# A REVIEW ON KINEMATICS OF

HYDRAULIC EXCAVATOR’S

BACKHOE ATTACHMENT

BHAVESHKUMAR P. PATEL

Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department, U. V. Patel College of Engineering,

Ganpat University (GNU), Kherva-382711, Dist. Mehsana, Gujarat, India

DR. J. M. PRAJAPATI

Associate Professor, Faculty of Technology and Engineering

Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda,

Vadodara - 390002, Gujarat, India

Abstract:

An excavator is a typical hydraulic heavy-duty human-operated machine used in general versatile

construction operations, such as digging, ground leveling, carrying loads, dumping loads and straight

traction. These operations require coordinated movement of boom, arm and bucket in order to control

the bucket tip position to follow a desired trajectory. This paper focuses on review of a work carried

out by researchers in the field of kinematic modeling of the backhoe attachment to understand relations

between the position and orientation of the bucket and spatial positions of joint-links. Kinematic modeling

is helpful for understanding and improving the operating performance of the backhoe excavation machine.

There are many research work done by researchers in the same field but still there is a scope to develop

kinematic modeling of backhoe attachment to predict the digging trajectory as well as better controlling of

backhoe attachment to carry out required digging task at desired location.

Keywords: Backhoe, Digging, Forward kinematics, Inverse kinematics

1. Introduction

Rapidly growing rate of industry of earth moving machines is assured through the high performance construction

machineries with complex mechanism and automation of construction activity. Backhoe excavators are widely used

for most arduous earth moving work in engineering construction to excavate below the natural surface of the ground

on which the machine rests. Hydraulic system is used for operation of the machine while digging or moving the

material [1]. An excavator is comprised of three planar implements connected through revolute joints known as

the boom, arm, and bucket, and one vertical revolute joint known as the swing joint [2]. Kinematics is the science

of motion which treats motion without regard to the forces that cause it. Within the science of kinematics one studies

the position, velocity, acceleration, and all higher order derivatives of the position variables (with respect to time or

any other variables) [3]. The excavator linkage, however, is a complex link mechanism whose motion is

controlled by hydraulic cylinders and actuators. To program the bucket motion and joint-link motion, a

mathematical model of the link mechanism is required to refer to all geometrical and/or time-based properties of

the motion. Kinematic model describes the spatial position of joints and links, and position and orientation of

the bucket. The derivatives of kinematics deal with the mechanics of motion without considering the forces that

cause it [4].

2. Formulation of Problem

The basic problem in the study of mechanical link mechanism is of computing the position and orientation of

bucket of the backhoe attachment when the joint angles are known, which is referred to as forward kinematics.

The inverse kinematics problem is, thus to calculate all possible sets of joint angles, which could be used to

attain a given position and orientation of the bucket tip of the backhoe attachment. The problem of link

mechanism control requires both the direct and inverse kinematic models of the backhoe attachment of the

excavator [4]. The kinematic modeling helpful to follow the defined trajectory as well as digging operation can

be carried out successfully at required location of the terrain using proper positioning and orientation of the

bucket and ultimately digging task can be automated. Here the next section highlights the research work carried

Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2011 1990

out by the researchers in the same area, which is helpful to understand and improving the operating performance

of the backhoe excavator attachment.

3. Kinematic Modeling

P. K. Vaha and M. J. Skibniewski, have described the kinematics of the excavator with the coordinate frame in

1993. To describe the position of the points on the mechanism of an excavator, coordinate systems are first defined.

A fixed Cartesian coordinate system is assigned to the body of the excavator. The local coordinate frames are

assigned to each link of the mechanism. A systematic method to define the local coordinate systems for the

serially connected links (upper structure, boom, arm, and bucket) of the excavator is accomplished by applying

the Denavit and Hartenberg procedure. The resulting coordinate flames for the links of the excavator are

shown in figure 1.

Fig. 1 Typical Excavator and Its Coordinate Frames Fig. 2 Moving items of typical backhoe excavator, and assignment of

their coordinate frames

It should be noted that the first link rotates on the supporting base about the vertical axis. The rotational axes for

the other joints are horizontal. For determining the transformation matrices, structural kinematic parameters are

defined and presented using the Denavit-Hartenberg procedure. The transformation matrices for rotational joints

assume the following general form:

A

ì-1

ì

= _

cos 0

ì

-cos o

ì

sin 0

ì

sino

ì

sin0

ì

o

1

cos0

ì

sin0

ì

coso

ì

cos0

ì

-sino

ì

cos 0

ì

o

1

sin0

ì

u sin0

ì

coso

ì

J

ì

u u u 1

_ …(1)

The kinematic model of an excavator presented here provides a useful computational platform for

investigating the machine behavior of a typical excavator. In particular, the model can serve as a basis for

computer simulation of excavator behavior during the motion. Moreover, it is useful in designing a

controller to make the excavator motion track a specified path for a given digging task [5].

Table 1: Kinematics Parameters of the Arm Mechanism for the Backhoe Excavator in D-H notation

Link θ α a d

Crawler

Superstructure

0

q

0

90º

0

q

c

a

0

0

0

Arm boom

Arm stick

Bucket

q

1

q

2

q

3

0

0

0

a

1

a

2

a

3

0

0

0

M. Bodur, H. Zontul, A. Ersak, A. J. Koivo, H. O. Yurtseven, E. Kocaozlan, and G. Pqamehmetolu, in 1994

have control the cognitive force for the automation of the land excavation is developed to include the

kinematics of the excavator arm. During digging at a certain point on the excavation trajectory, both the crawler

and the rotational super-structure bodies are stationary, and thus the kinematic model is reduced to 3 degree of

freedom. Kinematic solution of the arm is accomplished in the form of homogeneous transformation matrix by

using Denavit-Hartenberg (D-H) notation. The assignment of the joint displacement variables and the coordinate

frames are as shown in figure2 and (D-H) parameters are as shown in table 1. The forward kinematic

transformation T = A

l

A

2

A

3

which is obtained using the homogeneous transformation matrices A

i

, i = 1,2,3 of the

boom, stick and bucket, respectively. It converts the coordinates in the bucket frame into the fixed superstructure

frame. The cognitive force control prevents excessive ram-forces by converting the control of the ram-forces

into the modification of the digging trajectory, which is getting by kinematic model [6]. A. J. Koivo, in 1994,

presented the kinematics of specific construction machines as excavators (backhoes and loaders). A systematic

Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2011 1991

procedure is presented to assign Cartesian coordinate frames for the links (joints) of an excavator as shown in

figure 1. Then, the homogeneous transformation matrices that relate two adjacent coordinate frames are given

same as equation 1. If the lengths of the actuators or the joint variable angles are given, the position and

orientation (pose) of the bucket are determined by the forward kinematic equations. P

0

N

is the origin of the

fourth coordinate frame.

