Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JMR Roboticspaper
JMR Roboticspaper
net/publication/336366639
CITATIONS READS
0 2,311
2 authors, including:
Reddy Sreenivasulu
R.V.R. & J.C. College of Engineering
39 PUBLICATIONS 135 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 Reddy Sreenivasulu on 10 October 2019.
Article history Abstract: Present global engineering professionals feels that, robotics is a
Received: 20-07-2019 somewhat young field with extremely ruthless target, the crucial one being
Revised: 06-08-2019 the making of machinery/equipment that can perform and feel like human
Accepted: 22-08-2019 beings. Robot kinematics deals with the study of motion of linkages which
includes displacement, velocities and accelerations of a robot manipulator
Corresponding Author:
analytically. Deriving the proper kinematic models for an open chain
Dr. R. Sreenivasulu
R.V.R.&J.C. College of mechanism of a robot is essential for analyzing the performance of industrial
Engineering (Autonomous), robotic manipulators. In this study, first scrutinize a popular class of two and
Chowdavaram, Guntur Andhra three degrees of freedom open chain mechanism whose inverse kinematics
Pradesh, India admits a closed-form analytic solution. A simple coding was developed in
Email: rslu1431@gmail.com python in an easy way. In this connection a two link planer manipulator was
considered to get inverse kinematic solution developed in python
environment. For this task, we present a solution for obtaining the joint
variables of linkages to reach the position in a work space with the
corresponding input values such as link lengths and position of end effector.
© 2019 R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu. This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons
Attribution (CC-BY) 3.0 license.
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
using genetic algorithm approach. Kanayama et al. (1990) for continuum robots with constant curvature.Yang et al.
proposed a stable tracking control rule for nonholomonic (2016) discussed in their book on utilization of
vehicles to found reasonable target adapted to automation techniques in the field of applied robotics.
autonomous mobile robots. Mohamed and Duffy Literature depicts that previous investigators focused on
(1985) studied the instantaneous kinematics of end various aspects of methods involved in design and
effector platform of fully parallel robot type devices development of inverse kinematics solutions for a different
using screw theory concept. Jones and Walker (2006) configurations of roboytic manipulators. Compared to
introduced a modular approach method to get solution geometric approaches, programmable studies on inverse
for inverse kinematics for multisection continuum kinematic solutions have been found to be a limited extent.
robots. Radavelli et al. (2012) presented a comparative Also found that nobody applied PYTHON software to get
study of kinematics of robot manipulators between DH inverse solution of robotic linkages with multi degrees of
convention and Dual Quaternion approach. freedom problems especially in robotic field.
Chen et al. (2015) developed an improved algorithm
from screw theory to estimate inverse kinematic solution Inverse Kinematics
for a robotic manipulator. Chirikjian (1994) also studied
on kinematics of a robotic system by considering The robot inverse kinematics task is concerned with
metamorphic levels. Robot kinematics and inverse the recognition of the whole feasible and proper sets of
solution methods for different robotic linkages described joint variables that would understand the solution to find out
by various authors of text books like Craig (1989), the positions and orientations of the end effector. In the
Malley (2011) and Murray (2017). Raheem et al. (2019) inverse kinematics problem would not specify constantly a
presented in their work, how to enhance the work space unique solution compared with forward solution i.e.,
followed by robot end effector in the space using number of solutions to be obtained for one end effector
metaheuristic methods. Hudgens and Tesar (1988) position to reach the specified position and orientation.
concentrate their study on kinematic studies on
micromanipulators especially for parallel linkages. Sun Case I. Two Link Planar Manipulator Manipulator
et al. (2017) proposed analytical inverse kinematic Consider a two link planer manipulator having link
solution using DH notations. Tsai and Morgan (1985), lengths l1, l2 and joint angles 1 and 2 to reach a desired
Zhuang et al. (1992) developed a solution for general six position (Px, Py) as shown in Fig. 1. For this, inverse
and five degrees of freedom manipulators by
solution is derived from geometric approach as per the
continuation methods. Veitschegger and Wu (1986)
studied on measurement methods in the analysis of robot diagram shown in Fig. 2 is as follows:
kinematics to achieve accurate end effector positions.
