tracking is obtained.

4.3 Joint Error Manifold

According to (4), a nominal reference ˙ q

r

in the

joint space is deﬁned as follows

˙ q

r

= J

−1

R

−1

α

˙ x

r

(18)

Thus, the joint error manifold s

q

in joint space is

given by

s

q

= ˙ q − ˙ q

r

=J

−1

R

−1

α

( ˙ x − ˙ x

r

)

=J

−1

R

−1

α

s

x

(19)

We can see that if we design a controller that

yields convergence of s

q

, then s

x

will converge

since by assumptions J and R

α

are well-posed.

Note that convergence of s

x

implies ∆˙ x, ∆x → 0.

Because of the time derivative of ˙ q

r

is required in a

passivity-based controller designing, this is obtain

as follow

¨ q

r

=J

−1

R

−1

α

¨ x

r

+

˙

J

−1

R

−1

α

˙ x

r

(20)

Remark 1. Parameter uncertainty. Having de-

ﬁned the nominal references in both the joint and

screen frames, it is possible to design a controller

based on the calibrated joint error manifold, so

the intrinsic α and λ

f

, and the extrinsic z and θ

camera parameters are required, which is quite re-

strictive since usually some of them are unknown,

or at least very diﬃcult to compute in real time.

Therefore, in the following, we present a controller

that yields ﬁnite time tracking with neither knowl-

edge of inertia robot parameters nor knowledge of

intrinsic and extrinsic camera parameters.

5. SECOND ORDER SLIDING MODE WITH

TBG VISUAL SERVOING

5.1 Uncalibrated Joint Error Manifold

To handle the parametric uncertainty of the cam-

era system, note that ˙ q

r

allows a linear parame-

terization, that is ˙ q

r

= J

−1

R

−1

α

˙ x

r

≡ Y (q, ˙ x

r

)θ

v

,

where θ

v

incorporates intrinsic and extrinsic cam-

era parameters and Y (q, ˙ x

r

) is composed of known

variables. Then, since θ

v

is unknown, we deﬁne a

new nominal reference

˙

¯ q

r

as follows:

˙

¯ q

r

= Y

v

¯

θ

v

(21)

where Y

v

= Y

v

(q, ˙ x

r

), and

¯

θ

v

is tuned such that

J

−1

R

−1

α

˙ x

r

is well-posed. From equations (19),

(21) and proposition (5), the uncalibrated joint

error manifold ¯ s

q

vector is given by

¯ s

q

= ˙ q −

˙

¯ q

r

= ˙ q −

˙

¯ q

r

± ˙ q

r

=s

q

−Y

v

¯

θ

v

+ Y

v

θ

v

=s

q

−Y

v

∆θ

v

(22)

where ∆θ

v

=

¯

θ

v

−θ

v

. It is useful to give ¨ q

r

now

¨

¯ q

r

=

˙

Y

v

¯

θ

v

(23)

In order to compensate the eﬀects on robot dy-

namics due to deﬁnition of new nominal references

(

˙

¯ q

r

= ˙ q

r

,

¨

¯ q

r

= ¨ q

r

, and therefore ¯ s

q

= s

q

), it is

convenient to express the error

˙

¯ s

q

in terms of ˙ s

q

as follows

˙

¯ s

q

= ˙ s

q

−

˙

Y

v

∆θ

v

(24)

5.2 Open-loop Error Equation

Using nominal references (21)-(23), the uncali-

brated open-loop system can be written as follows

H (q)

˙

¯ s

q

+ C (q, ˙ q) ¯ s

q

= τ −

¯

Y

br

θ

b

(25)

where

¯

Y

br

= Y

br

(q, ˙ q,

˙

¯ q

r

,

¨

¯ q

r

) is available for mea-

surement. Considering equations (22) and (24),

open loop dynamics is expressed in terms of s

q

and ˙ s

q

by

H (q) ˙ s

q

+ C (q, ˙ q) s

q

=τ −

¯

Y

br

θ

b

+ Y

v

e

∆θ

v

e

(26)

where

Y

v

e

∆θ

v

e

=H(q)

˙

Y

v

∆θ

v

+ C(q, ˙ q)Y

v

∆θ

v

with Y

v

e

= Y

v

e

(q, ˙ q, ˙ x

r

, ¨ x

r

). Since H(q), C(q, ˙ q)

are linearly parameterizable, then last equation

can be written in terms of a linear parameteri-

zation, too. At this stage the problem becomes

in computing τ in (26) such that s

q

be bounded

subject to unknown θ

b

, ∆θ

v

e

.