P

0

N

= A

0

4

P

4

N

…(2)

A

0

4

= _

C

1

C

234

-C

1

S

234

S

1

C

1

(o

4

C

234

+o

3

C

23

+o

2

C

2

+ o

1

)

S

1

C

234

S

1

S

234

-C

1

S

1

(o

4

C

234

+ o

3

C

23

+o

2

C

2

+o

1

)

S

234

C

234

u o

4

S

234

+o

3

S

23

+o

2

S

2

u u u 1

_ … (3)

A

0

4

is the homogeneous transformation matrix that relates the vector of the fourth coordinate frame to a

vector in the base coordinate system. Equations (2) and (3) represent the first part of the forward kinematic

equations for the excavator. If the position and orientation of the bucket are specified, the joint variable

angles corresponding to this bucket pose and the lengths of the actuators are calculated from the backward

(inverse) kinematic equations. The corresponding velocity relations are derived for the hydraulically driven

excavator (backhoe and loader). The kinematic equations presented establish the foundation for automatic

computer control of this type of construction machine [7].

Fig. 3 Excavator kinematics Fig. 4 Bucketposition and orientation

David A Bradley and Derek W Seward, in 1995, the LUCIE system has demonstrated a number of novel

concepts in its approach to automated and robotic excavation and in particular features such as the use of

velocity vector control and software force feedback to control the motion of the bucket through ground. During

excavation, the motion of the excavator arm is constrained to the line of the trench in which case,

referring to figure 3 of excavator kinematics, the position of the bucket joint relative to the point of

attachment of the arm to the vehicle, joint 1, is obtained. The bucket position and orientation is shown in figure 4.

The position of the initial and target positions in terms of the system reference co-ordinates enables the current

and required joint angles of the excavator arm to be obtained together with the angle of the bucket joint using the

velocity of the bucket tip for ∆I as reference time interval. The equations for angular velocities of each joint was

developed. This structure is implemented in real-time using a production rule based AI format. They have control

the movement of the excavator or LUCIE through ground by implementation of a real-time artificial intelligence

based control system utilising a novel form of motion control strategy [8]. C.F. Hofstra, A. J. M. van Hemmen, ,S.

A. Miedema and J. van Hulsteyn, described the kinematics of the backhoe of Komatsu H245S with a 12 m boom

and a 8.5 m stick in 1999. This kinematics of backhoe utilized by them for the development of dynamic model. They

have determine the relation between the machine orientation and the desired trajectory. In order to do this effectively

while describing the position and orientation of the bucket the Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) approach based on

homogenous co-ordinates is utilised [9]. S.S. Rao, P.K. Bhatti have developed a probabilistic model of the

manipulator kinematics to account for the random errors in the kinematic parameters in 2001. Based on the

probabilistic model, kinematic performance criteria are defined to provide measures of the behavior of the robotic

end-effector.Gaussian distributions are assumed for the various manipulator parameters, and the joint efforts are

modeled as Markov stochastic processes. Indices called kinematic reliabilities are proposed as measures to assess the

performance of a manipulator. The analytical approach is computationally more involved and the simulation

technique is numerically more convenient to compute the performance measures of a manipulator [10]. Hsin-Sheng

Lee, Shinn-Liang Chang and Kuo-Huang Lin, in 2002, a CAD/CAE/CAM and remote control integrated system for

a pneumatic excavator mechanism was developed. The vector loop method and Visual C++ language were used to

build the position analysis module. The velocity of the links could be obtained easily by differentiating the position

equation with respect to time. Link accelerations were then obtained by differentiating the velocity equation. The

position analysis determines the working space of the excavator loader and helps the designer to choose the proper

length and link conﬁguration.

Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2011 1992

Fig. 5 Assembly model of the excavator Fig. 6 Pneumatic excavator prototype Fig. 7 Structure of the backhoe excavator model

Figure 5 shows an assembly model of the excavator. Pro/ENGINEER (Pro/E) was used to construct the

parametric solid models. In order to analyze excavator design in the real world by creating a virtual prototype,

Pro/Mechanica was used to implement the excavator kinematic simulation and structure analysis. Figure 6 shows

pneumatic excavator prototype equipped with air cylinders, valves, pipes, a motor, and an air-pressure pump. This

project was designed speciﬁcally for educational purposes, and made use of low-cost and easy programming instead

of expensive industrial equipment [11]. Fuad Mrad, M. Asem Abdul-Malak, Salah Sadek, and Ziad Khudr, in 2002,

develpoed simulation package using Matlab with several embedded design and analysis tools. Emulation was also

carried out on the RHINO educational robot to confirm the simulation results. The constructed simulation package

offered an integrated environment for trajectory design and analysis for an excavator while addressing the

constraints related to the excavator structure, safety and stability, and mode of application. In this simulation package

they have carriedout kinematic modeling for excavator and the numerical values of specifications are adoped for the

JCB-3CX commercial excavator as per brochure of the excavator model. The model has 5 DOF, four revolute joints

and one prismatic side-shift link at the base. Figure 7 shows the adopted backhoe excavator structure.

Fig. 8 Structural parameters of the excavator model Fig. 9 A critically safe excavator excavator

Table 2: D-H structural parameters of backhoe excavator

Offset length Joint rotation Link length Offset angle (x)

1

2

3

4

5

d

1

(t)

d

2

0

0

0

90º

θ

1

(t)

θ

2

(t)

θ

3

(t)

θ

4

(t)

a

1

a

2

l

1

l

2

_o

3

2

+l

3

2

90º

90º

0

0

0

Fig. 10 Schematic and various dimensions of the Fig. 11 A velocity diagram of the chassis and boom backhoe model

Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2011 1993

The excavator model with the assigned structural parameters is sketched in figure 8. The excavator structural

parameters are derived and tabulated in Table 2. A schematic diagram of a critically safe excavator configuration is

shown in figure 9. The safety criterion is based on ensuring that the excavator does not dig soil under the area on

which the excavator vehicle stands. The operator's safety is addressed in the excavator's structural constraints [12].

Donald Margolis, and Taehyun Shim, in 2003, a complete pitch/plane model of a backhoe was developed that

includes the hydraulic dynamics and kinematics of the control linkage. The developed model is based on Bond

graphs, which are a concise pictorial representation of the interactive dynamics of all types of energetic systems. The

model was developed in pieces using bond graph fragments, and the overall model was assembled by

straightforwardly assembling the bond graph fragments. A schematic of a backhoe is shown in figure 10 where only

the bucket loader is attached. A velocity diagram of the chassis and boom is shown in figure 11. Through straight

forward trigonometry, the instantaneous length of the cylinder, is found. Equations were derived directly from the

bond graph and programmed for simulation using a digital computer. Simulations were run for an initial condition

response from near equilibrium. The model predicts the instability observed on the actual backhoe, and is now ready

to be used as a design tool for future backhoe development [13]. Emil Assenov, E. Bosilkov, Radoslav Dimitrov,

Tzvetan Damianov, in 2003, have carried out study on kinematics of working mechanism of hydraulic excavator.