px l1 cos1 l2 cos 1 2 (1)
Webster and Jones (2010) designed a kinematic model
Y P
l2
2
l1
1
X
543
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
l2sin(1 + 2)
l2 2
1
l1 l1sin1
1
X
l1cos1 l2cos(1 + 2)
p y l1 sin 1 l2 sin 1 2 (2) Finally, two possible solutions for θ 2 can be
written as:
px2 l12cos 21 l22cos 2 1 2 2l1l2 cos 1 cos 1 2
2 arctan 2 sin 2 ,cos2 (5)
p y2 l12 sin 21 l22 sin 2 1 2 2l1l2 sin 1 sin 1 2
px2 p 2y l12 cos 21 sin 21 Then, multiply each side of Equation 1 by cos1 and
l cos 1 2 sin 1 2
2 2 2 Equation 2 by sin2 and add the resulting equations in
order to find the solution of θ1 in terms of link
2
2l1l2 cos 1 cos 1 2 sin 1 sin 1 2 parameters and the known variable 2:
px2 p 2y l12 l22
cos1 px l1cos 21 l2cos 21 cos 2 l2 cos1 sin 1 sin 2
cos 1 cos1 cos 2 sin 1 sin 2
2l1l2 sin 1 p y l1sin 21 l2 sin 21 cos 2 l2 sin 1 cos1 sin 2
sin sin cos cos sin
2
cos1 px sin 1 p y l1 cos 21 sin 21
1 1 2 1
px2 p 2y l12 l22 2l1l2 cos 2 cos 21 sin 21 l2 sin 21 sin 2 cos1 p y l1 sin 1 cos1
l2 cos1 sin 1 cos 2 l2cos 21 sin 2 sin 1 px
px2 p 2y l12 l22 2l1l2 cos 2
cos1 p y l2 sin 2 cos 21 sin 21
cos 2
p 2
x p 2y l12 l22
(3) The simplified equation obtained as follows:
2l1l2
544
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
545
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
l2
2 = 60
l1
1 = 30
X
1 = 30, 2 = 60
Fig. 3: Elbow up position and orientation of 2 link manipulator for first solution
2 = -60
l2
l1
12.99, 2.5
1 = 30
X
1 = 30, 2 = -60
Fig. 4: Elbow down position and orientation of 2 link manipulator for first solution
546
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
12.99, 2.5
l2
X
2 = 60
l1
1 = -8.2
1 = -8.2, 2 = 60
Fig. 5: Elbow up position and orientation of 2 link manipulator for second solution
X
1 = -8.2
l1
2 = -60
l2
1 = -8.2, 2 = -60
Fig. 6: Elbow down position and orientation of 2 link manipulator for second solution
The following are the different configurations links are increased then the solution procedure becomes
executed by feeding the input values in developed complex. So for serial planer manipulators geometric
programme and depicted in the following Fig. 3 to 6. approach gives complex solution. In this connection,
PYTHON code provides easy steps to achieve solution
Case II. Three Link RR Planar Manipulator and it helps to reduce the time and also gives accurate
Consider a three link RR planar manipulator along xy performance while running the programme comparing
plane. For this mechanism also, similar geometric with MATLAB. The programme code and elbow down
approach attempted for obtaining inverse solution. But and elbow up configurations shown in the following
the results in this method revealed that when number of Fig. 7 to 9.
547
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
End
E effecter
xe
y ye
ℓ3 e
3
B
xw
Wrist
yw
r
ℓ2
2
A
1
O
ℓ1
E
y
3
2
O 1
Fig. 8: Elbow down position and orientation of 3 link manipulator for first solution
548
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
y E
'3
3
B
'2
O '1
Fig. 9: Elbow up position and orientation of 3 link manipulator for first solution
theta2 = math.pi - self.cosCalc(l1, l2, r) The following configurations drawn for every elbow
theta1 = math.atan2(yw, xw) - gamma up and elbow down positions of manipulator links to
theta3 = phie - theta1 - theta2 reach a desired position.
549
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
550
R. Venkata Neeraj Kumar and R. Sreenivasulu / Journal of Mechatronics and Robotics 2019, Volume 3: 542.551
DOI: 10.3844/jmrsp.2019.542.551
Radavelli, L., R. Simoni, E. De Pieri and D. Martins, Tsai, M.J. and Y.H. Chiou, 1989. Symbolic Equation
2012. A comparative study of the kinematics of Generation for Manipulators (SEGM). Proceeding
robots manipulators by Denavit-Hartenberg and dual of the 4th International Conference on Advanced
quaternion. Mecánica Comput. Multi-Body Syst., Robotics, (CAR’ 89), Columbus, OH, pp: 35-61.
31: 2833-48. Veitschegger, W. and C.H. Wu, 1986. Robot accuracy
Sadiq, A.T., F.A. Raheem and N.A. Abbas, 2017. analysis based on kinematics. IEEE J. Robot.
Optimal trajectory planning of 2-DOF robot arm Automat., 2: 171-179.
using the integration of PSO based on D* algorithm DOI: 10.1109/JRA.1986.1087054
and cubic polynomial equation. Proceedings of the Webster III, R.J. and B.A. Jones, 2010. Design and
1st International Conference for Engineering kinematic modeling of constant curvature
Researches, (CER’ 17), Middle Technical continuum robots: A review. Int. J. Robot. Res., 29:
University, Baghdad-Iraq, pp: 458-467. 1661-83. DOI: 10.1177/0278364910368147
Sreenivasulu, R., 2012. Simulation of desired end point Yang, C., H. Ma and M. Fu, 2016. Advanced Technologies
trajectory for a 2-dof planar manipulator. Int. J. Adv. in Modern Robotic Applications. 1st Edn., Springer,
Scientific Technical Res., 5: 688-696. Singapore, ISBN-10: 9811008299, pp: 419.
Sun, J.D., G.Z. Cao, W.B. Li, Y.X. Liang and S.D. Zhuang, H., Z.S. Roth and F. Hamano, 1992. A complete
Huang, 2017. Analytical inverse kinematic solution and parametrically continuous kinematic model for
using the D-H method for a 6-DOF robot. robot manipulators. IEEE Trans. Robot. Automat.,
Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on 8: 451-63. DOI: 10.1109/70.149944
Ubiquitous Robots and Ambient Intelligence, Jun. Khatib, O., 1987. A unified approach for motion and
28-Jul. 1, IEEE Xplore Press, Jeju, South Korea, pp: force control of robot manipulators: The operational
714-716. DOI: 10.1109/URAI.2017.7992807 space formulation. IEEE J. Robotics Automation, 3:
Tsai, L.W. and A.P. Morgan, 1985. Solving the 43-53.
kinematics of the most general six-and five-degree- Lloyd, J. and V. Hayward, 1993. Trajectory generation
of-freedom manipulators by continuation methods. for sensor-driven and time-varying tasks. Int. J.
J. Mechanisms Transmiss. Automat. Design, 107: Robotics Res., 12: 380-393.
189-200. DOI: 10.1115/1.3258708
551