5.3 Main Result

We propose the following controller

τ =−

¯

Y

br

Θ

b

sgn(

¯

Y

T

br

s

q

) −γsgn(s

q

) (27)

where Θ

b

∈ IR

p1×p1

, Θ

b

ii

≥ [θ

b

i

[ , and γ > 0.

Theorem 1. Consider a robot manipulator (6)

with the second order sliding mode with time base

generator visual servoing scheme (27), subject to

robot and camera parametric uncertainties. Then,

the closed-loop system yields ﬁnite-time conver-

gence of image tracking errors.

Proof. The following closed loop error equation

between (6) and (27) arises

H(q) ˙ s

q

=−C(q, ˙ q)s

q

−

¯

Y

br

Θ

b

sgn(

¯

Y

T

br

s

q

) −

¯

Y

br

θ

b

−Y

v

e

Θ

v

sgn(Y

T

v

e

s

q

) −γsgn(s

q

)

+Y

v

e

∆θ

v

e

+ τ

∗

(28)

for τ

∗

≡ 0 a virtual control input. Note that the

passivity inequality 's

q

, τ

∗

` =

˙

V +γ[s

q

[, with the

following energy storage function

V =

1

2

s

T

q

H (q) s

q

(29)

whose rate of change yields

˙

V ≤−γ [s

q

[ + s

T

q

Y

v

e

∆θ

v

e

≤−γ [s

q

[ +[s

q

[[Y

v

e

[[∆θ

v

e

[

where we have used Property 1. Note that

Y

v

e

∆θ

v

e

= f

1

( ˙ x

r

, ¨ x

r

, θ

v

e

, ∆θ

v

e

, θ

b

), s

q

= f

2

( ˙ x

r

,

¨ x

r

, θ

v

e

, υ), and there exists an upper bound for

the regressors θ

v

e

, θ

b

because the entries of these

regressors depend on trigonometry functions and

link lengths, bounded desired trajectories and the

state of the system, then there exists a large

enough feedback gain γ such that

˙

V ≤−γ [s

q

[ + f

0

[s

q

[

for smooth and bounded function f

0

≥ g(f

1

, f

2

).

Then, according to the second method of Lya-

punov, there arises stability of s

q

, that is, s

q

is

bounded, with L

∞

boundedness for ˙ s

q

, therefore

multiplying equation (19) by R

α

J, becomes in

s

x

= R

α

Js

q

with a derivative ˙ s

x

= R

α

J ˙ s

q

+

R

α

˙

Js

q

, that is, it gives rise to, from equation (17),

˙ s

δ

= −K

i

sgn(s

δ

) + R

α

J ˙ s

q

+ R

α

˙

Js

q

(30)

Now, in order to produce the sliding mode condi-

tion for s

δ

, we multiply the previous equation by

s

T

δ

to obtain

s

T

δ

˙ s

δ

=−s

T

δ

K

i

sgn(s

δ

) + s

T

δ

R

α

J ˙ s

q

+ s

T

δ

R

α

˙

Js

q

≤−K

i

[s

δ

[ +

0

[s

δ

[[ ˙ s

q

[ +

1

[s

δ

[[s

q

[

≤−K

i

[s

δ

[ +

2

[s

δ

[ +

3

[s

δ

[

≤−K

i

[s

δ

[ +

4

[s

δ

[

≤−µ[s

δ

[, µ = K

i

−

4

> 0, (31)

where

0

≥ [R

α

J[,

1

≥ [R

α

˙

J[,

2

≥ [ ˙ s

q

[,

3

≥ [s

q

[

4

=

2

+

3

. Thus, if K

i

>

4

, equation (31)

qualiﬁes as the sliding mode condition for s

δ

= 0

for all time since s

δ

(t

0

) = 0 ∀t

0

. Thus, a second

order sliding mode regime is induced at s

δ

= 0 for

all time.

Now, as shown in section 3, the TBG induces

ﬁnite time convergence if we substitute y = ∆x in

equation (9), that is the following equation arises

x(t

s

) = x

d

(t

s

) + ∆x(t

0

)δ

1+

(32)

In this way, tracking errors converge to an ar-

bitrary small vicinity of ∆x = 0 in arbitrary

ﬁnite time t = t

b

without knowledge of manip-

ulator dynamics, and with uncalibrated camera.

Afterwards, for t > t

b

, s

δ

(t) = 0, which implies

∆˙ x = −λ

0

∆x+ε. Then, since s

d

(t) → 0, ∆x → 0

exponentially. ♦

Remark 2. Signum of s

q

. Because of robot and

vision system parameters are unknown, s

q

is not

available. However, its signum can be easily deter-

mined from equation (19) and using proposition

(5), namely the sign of s

q

= Y

v

(q, s

x

)θ

v

is deter-

mined by the sign of the known regressor Y

v

(q, s

x

),

since the vector θ

v

it is assumed unknown but

constant.