The mechanism of this manipulator is plane multilinkage, that consists of arms joined and hydraulic cylinders. They

have consider the working mechanism as conjunction of jib, arm and bucket, that are joined by the cylindrical

joints and hydraulic cylinders. A model of arm and jib is shown in figure 12.

Fig. 12 A model of mechanism arm – jib Fig. 13 3-D SolidWorks model

The body 1 presents the jib, the body 2 – arm. They are joined in point A and point B with hydraulic cylinder.

The pressure and area of the cylinder are known. The kinematic modeling is done for hydraulic excavator of

Caterpillar with 1m

3

bucket volume. This model is shown in figure 13. The equation for the length of the cylinder is

derived. Simulation of such a mechanism is made by using Lagrange equation of the first type with unknown

multipliers. The results can be used for creation of a control system of the working process of the hydraulic

excavator [14]. Boris Vidolov, Svetoslav Genchev, in 2005, have developed two heuristic approaches for inverse

kinematics of a real 12 MXT MECALAC redundant excavator. This approach of coordinated motion control

appears as a solution to discharge the operator from a fastidious and monotonous work so that he can focus more on

the critical situations and takes the appropriate decisions in dynamical and unstructured environments. For the

simplicity of the presentation they have consider only the plane displacement of the arm. The MECALAC machines

present particular kinematics scheme with 5-DOF hydraulic arm which is shown in figure 14.

Fig. 14 MECALAC arm scheme Fig.15 Kinematics model for working mechanism of

hydraulic excavator

They have presented a priority approach and alternating approach. In simulation, the method gives a very

smooth overall motion. They have developed a simulator in order to test and validate their developments. This is

generic tool that allow us: to simulate different kinematics and dynamic models (differential equations systems), to

evaluate various control algorithms, to observe the behavior of the different body, actuators, tools of the studied

arms, to quantify the capacities of developed approaches to follow specified trajectories [15]. Daqing Zhang,

Qinghua He, Peng Hao and HaiTao Zhang, in 2005, have derived the full kinematic model of the excavator arm,

Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2011 1994

regarded as a planar manipulator with three degrees (boom, dipper and bucket) of freedom, to find a feasible

way to control excavator’s arm and realize autonomous excavation. The exponential product formula based on

screw theory is used to develop the kinematic model of manipulator to get the desired trajectory. One of the most

attractive characteristic of exponential product formula is that it has two coordinate systems, one is base

coordinate system S and the other is tool coordinate system ‘T’ as shown in figure 15. The aim of establishing the

kinematic model of manipulator is to transfer bucket tip’s reference trajectories to the corresponding and

required reference angles sequence of each joint, and to get the motion sequences of hydraulic cylinders. The motion

controlling experiment of boom is done on the robotic excavator, which is based on the Sunward SWE85

excavator. The experimental result exhibits good tracking performance for boom cylinder under the controller

developed. The peak error is less than 4 degrees [16]. A.S. Hall, P.R. McAree, in 2005, have studed on the

excavation arm of a large hydraulic mining shovel having a multi-loop kinematic form. They have describe an

iterative algorithm that allows the position of the bucket to be tracked from measurements of the linear actuator

extensions. The important characteristic of this algorithm is that it is numerically well-behaved when the linkage is

close to singular conﬁgurations.

Fig. 16 Kinematic layout of the excavation Fig. 17 Terex face-shovel excavator Fig. 18 Workspace of an excavator

Arm RH-340 in the design environment

Speciﬁcally, they have described a method for tracking the angles of the boom, stick and bucket links relative to

a global reference frame and the kinematic layout of the excavation arm shown in figure 16. Having determined

these angles, and with knowledge of the (easily measured) pivot angle, the spatial position of the bucket can be

readily determined by applying, the transform method of Denavit and Hartenberg or Brockett’s product-of-

exponentials method. They have also carried out forward kinematic tracking using a multi-dimensional Newton–

Raphson solver which is helpful to determining the time-varying trajectory from measure ments of the cylinder

lengths [17]. F. Geu Flores, A. Kecskemethy, A. Pottker, in 2007, have described a method based on the concept of

“kinematical transformers” for ﬁnding closed-form solutions for the kinematics of Terex face-shovel excavator RH-

340 as shown in figure 17. In this concept, each multibody loop is regarded as a transmission element, which is

coupled by linear equations with the other multibody loops. An application-speciﬁc code has been realized using a

combination of the object-oriented multibody library MOBILE and symbolical equations. The method is applied to

an existing heavy-load excavator , showing that the computational effort can be reduced by a factor of more than 200

as compared to general purpose numerical codes. This can be of importance when the design process has to be

repeated several times. The code can be used also as a kernel for controllers and for the analysis of the effect of

uncertainties in the components of the system using interval analysis. The work space of an excavtor is carriedout for

a practical face-shovel excavator using the designed software as shown in figure 18 [18]. Hyongju Park, Sanghak

Lee, Baeksuk Chu and Daehie Hong, the recurrent neural network was implemented for better kinematics control

of the excavator with obstacle avoidance capability in 2008. A recurrent neural network algorithm and joint

constraints was conducted to effectively accomplish the goals of excavation task execution, joint limit control, and

obstacle avoidance at the same time.Excavator was considered as a manipulator withn 4-DOFs,, therefore mobile or

track motion was excluded in this study. For convenience and generality, Denavit-Hartenburg (D-H) notation was

used to build homogenous transformation matrices. The D-H convention was used for frame assignments of the

excavator model as listed in Table 3.

Table 3: D-H structural parameters for excavator

a d o θ

(1) a

1

0 90º θ

1

(2) a

2

0 0º θ

2

(3) a

3

0 0º θ

3

(4) a

4

0 0º θ

4

The forward kinematics model of the excavator was established. With additional bound constraints, excavator

model can perform its job without any problem, such as malfunctioning, sudden stop and etc. Simulation results

show that the position error was reasonably small, on the assumption that excavator model has only one available

redundancy [19]. Michael G. Lipsett, in 2009, have described a simple framework for assessing different shovel

designs, including kinematic performance of face shovels for surface mining excavation. Key design

Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2011 1995

considerations for an excavating shovel to meet the performance and reliability speciﬁcations are based primarily

on kinematics. The kinematics of the shovel attachment determines the maximum reachable height, and the

maximum reach to the bank to do work (which determines the maximum bench height in mine design and

production planning). Kinematic mechanism analysis can be used to calculate various specifications.

Fig. 20 RH 400 Kinematics Fig. 21 - Kinematic Manipulability of the RH 400 with Horizontal

Bucket (Distances in mm)

The Terex O&K RH 400 is analyzed as a case study; reachable workspace, mobility during digging and achievable

cutting forces are presented with some simplifying assumptions for the dynamics of the machine. Methods for

determining the parameters of the models are discussed. Forward kinematics yields the location and orientation

of the bucket lip, given the three joint displacements. Figure 20 shows the kinematic parameters of the RH

400 shovel attachment. Inverse kinematics produces the joint displacements for a given shovel pose. A skilled

operator can achieve the desired bucket motion with good angle of attack, provided that visibility is good.

Figure 21 shows the reachable workspace of the RH 400 with the bucket horizontal, and a set of ellipses[20].

Dongnam Kim, Kyeong Won Oh, Daehie Hong, Yoon Ki Kim and Suk-Hie Hong, in 2009, a novel concept of

applying tele-operated device was developed for the remote control of excavator-like dismantling equipment. As a

tele-operated system, this controller is designed to improve the operability of the excavator. They have developed all

the necessary kinematic analysis to design the tele-operated system and basic motion control simulations to the real

excavator working at construction site are conducted with designed tele-operated system. This device is designed

based on the kinematics of the excavator, which can cover 3-dimensional workspace. And operator can control the

real excavator intuitively with this new model of tele-operated system.

Figure 22 Kinematic model of excavator Fig. 23 Schematic diagram of the excavator

Figure 22 shows 4 coordinates of each links of the excavator. After the modeling of excavator, forward and inverse

kinematics analysis is necessary. When the haptic devices are designed, the inverse kinematics analysis is more

important to control the pose of last link. With this reason, according to the bucket’s pose, four joint angles of

excavator are controlled by the inverse kinematics analysis [21]. Hongnian Yu, Yang Liu and Mohammad Shahidul

Hasan, in 2010, have described modeling of excavator to carry out the kinematic which give the trajectory of the

excavator bucket based on the trajectory of the excavator arm joints and the inverse kinematics which give the

desired joint variables corresponding to the desired bucket trajectory. The excavator schematic diagram is shown in

figure 23. The problem of forwared kinematics can be summarised as: For the given Θ = |θ

2

θ

3

θ

4

]

1

, find the

coordinate P = |X ¥ X]

1

= |¡

x

(Θ) ¡

¡

(Θ) ¡

z

(Θ)]

1

. In the forward kinematics the transformation matrix relating

two adjacent coordinate frames was used which is given by Koivo et al. (1996). The problem of inverse kinematics

can be summarised as below: For the given P = |X ¥ X]

1

, find the joint angles Θ = |θ

2

θ

3

θ

4

]

1

=

|g

2

(P) g

3

(P) g

4

(P)]

1

= |¡

x

-1

(Θ) ¡

¡

-1

(Θ) ¡

z

-1

(Θ)]

1

. The inverse kinematics was completed using the model

provided by Tafazoli (1997). They have utilized three control approaches: adaptive control, robust control and

iterative learning control which have been developed on the fully actuated robot manipulator.

Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2011 1996

4. Conclusion

Kinematic modeling is helpful for understanding and improving the operating performance of the backhoe

excavation machine. Kinematic model describes the spatial position of joints and links, and position and

orientation of the bucket. The derivatives of kinematics deal with the mechanics of motion without considering

the forces that cause it. The kinematics of excavator was described by P. K. Vaha (1993) and A. J. Koivo

(1994), provides a useful computational platform for investigating the machine behavior of a typical

excavator by defining Cartesian coordinate system. For determining the transformation matrices, structural

kinematic parameters are defined and presented using the Denavit-Hartenberg procedure. The forward and inverse

kinematics also described by them. This concept of kinematics is followed by number of researchers for their

application. This review provides the background of excavator kinematics to carry out further research work in the

same era.

“References”

[1] Mehta Gaurav K, “Design and Development of an Excavator Attachment” M. tech Dissertation Thesis, Nirma University, Institute of

Technology, Ahmedabad, May 2008, pp. 1.

[2] Howard N. Cannon, “Extended Earthmoving with an Autonomous Excavator”, Thesis of Master of Science, The Robotics Institute

Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, 1999.

[3] John J. Craig, “Introduction to Robotics Machines and Control”, Second Edition, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1989, pp. 68.

[4] R. K. Mittal, I. J. Nagtath, “Robotics and Control”, Ninth Reprint, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, 2008, pp. 70.

[5] P. K. Vaha, M. J. Skibniewski, “Dynamic Model of Excavator”, Journal of Aerospace Engineering, Vol. 6, No. 2, April, 1993.

[6] M. Bodur, H. Zontul, A. Ersak, A. J. Koivo, H. O. Yurtseven, E. Kocaozlan, G. Pqamehmetolu, “Dynamic Cognitive Force Control

for an Automatic Land Excavation Robot”, IEEE, 1994, pp. 1772-1776.

[7] A. J. Koivo, “Kinematics of Excavators (Backhoes) for Transferring Surface material”, Journal of Aerospace Engineering, Vol. 7,

No. 1, January, 1994, pp. 17-32.

[8] David A Bradley, Derek W Seward, “Developing Real-Time Autonomous Excavation – The Lucie”, Proceedings of the 34th

Conference on Decision & Control, IEEE, New Orleans, LA - December 1995, pp. 3028 – 3033.

[9] C.F. Hofstra, ,A. J. M. van Hemmen, ,S. A. Miedema, J. van Hulsteyn, “Describing the position of backhoe dredge buckets”, 1999.

[10] S. S. Rao, P.K. Bhatti, “Probabilistic approach to manipulator kinematics and dynamics”, Reliability Engineering and System Safety,

Elsevier Science, 2001, pp. 47-58.

[11] Hsin-Sheng Lee, Shinn-Liang Chang and Kuo-Huang Lin, “A study of the design, manufacture and remote control of a pneumatic

excavator”, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 2002, pp. 345-361.

[12] Fuad Mrad, M. Asem Abdul-Malak, Salah Sadek, and Ziad Khudr, “Automated excavation in construction using robotics trajectory

and envelop generation”, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Blackwell Science Ltd., 2002, pp. 325-335.

[13] Donald Margolis, Taehyun Shim “Instability Due to Interacting Hydraulic and Mechanical Dynamics in Backhoes”, Journal of

Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, ASME, Vol. 125, 2003, pp. 497-504.