Remark 3. Experimental evaluation. The discon-

tinuous nature of the signum function make phys-

ical implementation of our controller impractical,

and hence at least a piecewise continuous approx-

imation of the signum function must be imple-

mented in order to not only reduce chattering but

also to be able to physically realize the controller.

Remark 4. Extension to 3D. With the exception

of the camera model (1) and proposition (5),

the controller design was conducted taking no

account of dimension of the robot workspace,

which indicate the possibility of extending our

scheme to the 3D spatial case as a future research

topic.

6. SIMULATIONS

A two-rigid link, planar robot without friction

forces is considered. Dimensions of the robot and

camera parameters are given in Table 1, where

subindex 1 and 2 stand for ﬁrst and second link,

respectively. The endpoint of the manipulator is

requested to draw a circle deﬁned with respect to

the vision frame x

d

= (x

d1

, x

d2

)

T

= (0.1 cos ωt +

0.05, 0.1 sin ωt+0.05)

T

, where ω = 2 rad/sec, with

t

b

= 1.0 sec as the desired convergence time. Data

allows to visualize the stability properties stated

in Theorem 1.

Table 1. Camera and robot parameters.

ROBOT SYSTEM Value - Unit

Length link l

1

, l

2

0.4, 0.3 m

Center of gravity 1,2 l

c1

, l

c2

0.1776, 0.1008 m

Mass link m

1

, m

2

9.1, 2.5714 kg

Inertia link I

1

, I

2

0.284, 0.0212 kgm

2

Gravity acceleration g

z

9.8 m/sec

2

VISION SYSTEM .

Clock-wise rotation angle θ

π

8

rad

Scale factor α 72727 pixeles/m

Depth ﬁeld of view z 1.5 m

Camera oﬀset

C

O

B

[−0.2 −0.1]

T

m

Oﬀset Σ

I

O

I

[0.0005 0.0003]

T

m

Focal length λ

f

0.008 m

0 1 2 3 4 5

−400

−300

−200

−100

0

100

[

p

i

x

e

l

s

]

Position errors

0 1 2 3 4 5

−100

0

100

200

300

400

500

[

p

i

x

e

l

s

/

s

]

Velocity errors

0 1 2 3 4 5

−20

−10

0

10

20

30

[

N

m

]

Applied torques

−400 −200 0 200

−300

−200

−100

0

100

200

300

400

x

1

,xd

1

[pixels]

x

2

,

x

d

2

[

p

i

x

e

l

s

]

Desired and end−effector trajectories

joint 2

joint 1

joint 1

joint 2

joint 1

joint 2

Robot workspace

boundary

x(t)

x

d

(t)

Fig. 2. Tracking of image-based desired trajecto-

ries: Theorem 1 controller for t

b

= 1 sec.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

−2000

−1500

−1000

−500

0

500

1000

1500

[N

m

]

Applied torques

joint 1

joint 2

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

−15

−10

−5

0

5

10

15

20

25

[N

m

]

Applied torques

joint 1

joint 2

Fig. 3. Applied torques: 1SM (left), and 2SM

Theorem 1 (right).

7. CONCLUSIONS

We have proposed a new image-based servo con-

troller for uncertain planar robots and uncali-

brated camera in a passivity-based second order

sliding mode with time base generator approach.

The closed-loop system exhibit exponential con-

vergence of tracking errors for any given initial

conditions despite of the size of the parametric

uncertainty. Finite time convergence is visualized

through simulation results when all parameters

are unknown.

REFERENCES

Bishop, B.E. and M.W. Spong (1997). Adaptive

calibration and control of 2d monocular vi-

sual servo systems. IFAC Symp. on Robot

Control, Nantes, France.

Fierro-Rojas, J.D., V. Parra-Vega

and A. Espinosa-Romero (2002). 2d sliding

mode visual servoing for uncertain manipu-

lators with uncalibrated camera. IEEE`RSJ

Conf. IROS.

Hsu, L. and P. Aquino (1999). Adaptive visual

tracking with uncertain manipulator dynam-

ics and uncalibrated camera. Proc. 38th IEEE

CDC, Phoenix, Arizona, pp.1248–1253.

Hutchinson, S., G.D. Hager and P.I. Corke (1996).

A tutorial on visual servo control. Trans. on

Robotics and Automation, 12, 651–670.