[14] Emil Assenov, E. Bosilkov, Radoslav Dimitrov, Tzvetan Damianov, “Kinematics and Dynamics of Working Mechanism of Hydraulic

Excavator”, University of Mining and Geology, St. Ivan Rilski, Annual, vol. 46, part ІІІ, Mechanization, Electrification and

Automation in Mines, Sofia, 2003, рр.47-49

[15] Boris Vidolov, Svetoslav Genchev “Heuristic Approaches for the coordinated motion of a redundant heavy-duty hydraulic excavator”,

Proceedings of the 13

th

Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation Limassol, Cyprus, IEEE, June 27-29, 2005, pp. 692-

695.

[16] Daqing Zhang, Qinghua He, Peng Hao, HaiTao Zhang, “Modeling and controlling for hydraulic excavator’s arm”, 22ndInternational

Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, Ferrara (Italy), September 11-14, 2005, pp. 1-7.

[17] A. S. Hall, P. R. McAree, “Robust bucket position tracking for a large hydraulic excavator”, Mechanism and Machine Theory,

Elsevier, Vol. 40, 2005, pp. 1-16.

[18] F. Geu Flores, A. Kecskemethy, A. Pottker, “Workspace Analysis and Maximal Force Calculation of a Face-Shovel Excavator using

Kinematical Transformers”, 12th IFToMM World Congress, Besancon, June 18-21, 2007, pp. 1-6.

[19] Hyongju Park, Sanghak Lee, Baeksuk Chu and Daehie Hong, “Obstacle Avoidance for Robotic Excavators Using a Recurrent Neural

Network”, International Conference on Smart Manufacturing Application, KINTEX, Gyeonggi-do, Korea, 9-11 April, 2008. pp. 585-

590.

[20] Michael G. Lipsett, “Methods for Assessing Dynamic Performance of Shovels”, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of

Alberta, Edmonton, 2009.

[21] Dongnam Kim, Kyeong Won Oh, Daehie Hong, Yoon Ki Kim and Suk-Hie Hong, “Motion Control of Excavator with Tele-Operated

System”, 26th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC), 2009, pp. 341-347.

[22] Hongnian Yu, Yang Liu and Mohammad Shahidul Hasan, “Review of modelling and remote control for excavators”, International

Journal of Advanced Mechatronic Systems, Inderscience, Vol. 2, 2010, pp. 68-80.

Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

ISSN : 0975-5462 Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2011 1997

which is getting by kinematic model [6]. Zontul. K. Vaha and M. Table 1: Kinematics Parameters of the Arm Mechanism for the Backhoe Excavator in D-H notation Link Crawler Superstructure Arm boom Arm stick Bucket θ 0 q0 q1 q2 q3 α 90º 0 0 0 0 a qc a0 a1 a2 a3 d 0 0 0 0 0
M. To describe the position of the points on the mechanism of an excavator. E. A. J. A systematic method to define the local coordinate systems for the serially connected links (upper structure. in 1994 have control the cognitive force for the automation of the land excavation is developed to include the kinematics of the excavator arm. In particular. boom. The cognitive force control prevents excessive ram-forces by converting the control of the ram-forces into the modification of the digging trajectory. Kinematic Modeling P. and bucket) of the excavator is accomplished by applying the Denavit and Hartenberg procedure. which is helpful to understand and improving the operating performance of the backhoe excavator attachment. 1 Typical Excavator and Its Coordinate Frames
Fig. Koivo. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
out by the researchers in the same area. in 1994. it is useful in designing a controller to make the excavator motion track a specified path for a given digging task [5]. Kocaozlan. the model can serve as a basis for computer simulation of excavator behavior during the motion. During digging at a certain point on the excavation trajectory. 3 No. O. A fixed Cartesian coordinate system is assigned to the body of the excavator. respectively. The forward kinematic transformation T = Al A2 A3 which is obtained using the homogeneous transformation matrices Ai. coordinate systems are first defined. stick and bucket. A.3 of the boom. J. Skibniewski. Yurtseven. i = 1. structural kinematic parameters are defined and presented using the Denavit-Hartenberg procedure. Koivo. The local coordinate frames are assigned to each link of the mechanism.2. and G.
Fig. H. For determining the transformation matrices. The rotational axes for the other joints are horizontal. presented the kinematics of specific construction machines as excavators (backhoes and loaders). 3 March 2011
1991
. A. It converts the coordinates in the bucket frame into the fixed superstructure frame. Kinematic solution of the arm is accomplished in the form of homogeneous transformation matrix by using Denavit-Hartenberg (D-H) notation. Patel et al. H. Ersak. arm. both the crawler and the rotational super-structure bodies are stationary. and assignment of their coordinate frames
It should be noted that the first link rotates on the supporting base about the vertical axis. The assignment of the joint displacement variables and the coordinate frames are as shown in figure2 and (D-H) parameters are as shown in table 1.Bhaveshkumar P. The resulting coordinate flames for the links of the excavator are shown in figure 1. The transformation matrices for rotational joints assume the following general form: cos 0 0 cos 0 sin sin sin sin cos 0 1
…(1)
The kinematic model of an excavator presented here provides a useful computational platform for investigating the machine behavior of a typical excavator. 3. Moreover. Bodur. and thus the kinematic model is reduced to 3 degree of freedom. J. 2 Moving items of typical backhoe excavator. have described the kinematics of the excavator with the coordinate frame in 1993. A systematic
ISSN : 0975-5462
Vol. Pqamehmetolu.

Miedema and J.5 m stick in 1999. 3 No. This structure is implemented in real-time using a production rule based AI format. in 2002. The corresponding velocity relations are derived for the hydraulically driven excavator (backhoe and loader). Equations (2) and (3) represent the first part of the forward kinematic equations for the excavator. P. a CAD/CAE/CAM and remote control integrated system for a pneumatic excavator mechanism was developed. This kinematics of backhoe utilized by them for the development of dynamic model. kinematic performance criteria are defined to provide measures of the behavior of the robotic end-effector. the motion of the excavator arm is constrained to the line of the trench in which case. Rao. If the lengths of the actuators or the joint variable angles are given. described the kinematics of the backhoe of Komatsu H245S with a 12 m boom and a 8. Based on the probabilistic model. The analytical approach is computationally more involved and the simulation technique is numerically more convenient to compute the performance measures of a manipulator [10]. is the origin of the fourth coordinate frame. . They have control the movement of the excavator or LUCIE through ground by implementation of a real-time artificial intelligence based control system utilising a novel form of motion control strategy [8]. …(2) 0 0 … (3) 1
0
0
is the homogeneous transformation matrix that relates the vector of the fourth coordinate frame to a vector in the base coordinate system. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
procedure is presented to assign Cartesian coordinate frames for the links (joints) of an excavator as shown in figure 1.K. The position of the initial and target positions in terms of the system reference co-ordinates enables the current and required joint angles of the excavator arm to be obtained together with the angle of the bucket joint using the velocity of the bucket tip for ∆ as reference time interval. in 1995. The velocity of the links could be obtained easily by differentiating the position equation with respect to time. Indices called kinematic reliabilities are proposed as measures to assess the performance of a manipulator. The kinematic equations presented establish the foundation for automatic computer control of this type of construction machine [7]. the joint variable angles corresponding to this bucket pose and the lengths of the actuators are calculated from the backward (inverse) kinematic equations.F. They have determine the relation between the machine orientation and the desired trajectory. the position and orientation (pose) of the bucket are determined by the forward kinematic equations. van Hemmen. Link accelerations were then obtained by differentiating the velocity equation. van Hulsteyn.S. Then.
ISSN : 0975-5462
Vol. In order to do this effectively while describing the position and orientation of the bucket the Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) approach based on homogenous co-ordinates is utilised [9].Bhaveshkumar P.
Fig. The bucket position and orientation is shown in figure 4. referring to figure 3 of excavator kinematics. If the position and orientation of the bucket are specified. A. the LUCIE system has demonstrated a number of novel concepts in its approach to automated and robotic excavation and in particular features such as the use of velocity vector control and software force feedback to control the motion of the bucket through ground. C. The vector loop method and Visual C++ language were used to build the position analysis module. the homogeneous transformation matrices that relate two adjacent coordinate frames are given same as equation 1. During excavation. joint 1. The position analysis determines the working space of the excavator loader and helps the designer to choose the proper length and link conﬁguration. 4 Bucketposition and orientation
David A Bradley and Derek W Seward.Gaussian distributions are assumed for the various manipulator parameters. Bhatti have developed a probabilistic model of the manipulator kinematics to account for the random errors in the kinematic parameters in 2001.S. Hofstra. the position of the bucket joint relative to the point of attachment of the arm to the vehicle. S. A. 3 Excavator kinematics
Fig. 3 March 2011
1992
. is obtained. Patel et al. and the joint efforts are modeled as Markov stochastic processes. The equations for angular velocities of each joint was developed. Shinn-Liang Chang and Kuo-Huang Lin. M. Hsin-Sheng Lee. J.

a motor. Figure 7 shows the adopted backhoe excavator structure. and an air-pressure pump. safety and stability. 6 Pneumatic excavator prototype
Fig. Pro/Mechanica was used to implement the excavator kinematic simulation and structure analysis. Salah Sadek. Asem Abdul-Malak. and made use of low-cost and easy programming instead of expensive industrial equipment [11]. 10 Schematic and various dimensions of the
Fig. Patel et al. 3 No. In this simulation package they have carriedout kinematic modeling for excavator and the numerical values of specifications are adoped for the JCB-3CX commercial excavator as per brochure of the excavator model. The model has 5 DOF. 8 Structural parameters of the excavator model
Fig. 9 A critically safe excavator excavator
Table 2: D-H structural parameters of backhoe excavator
1 2 3 4 5
Offset length d1(t) d2 0 0 0
Joint rotation 90º θ1(t) θ2(t) θ3(t) θ4(t)
Link length a1 a2 l1 l2
Offset angle (x) 90º 90º 0 0 0
Fig. 5 Assembly model of the excavator
Fig. Pro/ENGINEER (Pro/E) was used to construct the parametric solid models. This project was designed speciﬁcally for educational purposes. Figure 6 shows pneumatic excavator prototype equipped with air cylinders. valves. four revolute joints and one prismatic side-shift link at the base. 3 March 2011
1993
. In order to analyze excavator design in the real world by creating a virtual prototype. and mode of application. in 2002. The constructed simulation package offered an integrated environment for trajectory design and analysis for an excavator while addressing the constraints related to the excavator structure. pipes. Emulation was also carried out on the RHINO educational robot to confirm the simulation results. M. 11 A velocity diagram of the chassis and boom backhoe model
ISSN : 0975-5462
Vol. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
Fig.Bhaveshkumar P. 7 Structure of the backhoe excavator model
Figure 5 shows an assembly model of the excavator. Fuad Mrad.
Fig. develpoed simulation package using Matlab with several embedded design and analysis tools. and Ziad Khudr.

Fig. Simulations were run for an initial condition response from near equilibrium. the body 2 – arm. actuators. This approach of coordinated motion control appears as a solution to discharge the operator from a fastidious and monotonous work so that he can focus more on the critical situations and takes the appropriate decisions in dynamical and unstructured environments. A velocity diagram of the chassis and boom is shown in figure 11. the method gives a very smooth overall motion.
ISSN : 0975-5462
Vol. The model predicts the instability observed on the actual backhoe. a complete pitch/plane model of a backhoe was developed that includes the hydraulic dynamics and kinematics of the control linkage. The model was developed in pieces using bond graph fragments. arm and bucket. Emil Assenov. They have developed a simulator in order to test and validate their developments. and Taehyun Shim. Tzvetan Damianov. have developed two heuristic approaches for inverse kinematics of a real 12 MXT MECALAC redundant excavator. In simulation. The kinematic modeling is done for hydraulic excavator of Caterpillar with 1m3 bucket volume. to evaluate various control algorithms. Equations were derived directly from the bond graph and programmed for simulation using a digital computer. The developed model is based on Bond graphs. A schematic of a backhoe is shown in figure 10 where only the bucket loader is attached. in 2005. The mechanism of this manipulator is plane multilinkage. in 2005.
Fig. Donald Margolis. Simulation of such a mechanism is made by using Lagrange equation of the first type with unknown multipliers. 14 MECALAC arm scheme
Fig. A schematic diagram of a critically safe excavator configuration is shown in figure 9. to quantify the capacities of developed approaches to follow specified trajectories [15]. to observe the behavior of the different body. They are joined in point A and point B with hydraulic cylinder. They have consider the working mechanism as conjunction of jib. For the simplicity of the presentation they have consider only the plane displacement of the arm.15 Kinematics model for working mechanism of hydraulic excavator
They have presented a priority approach and alternating approach. E. A model of arm and jib is shown in figure 12. Bosilkov. tools of the studied arms. Svetoslav Genchev. Qinghua He. The excavator structural parameters are derived and tabulated in Table 2.Bhaveshkumar P. Patel et al. This is generic tool that allow us: to simulate different kinematics and dynamic models (differential equations systems). The results can be used for creation of a control system of the working process of the hydraulic excavator [14]. 3 No. The safety criterion is based on ensuring that the excavator does not dig soil under the area on which the excavator vehicle stands. 3 March 2011
1994
. The operator's safety is addressed in the excavator's structural constraints [12]. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
The excavator model with the assigned structural parameters is sketched in figure 8. that consists of arms joined and hydraulic cylinders. The pressure and area of the cylinder are known. The equation for the length of the cylinder is derived. Radoslav Dimitrov. Daqing Zhang. have carried out study on kinematics of working mechanism of hydraulic excavator. which are a concise pictorial representation of the interactive dynamics of all types of energetic systems. 12 A model of mechanism arm – jib
Fig. The MECALAC machines present particular kinematics scheme with 5-DOF hydraulic arm which is shown in figure 14. in 2003. Boris Vidolov. Through straight forward trigonometry. and the overall model was assembled by straightforwardly assembling the bond graph fragments. This model is shown in figure 13. in 2003. have derived the full kinematic model of the excavator arm. 13 3-D SolidWorks model
The body 1 presents the jib. Peng Hao and HaiTao Zhang. the instantaneous length of the cylinder. is found. and is now ready to be used as a design tool for future backhoe development [13]. that are joined by the cylindrical joints and hydraulic cylinders.