Kelly, R., P. Shirkey and M.W. Spong (1996).

Fixed-camera visual servo control for planar

robots. Proc. of the 1996 IEEE Int. Conf. on

Robotics and Automation, Minnesota.

Parra-Vega, V. and G. Hirzinger (2000). Finite-

time tracking for robot manipulators with

continuous control. SYROCO, Wien.

Shen, Y., Y.H. Liu and K. Li (2001). Asymptotic

trajectory tracking of manipulators using un-

calibrated visual feedback. Submitted to the

IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics.

C OB = [c Ob1 . ROBOT-CAMERA MODEL Consider the set-up of a planar manipulator using a vision system as depicted in Fig. namely the robot base frame ΣB = {XB . z > 0 is the distance of separation of the planes XC − 1 For a detailed procedure to obtain the explicit relationship see for instance (Kelly et al.the semi-continuous 2SM control yields global exponential tracking versus the stable regime of the pise-wise continuous 1SM control. which are refereed in the following subsection. 2 Without loss of generality. v}. 0 1 (3) 2. 0 α (1) Ob1 Ob2 where α > 0 is the scale factor in pixels. 2. Ox2 ]T denotes the origin of ΣI in the ΣS coordinate system. fully actuated robot manipulator can be written as follows 2 H (q) q + C (q. YC . 1. ZC }. . nonredundant. OI is the position of the intersection of the optical axis with respect to ΣI . ZB }. YE . YB .1.3 Robot Dynamics In the absence of friction or other disturbances.1 Camera Model and Forward Kinematics The position of the robot end-eﬀector in the screen coordinate frame ΣS .2 Diﬀerential Kinematics By diﬀerentiating equation (1) we obtain the velocity of the end-eﬀector with respect to the screen frame x=α ˙ λf λf − z = Rα J q ˙ −1 0 RJ q ˙ 0 1 (2) where J = J (q) is the Jacobian matrix of the manipulator and Rα = α λf λf − z −1 0 R. In order to describe motion of the end-eﬀector in an screen coordinate system. Proposition 1. our controller can be applied with similar results if we consider dynamic friction. For any vector z ∈ I 2 the product R −1 J −1 Rα z can be represented in the following linear form −1 J −1 Rα z = Yv (q. the dynamics of a serial n−link rigid. (5) 2. the CCD image frame ΣI = {XI . λf > 0 is the focal length. and θv ∈ I p2 ×1 is composed of parameters of the R rotation matrix and parameters of the Jacobian matrix. 2. (1). some coordinates frames are deﬁned. for instance the LuGre model. 1996) is given by 1 x= − u v c c whose elements of Yv (q. z) θv Fig. YI } and the screen frame ΣS = {u. Inverse diﬀerential kinematics According to the equation (2). f (q) is the direct kinematics function. To illustrate the performance of the proposed controller we present some simulations that conﬁrms the expected convergence behavior of the trajectory errors in screen coordinates. YC ∈ ΣC and XB − YB ∈ ΣB . q) q + G (q) = τ ¨ ˙ ˙ (6) = αλf λf − z + −1 0 R f (q) 0 1 −α 0 OI + O X . XC ) = θ. the camera frame ΣC = {XC . ZE }.c Ob2 ]T is the position of ΣC with respect to ΣB .. R = R(θ) ∈ I 2×2 denotes the rotation R matrix of ΣB with respect to ΣC . System coordinates frames: ZB ZC and angle (XB . and ﬁnally. the end-eﬀector frame ΣE = {XE . based on the perspective projection model (Hutchinson et al. 1996).2. OX = [Ox1 . z) ∈ I 2×p2 do not depend R neither on the rotation matrix nor links length. the following mapping appears −1 ˙ q = J −1 Rα x ˙ (4) to establish an explicit dependence of joint velocity coordinates in terms of image velocity vector. 2..

xd and xd de˙ note the desired position and velocity of the endeﬀector with respect to the screen frame. Thus. Consider the following ﬁrst order time-varying ordinary differential equation y = −λ(t)y ˙ where ˙ ξ λ(t) = λ0 (1 − ξ) + δ (10) (9) 4. in terms of visual error manifold sx . The time base generator ξ = ξ(t) ∈ C 2 must be provided by the user so as to ξ goes smoothly from 0 to 1 ˙ ˙ in ﬁnite-time t = tb > 0. and x are ˙ available. xT (t). Image coordinates x. and afterwards we present the unknown parametric case (the camera is not calibrated) that satisﬁes the problem above. if our controller yields a closed-loop equation similar to (9).where q ∈ I n is the vector of joint displacements. Note that y(tb ) = y(t0 )δ 1+ > 0 can be made arbitrarily small in arbitrary ﬁnite time tb . and ξ = ξ(t) is a bell ˙ ˙ shaped derivative of ξ such that ξ(t0 ) = ξ(tb ) ≡ 0. which satisﬁes a passivity inequality sq . Assumptions 2. for y the position tracking errors of the robot. The time derivative of the inertia matrix. For completeness we present the basics of TBG-based control (Parra-Vega and Hirzinger. Two important properties of robot dynamics useful for stability analysis are the following. and ﬁnally G(q) ∈ I n is the vector of R gravitational torques. 1. respectively. Then. PRELIMINARY CONTROLLER DESIGN 4. To this end. where xr is base on a time-varying continuous ˙ state-independent TBG gain λ(t). ∀X ∈ I n (7) ˙ R 2 4. xT (t))T ∈ I 3n . and the camera is not calibrated. The ﬁx camera is modelled as a static operator (1) that relates screen and joint coordinates. Inertial robot parameters are unknown. Property 1. q)q ∈ ˙ ˙ I n stands for the vector of centripetal and CorioR lis torques. we need to derive the robot dynamics in sq coordinates. and the centripetal and Coriolis matrix satisfy a skew-symmetric matrix XT 1 ˙ H (q) − C (q. there exists a functional that relates image errors and joint errors. with λ(tb ) > 0. that guarantees ﬁnite-time tracking of a given time-varying image-based trajectory denoted by (xT (t). and 0 < δ 1. H(q) ∈ I n×n is the symmetric positive R deﬁnite manipulator inertia matrix. ∆x = x − xd is the image-based R end-eﬀector position tracking error.2 Visual Error Manifold Consider the following nominal reference with respect to the screen frame xr = xd − λ(t)∆x + sd − Ki υ ˙ ˙ υ = sign (sδ ) ˙ (11) (12) where λ0 = 1 + . a well-posed TBG algorithm is proposed to guarantee ﬁnitetime convergence of robot manipulators. then ﬁnite-time convergence arises. and the passivity inequality will dictate the control structure as well as the storage function. 2000). 2000). and the problem statement are discussed in the following section. the solution of (9) is y(t) = y(t0 )[(1 − ξ) + δ]1+ . κ > 0. C(q. τ ∗ with respect to the virtual joint input τ ∗ . Robot dynamics are linearly parameterizable in terms of a known regressor Yb = R Yb (q. To proceed we ﬁrst derive the known parametric case (the camera is calibrated). q) X = 0. necessary to achieve ﬁnite-time visual tracking. TIME BASE GENERATOR In (Parra-Vega and Hirzinger. sd = s(t0 ) ∈ . R τ ∈ I n×1 stands for the vector applied joint R torques.1 Problem Statement We consider the problem of designing a visual servo controller for the dynamic model of robot manipulators under uncalibrated camera and unknown physical robot parameters. Thus. 3. q ) ∈ I n×p1 and a vector θb ∈ I p1 of ˙ ¨ R robot parameters as follows H (q) q + C (q. q) q + G (q) = Yb θb ¨ ˙ ˙ (8) The time base generator concept. q. and sδ = s − s d s = ∆x + λ(t)∆x ˙ sd = s(t0 ) exp −κt (13) (14) (15) with the integral feedback gain Ki > 0 whose precise lower bound is to be deﬁned yet. with the following ˙d ¨d R d assumptions: Assumptions 1. the sgn (y) is the discontinuous signum(y) function of y ∈ I n . Also note that the transient of y(t) is shaped by ξ(t) over time. we are interested in designing a joint output error manifold sq . In this conditions. Property 2.