With additional bound constraints. sudden stop and etc. The motion controlling experiment of boom is done on the robotic excavator. The work space of an excavtor is carriedout for a practical face-shovel excavator using the designed software as shown in figure 18 [18]. Geu Flores. Hyongju Park. A. Sanghak Lee. A. Key design
ISSN : 0975-5462
Vol. They have also carried out forward kinematic tracking using a multi-dimensional Newton– Raphson solver which is helpful to determining the time-varying trajectory from measure ments of the cylinder lengths [17]. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
regarded as a planar manipulator with three degrees (boom. the spatial position of the bucket can be readily determined by applying. One of the most attractive characteristic of exponential product formula is that it has two coordinate systems. Michael G.
Table 3: D-H structural parameters for excavator
(1) (2) (3) (4)
a a1 a2 a3 a4
d 0 0 0 0
90º 0º 0º 0º
θ θ1 θ2 θ3 θ4
The forward kinematics model of the excavator was established. in 2009. 16 Kinematic layout of the excavation Arm
Fig. This can be of importance when the design process has to be repeated several times. to find a feasible way to control excavator’s arm and realize autonomous excavation. The D-H convention was used for frame assignments of the excavator model as listed in Table 3. showing that the computational effort can be reduced by a factor of more than 200 as compared to general purpose numerical codes.S. stick and bucket links relative to a global reference frame and the kinematic layout of the excavation arm shown in figure 16. In this concept. in 2007. on the assumption that excavator model has only one available redundancy [19]. the transform method of Denavit and Hartenberg or Brockett’s product-ofexponentials method. Kecskemethy. have studed on the excavation arm of a large hydraulic mining shovel having a multi-loop kinematic form. The experimental result exhibits good tracking performance for boom cylinder under the controller developed. 3 March 2011
1995
. Simulation results show that the position error was reasonably small. They have describe an iterative algorithm that allows the position of the bucket to be tracked from measurements of the linear actuator extensions. have described a simple framework for assessing different shovel designs. excavator model can perform its job without any problem. the recurrent neural network was implemented for better kinematics control of the excavator with obstacle avoidance capability in 2008. Lipsett. An application-speciﬁc code has been realized using a combination of the object-oriented multibody library MOBILE and symbolical equations. Baeksuk Chu and Daehie Hong. Pottker. Hall. P. The peak error is less than 4 degrees [16]. dipper and bucket) of freedom. 18 Workspace of an excavator in the design environment
Speciﬁcally. therefore mobile or track motion was excluded in this study. The important characteristic of this algorithm is that it is numerically well-behaved when the linkage is close to singular conﬁgurations. which is coupled by linear equations with the other multibody loops. which is based on the Sunward SWE85 excavator. The code can be used also as a kernel for controllers and for the analysis of the effect of uncertainties in the components of the system using interval analysis. A. The exponential product formula based on screw theory is used to develop the kinematic model of manipulator to get the desired trajectory. 3 No. A recurrent neural network algorithm and joint constraints was conducted to effectively accomplish the goals of excavation task execution. The aim of establishing the kinematic model of manipulator is to transfer bucket tip’s reference trajectories to the corresponding and required reference angles sequence of each joint. McAree. and obstacle avoidance at the same time. and with knowledge of the (easily measured) pivot angle. and to get the motion sequences of hydraulic cylinders. such as malfunctioning. Having determined these angles.Excavator was considered as a manipulator withn 4-DOFs.Bhaveshkumar P. one is base coordinate system S and the other is tool coordinate system ‘T’ as shown in figure 15. including kinematic performance of face shovels for surface mining excavation. Patel et al.R.. The method is applied to an existing heavy-load excavator . have described a method based on the concept of “kinematical transformers” for ﬁnding closed-form solutions for the kinematics of Terex face-shovel excavator RH340 as shown in figure 17. 17 Terex face-shovel excavator RH-340
Fig. they have described a method for tracking the angles of the boom. joint limit control. F. each multibody loop is regarded as a transmission element. in 2005. Denavit-Hartenburg (D-H) notation was used to build homogenous transformation matrices.
Fig. For convenience and generality.

Kyeong Won Oh. They have utilized three control approaches: adaptive control. When the haptic devices are designed. four joint angles of excavator are controlled by the inverse kinematics analysis [21]. The problem of inverse kinematics can be summarised as below: For the given . Dongnam Kim.Kinematic Manipulability of the RH 400 with Horizontal Bucket (Distances in mm)
The Terex O&K RH 400 is analyzed as a case study. and a set of ellipses[20].
ISSN : 0975-5462
Vol. Patel et al. which can cover 3-dimensional workspace. This device is designed based on the kinematics of the excavator. given the three joint displacements.Bhaveshkumar P. have described modeling of excavator to carry out the kinematic which give the trajectory of the excavator bucket based on the trajectory of the excavator arm joints and the inverse kinematics which give the desired joint variables corresponding to the desired bucket trajectory. Hongnian Yu. 23 Schematic diagram of the excavator
Figure 22 shows 4 coordinates of each links of the excavator. 3 No. 21 . Forward kinematics yields the location and orientation of the bucket lip. The problem of forwared kinematics can be summarised as: For the given Θ θ θ θ .
Fig. They have developed all the necessary kinematic analysis to design the tele-operated system and basic motion control simulations to the real excavator working at construction site are conducted with designed tele-operated system. find the joint angles Θ θ θ θ Θ Θ Θ . / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
considerations for an excavating shovel to meet the performance and reliability speciﬁcations are based primarily on kinematics. reachable workspace. The kinematics of the shovel attachment determines the maximum reachable height. 20 RH 400 Kinematics
Fig. mobility during digging and achievable cutting forces are presented with some simplifying assumptions for the dynamics of the machine. the inverse kinematics analysis is more important to control the pose of last link. In the forward kinematics the transformation matrix relating two adjacent coordinate frames was used which is given by Koivo et al. Yoon Ki Kim and Suk-Hie Hong. The inverse kinematics was completed using the model provided by Tafazoli (1997). forward and inverse kinematics analysis is necessary. in 2010. As a tele-operated system. Methods for determining the parameters of the models are discussed. according to the bucket’s pose. With this reason. Daehie Hong. (1996). Kinematic mechanism analysis can be used to calculate various specifications. After the modeling of excavator. in 2009. this controller is designed to improve the operability of the excavator. Figure 20 shows the kinematic parameters of the RH 400 shovel attachment. Yang Liu and Mohammad Shahidul Hasan. find the coordinate Θ Θ Θ . Figure 21 shows the reachable workspace of the RH 400 with the bucket horizontal. 3 March 2011
1996
. And operator can control the real excavator intuitively with this new model of tele-operated system.
Figure 22 Kinematic model of excavator
Fig. The excavator schematic diagram is shown in figure 23. robust control and iterative learning control which have been developed on the fully actuated robot manipulator. provided that visibility is good. Inverse kinematics produces the joint displacements for a given shovel pose. a novel concept of applying tele-operated device was developed for the remote control of excavator-like dismantling equipment. and the maximum reach to the bank to do work (which determines the maximum bench height in mine design and production planning). A skilled operator can achieve the desired bucket motion with good angle of attack.