Since H(q). the uncalibrated open-loop system can be written as follows ¯ ˙ H (q) sq + C (q. open loop dynamics is expressed in terms of sq and sq by ˙ ¯ (26) H (q) sq + C (q. In this way. q. Then. xr ) is composed of known ˙ variables. ∆x → 0.1 Uncalibrated Joint Error Manifold To handle the parametric uncertainty of the camera system. note that qr allows a linear parame˙ −1 ˙ ˙ terization. ∆θve . we deﬁne a ˙ new nominal reference q r as follows: ¯ ¯ ˙ q r = Y v θv ¯ (21) Then. the uncalibrated joint error manifold sq vector is given by ¯ ˙ ˙ sq = q − q r = q − q r ± qr ¯ ˙ ¯ ˙ ¯ ˙ ¯v + Yv θv = sq − Yv θ = sq − Yv ∆θv (22) ¯ where ∆θv = θv − θv . q r . Having deﬁned the nominal references in both the joint and screen frames. since θv is unknown. q)Yv ∆θv ˙ ˙ ¨ ˙ with Yve = Yve (q. ¯ where Yv = Yv (q. q) sq = τ − Ybr θb ¯ ˙ ¯ (25) We can see that if we design a controller that yields convergence of sq . a nominal reference qr in the ˙ joint space is deﬁned as follows −1 ˙ qr = J −1 Rα xr ˙ (18) Thus. then sx will converge since by assumptions J and Rα are well-posed. which is quite restrictive since usually some of them are unknown.2 Open-loop Error Equation Using nominal references (21)-(23). xr . ˙ (21) and proposition (5).3 Joint Error Manifold According to (4). q) are linearly parameterizable. Considering equations (22) and (24). . the joint error manifold sq in joint space is given by sq = q − q r ˙ ˙ −1 ˙ ˙ = J −1 Rα (x − xr ) −1 = J −1 Rα sx In order to compensate the eﬀects on robot dynamics due to deﬁnition of new nominal references ˙ (q r = qr . ˙ Because of the time derivative of qr is required in a ˙ passivity-based controller designing. it is ¯ ˙ q ¯ ¨ ¯ ˙ convenient to express the error sq in terms of sq ¯ ˙ as follows ˙ ˙ sq = sq − Yv ∆θv ¯ ˙ (24) (19) 5. ¨r ) is available for mea˙ ¯ q surement. Therefore. xr ). ¨r = qr . too. in the following. and therefore sq = sq ). From equations (19). the derivative of (11) becomes xr = xd − λ(t)∆x − λ(t)∆x + sd ¨ ¨ ˙ ˙ ˙ −Ki sign(sδ ) (16) 5. C(q. this is obtain as follow −1 −1 ˙ qr = J −1 Rα xr + J −1 Rα xr ¨ ¨ ˙ (20) ¯ ˙ ¯ where Ybr = Ybr (q. or at least very diﬃcult to compute in real time. and the extrinsic z and θ camera parameters are required. then last equation can be written in terms of a linear parameterization. the visual error manifold (screen coordinates extended error) is given by sx = x − x r ˙ ˙ t = s δ + Ki t0 sgn(sδ )(ζ)dζ (17) Note that if sδ = 0 then tracking is obtained. it is possible to design a controller based on the calibrated joint error manifold. Parameter uncertainty. Remark 1. and θv is tuned such that ˙ −1 −1 J Rα xr is well-posed. xr )θv . SECOND ORDER SLIDING MODE WITH TBG VISUAL SERVOING 5. q) sq = τ − Ybr θb + Yve ∆θve ˙ ˙ where ˙ ˙ Yve ∆θve = H(q)Yv ∆θv + C(q. we present a controller that yields ﬁnite time tracking with neither knowledge of inertia robot parameters nor knowledge of intrinsic and extrinsic camera parameters. q.C 1 ⇒ sδ (t0 ) = 0. xr ). ˙ where θv incorporates intrinsic and extrinsic camera parameters and Y (q. that is qr = J −1 Rα xr ≡ Y (q. so the intrinsic α and λf . At this stage the problem becomes in computing τ in (26) such that sq be bounded subject to unknown θb . Note that convergence of sx implies ∆x. It is useful to give qr now ¨ ˙ ¯ ¨r = Yv θv q ¯ (23) 4.