IEEE. Vaha (1993) and A. pp. Gyeonggi-do. J. Yoon Ki Kim and Suk-Hie Hong. 2007. 1994. 1-7. John J. Lipsett. May 2008. “Design and Development of an Excavator Attachment” M. Patel et al. Nagtath. pp. Nirma University. Pottker. “Obstacle Avoidance for Robotic Excavators Using a Recurrent Neural Network”. pp. structural kinematic parameters are defined and presented using the Denavit-Hartenberg procedure. Tzvetan Damianov. 2009. 2002. 2003. A. Measurement and Control. “Methods for Assessing Dynamic Performance of Shovels”. A. Annual. Besancon. I. pp. “Robust bucket position tracking for a large hydraulic excavator”. 6. The Robotics Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh. Mechanization. “Automated excavation in construction using robotics trajectory and envelop generation”. Vol. Hall. pp. David A Bradley. “Dynamic Model of Excavator”. Institute of Technology. J. and Ziad Khudr. Miedema.47-49 Boris Vidolov. 345-361. 1999. 68. 1989. provides a useful computational platform for investigating the machine behavior of a typical excavator by defining Cartesian coordinate system. pp. Vaha. A. “Workspace Analysis and Maximal Force Calculation of a Face-Shovel Excavator using Kinematical Transformers”. Pqamehmetolu. Michael G. Fuad Mrad. No. Kecskemethy. P. 3028 – 3033. . Sofia. Blackwell Science Ltd. January. 1-16. Journal of Aerospace Engineering. Proceedings of the 13th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation Limassol. Shinn-Liang Chang and Kuo-Huang Lin. pp. St. Howard N. The derivatives of kinematics deal with the mechanics of motion without considering the forces that cause it. June 27-29. Sanghak Lee. 2010. “A study of the design. 1. E. pp. Mechanism and Machine Theory. Department of Mechanical Engineering. Elsevier. P. This review provides the background of excavator kinematics to carry out further research work in the same era. 17-32. Qinghua He. Cyprus. Vol.A. A. 2005. “Kinematics of Excavators (Backhoes) for Transferring Surface material”. For determining the transformation matrices. The forward and inverse kinematics also described by them. part ІІІ. Cannon. IEEE. “Describing the position of backhoe dredge buckets”. Radoslav Dimitrov. R. Bodur. “Probabilistic approach to manipulator kinematics and dynamics”. “Extended Earthmoving with an Autonomous Excavator”. Baeksuk Chu and Daehie Hong. 2008. September 11-14. Elsevier Science. Craig. 2003. 26th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC). 585590. R. 47-58. The kinematics of excavator was described by P. pp. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education. pp. 1. pp. 341-347. Ersak.
[15]
[16] [17] [18] [19]
[20] [21] [22]
ISSN : 0975-5462
Vol. “Introduction to Robotics Machines and Control”. Hyongju Park. 3 No. tech Dissertation Thesis. Vol. “References”
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] Mehta Gaurav K. van Hemmen. June 18-21. “Dynamic Cognitive Force Control for an Automatic Land Excavation Robot”. 68-80. S. 2002. 692695. Daqing Zhang. 1993. University of Mining and Geology. Vol. IEEE. Ahmedabad. 2. K. No. Thesis of Master of Science. pp. K. 1999. Emil Assenov.S. Hofstra. 2008. Koivo. G. This concept of kinematics is followed by number of researchers for their application. Journal of Aerospace Engineering. J. Yang Liu and Mohammad Shahidul Hasan. 12th IFToMM World Congress. Kinematic model describes the spatial position of joints and links. H. International Journal of Advanced Mechatronic Systems. 1772-1776. Hongnian Yu. Kocaozlan. 325-335. F. C. 40. University of Alberta. Engineering. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)
4. рр. P. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. Electrification and Automation in Mines. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. H. Geu Flores. 70. O. New Orleans. E. Salah Sadek. 22ndInternational Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction. pp. Ivan Rilski. Asem Abdul-Malak. Conclusion Kinematic modeling is helpful for understanding and improving the operating performance of the backhoe excavation machine. Svetoslav Genchev “Heuristic Approaches for the coordinated motion of a redundant heavy-duty hydraulic excavator”. Vol.December 1995.K. pp. Yurtseven. 2. Mittal. April. Rao. M. 2001. pp. Inderscience. 7. Daehie Hong. J. S. “Motion Control of Excavator with Tele-Operated System”. 2005. J. LA . . KINTEX. A. vol. Edmonton. Korea. 2005. 9-11 April. “Review of modelling and remote control for excavators”. “Developing Real-Time Autonomous Excavation – The Lucie”. McAree. M. M. J. “Robotics and Control”. K. manufacture and remote control of a pneumatic excavator”. Kyeong Won Oh. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited. Derek W Seward. Ferrara (Italy). International Conference on Smart Manufacturing Application. Donald Margolis. Construction and Architectural Management. and position and orientation of the bucket. pp. ASME. 497-504. J.Bhaveshkumar P. 3 March 2011
1997
. 125. M. HaiTao Zhang. A. Bhatti. Ninth Reprint. Journal of Dynamic Systems. S. Bosilkov. 2009. Proceedings of the 34th Conference on Decision & Control. Taehyun Shim “Instability Due to Interacting Hydraulic and Mechanical Dynamics in Backhoes”. A. 46. Hsin-Sheng Lee.. 1994.F. “Kinematics and Dynamics of Working Mechanism of Hydraulic Excavator”. Dongnam Kim. Zontul. 1-6. “Modeling and controlling for hydraulic excavator’s arm”. Peng Hao. Second Edition. Koivo (1994). pp. Koivo. Skibniewski. van Hulsteyn.