5. Rα Js ˙ sδ = −Ki sgn(sδ ) + Rα J sq + Rα Jsq ˙ ˙ (30) Now. if Ki > 4 . its signum can be easily determined from equation (19) and using proposition (5). the controller design was conducted taking no account of dimension of the robot workspace. Signum of sq . Θbii ≥ |θbi | . planar robot without friction forces is considered. υ). a second order sliding mode regime is induced at sδ = 0 for all time. tracking errors converge to an arbitrary small vicinity of ∆x = 0 in arbitrary ﬁnite time t = tb without knowledge of manipulator dynamics. bounded desired trajectories and the state of the system. in order to produce the sliding mode condition for sδ . since the vector θv it is assumed unknown but constant. Extension to 3D. Remark 3. The endpoint of the manipulator is whose rate of change yields ˙ V ≤ −γ |sq | + sT Yve ∆θve q ≤ −γ |sq | + |sq ||Yve ||∆θve | where we have used Property 1. SIMULATIONS A two-rigid link. according to the second method of Lyapunov. Because of robot and vision system parameters are unknown. Then. sx )θv is determined by the sign of the known regressor Yv (q. f2 ). sδ (t) = 0. as shown in section 3. respectively. where subindex 1 and 2 stand for ﬁrst and second link. Dimensions of the robot and camera parameters are given in Table 1. since sd (t) → 0. and there exists an upper bound for ¨ the regressors θve . Then. Consider a robot manipulator (6) with the second order sliding mode with time base generator visual servoing scheme (27). and γ > 0. θb ). Note that the ˙ passivity inequality sq . the TBG induces ﬁnite time convergence if we substitute y = ∆x in equation (9). However. Now. we multiply the previous equation by sT to obtain δ . becomes in sx = Rα Jsq with a derivative sx = Rα J sq + ˙ ˙ ˙ q . that is. then there exists a large enough feedback gain γ such that ˙ V ≤ −γ |sq | + f0 |sq | for smooth and bounded function f0 ≥ g(f1 . 6. that is. R Theorem 1. ∆θve . Thus. 2 ≥ |sq |. q)sq − Ybr Θb sgn(Ybr sq ) − Ybr θb ˙ ˙ −Yve Θv sgn(YvT sq ) − γsgn(sq ) e +Yve ∆θve + τ ∗ (28) µ = Ki − > 0. xr . ∆x → 0 ˙ exponentially. Note that ˙ ˙ ¨ Yve ∆θve = f1 (xr . sx ). (31) ˙ where 0 ≥ |Rα J|.3 Main Result We propose the following controller τ ¯ ¯T = −Ybr Θb sgn(Ybr sq ) − γsgn(sq ) (27) ˙ ˙ sT sδ = −sT Ki sgn(sδ ) + sT Rα J sq + sT Rα Jsq δ δ δ δ ˙ ≤ −Ki |sδ | + ≤ −Ki |sδ | + ≤ −Ki |sδ | + ≤ −µ|sδ |. With the exception of the camera model (1) and proposition (5). The following closed loop error equation between (6) and (27) arises ¯ ¯T ¯ H(q)sq = −C(q. that is the following equation arises x(ts ) = xd (ts ) + ∆x(t0 )δ 1+ (32) for τ ∗ ≡ 0 a virtual control input. therefore ˙ multiplying equation (19) by Rα J. the closed-loop system yields ﬁnite-time convergence of image tracking errors. sq is not available. which implies ∆x = −λ0 ∆x + ε. and hence at least a piecewise continuous approximation of the signum function must be implemented in order to not only reduce chattering but also to be able to physically realize the controller. for t > tb . Experimental evaluation. from equation (17). equation (31) 4 qualiﬁes as the sliding mode condition for sδ = 0 for all time since sδ (t0 ) = 0 ∀t0 . τ ∗ = V + γ|sq |. namely the sign of sq = Yv (q. with L∞ boundedness for sq . θb because the entries of these regressors depend on trigonometry functions and link lengths. subject to robot and camera parametric uncertainties. xr . Proof. with the following energy storage function V = 1 T s H (q) sq 2 q (29) In this way. Then. Thus. which indicate the possibility of extending our scheme to the 3D spatial case as a future research topic. θve . there arises stability of sq . θve . sq = f2 (xr . ♦ Remark 2. sq is bounded. Afterwards. it gives rise to. 1 ≥ |Rα J|. 3 ≥ |sq | ˙ = 2 + 3 . ˙ 0 |sδ ||sq | 2 |sδ | 4 |sδ | 4 + 1 |sδ ||sq | + 3 |sδ | where Θb ∈ I p1×p1 . and with uncalibrated camera. Remark 4. The discontinuous nature of the signum function make physical implementation of our controller impractical.

Camera and robot parameters.5 m [−0. 2d sliding mode visual servoing for uncertain manipulators with uncalibrated camera. 0.1 sin ωt+0.0212 kgm2 9.D.0003]T m 0. 651–670. Parra-Vega and A. Value . Conf.W.I.2 lc1 . and G. Hsu.3 m 0. where ω = 2 rad/sec. with tb = 1.008 m Velocity errors REFERENCES Bishop. Liu and K. Hager and P. Y. 1500 Applied torques 25 joint 1 1000 20 Applied torques 15 500 joint 1 10 0 [Nm] joint 2 −500 [Nm] 5 joint 2 0 −1000 −5 −1500 −10 −2000 0 0. G. 12. Espinosa-Romero (2002).5 2 2. Proc. Applied torques: 1SM (left).. V. J. Wien. Shen. of the 1996 IEEE Int. Parra-Vega.1]T m [0..5 5 Fig. P. 3.5 2 2. on Robot Control. and M.5 3 3. Phoenix.5 1 1. Tracking of image-based desired trajectories: Theorem 1 controller for tb = 1 sec. Aquino (1999).E. pp. V. IFAC Symp.xd [pixels] Applied torques −400 −300 −200 −200 0 200 x1. ROBOT SYSTEM Length link l1 . 2. A tutorial on visual servo control. xd2 )T = (0.0 sec as the desired convergence time. Table 1.1248–1253. and P. Hutchinson. Corke (1996). Data allows to visualize the stability properties stated in Theorem 1. 38th IEEE CDC. on Robotics and Automation. Minnesota.5 4 4.D. Spong (1997). Fixed-camera visual servo control for planar robots.5 1 1. SYROCO.8 m/sec2 . lc2 Mass link m1 . Adaptive calibration and control of 2d monocular visual servo systems.05.2 −0. IROS. Kelly. IEEE\RSJ Conf.5 5 −15 0 0. L. l2 Center of gravity 1.0005 0.5 3 3. .. on Robotics and Automation. R.5 4 4. Trans. Position errors joint 2 500 400 300 200 100 0 joint 2 0 1 −100 −200 −300 −400 joint 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 −100 2 3 4 5 Desired and end−effector trajectories 30 20 10 0 −10 −20 joint 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 x . Finitetime tracking for robot manipulators with continuous control. Finite time convergence is visualized through simulation results when all parameters are unknown.1 cos ωt + 0. I2 Gravity acceleration gz VISION SYSTEM Clock-wise rotation angle θ Scale factor α Depth ﬁeld of view z Camera oﬀset C OB Oﬀset ΣI OI Focal length λf 100 0 joint 1 [pixels/s] [pixels] The closed-loop system exhibit exponential convergence of tracking errors for any given initial conditions despite of the size of the parametric uncertainty. B.1008 m 9.1776.284. 0. Shirkey and M.4. Li (2001). S.xd1 [pixels] joint 1 [Nm] −100 0 100 200 300 400 x(t) xd(t) 2 2 Robot workspace boundary Fig. 0. France.requested to draw a circle deﬁned with respect to the vision frame xd = (xd1 . Arizona. Proc. 7.05)T .5714 kg 0.1. Spong (1996). Asymptotic trajectory tracking of manipulators using uncalibrated visual feedback.W. CONCLUSIONS We have proposed a new image-based servo controller for uncertain planar robots and uncalibrated camera in a passivity-based second order sliding mode with time base generator approach.H. π rad 8 72727 pixeles/m 1. Mechatronics. Hirzinger (2000). Adaptive visual tracking with uncertain manipulator dynamics and uncalibrated camera.Unit 0. 2. 0. Submitted to the IEEE/ASME Trans.. Fierro-Rojas. Nantes. m2 Inertia link I1 . and 2SM Theorem 1 (right). Y.

- Ferrier SMdynamicsUploaded byAnggara T Nugraha
- 465Uploaded byNiamat Khan
- Crank and Slotted LeverUploaded bySengottaiyan Malaisamy
- A Comparison of Age Level on Baseball Hitting KinematicsUploaded byRafael Escamilla
- Visp 2.6.1 Tutorial Computer VisionUploaded byAnubhav Kumar
- ABET Syllabusmachine DrawingUploaded bynabeel2009
- Arun et al (2017)Uploaded bySophie Dawson
- robot cycle time analysisUploaded byThirumalaimuthukumaranMohan
- Study Of Chaos In Induction Machine DrivesUploaded byMirza Abdul Waris
- Stomp Rocket Lab 2013-07-11Uploaded bysk112
- Adaptive Sliding Mode-MRAS Strategy for Sensorless Speed Control of SPIM DrivesUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Control Software ArchitectureUploaded bysspmech
- Kinematics of machineryUploaded byRa Balamurugan
- MOM & ASIUploaded byarravind
- 77-5 Gear BoxUploaded byrip111176
- GEOL_460_lab_01_keyUploaded byGita Rusmala
- MATLAB Toolbox for Motion Control of KUKA Robot ManipulatorsUploaded byNajib Masghouni
- Lecture02_P1Uploaded byHuynhGiang
- Mathematics for Inverse Kinematics.pdfUploaded bykraskrom
- Ubc 2009 Fall Okwudire ChinedumUploaded bynad2702
- PC1431 Assignment 0 AnswersUploaded byMikael Lee
- UNIT 4 GEAR two marks.pdfUploaded byvinoth
- JAM. KOM docUploaded byelangandhi
- Simple MechanismsUploaded byRahul
- RTU Mech SyllUploaded byDr. Pradeep Kumar Sharma