Seminar I

Presentation
On
“Literature survey on
space robot contact
force minimization”
Haile Simachew
MSc. In mechanical engineering
PhD. Student in Aerospace engineerin
Supervisor
Dr. Melak zebenay
(NASA scientist)
 Contents

1) Introduction
2) Contact force modeling method
2.1) Discrete contact dynamic models

2.2) Continuous contact dynamics models

3) Methods of contact force analysis of space robot

4) Contact force minimization parameters of space robot

5) Critics and summary
6) References
 1) Introduction
 Robotics is a complex fields involves;
 Physics  Control theory,
 Properties of materials,  Signal processing,
 Statics and dynamics,  Computer programming,
 Electronics  Manufacturing
 Instead of human beings, space robots are
 Maintenance,  Refueling,
 Assembly,  Deployment and
 Transportation,  Retrieval.
The robot will perform tasks or specific work by two methods;
1) Robots moving freely in their workspace, i.e. without
interacting with their environment (painting, “pick and place”,
laser cutting, etc.) output joint positions and joint velocities.
2) Robot that have physical contact with their environment,
(polishing, deburring of materials, high quality assembling,
etc.), output may include the torques and forces.
  For the robot that have physical contact between the
manipulator and the environment a proper definition of forces
to be exerted is necessary.
 In space free floating robot, the capturing phase allows the
interactions between the end effector and the target.

 The contact dynamic modeling and control problem for

capturing is the research area.
  Contact is a more ambiguous term although it is frequently
used interchangeably with impact.
 Contact dynamic also modeled in two approach,
 Impulse-momentum principle that is the discrete dynamic
modeling interaction occurs in a short time and
configuration do not change significantly.
 Continuous dynamic modeling (Adding the contact forces
to the equation of motion) interaction forces act in a
continuous manner during the impact

 By adding the contact forces to the equations of motion during their

action period and the continuous modelling allows Better description
of the real behavior of the system.
 For dynamic contact force modeling the coefficient of

restitution and the compression were considered.

 Depends on (geometry, the approach velocity, the material

properties, the duration of contact and, friction)

 Several formulations of contact dynamics problems were

investigated and postulated

 Generally classified as discrete and continuous dynamic

modeling
 2) Contact force modeling method

 Based on the configuration of impact there are four types of

impact [3],

 Central or collinear, (mass center inline with impact line)

 Eccentric , (mass center is not inline with impact line )
 Direct, (initial velocities are inline with impact direction)
 Oblique, (initial velocities are not inline with impact
direction)
 Energy transfer and dissipation, coefficient of restitution and
deformation is employed.
 Perfectly elastic, line O–A–C, where no energy is lost.
 perfectly plastic, line O–A, where all energy is lost and the
deformation is permanent.
 partially elastic, line O–A–D, with energy loss but no permanent
deformation.
 partially plastic, line O–A–B, with energy loss and permanent
deformation.
 2.1) Discrete contact dynamic models

 The discrete problem was analyzed by linear impulse-

momentum principle, angular impulse-momentum principle, to
relate the variables before and after impact.
 m is mass,
 v velocity,
 P linear momentum,
 h angular momentum,
 d distance of center of mass
and
 M angular impulse.

 The discrete problem (impact analysis) is different based

on the coefficient of restitution
 According to Poisson’s model, coefficient of restitution is
the ratio of restitution impulse and compression impulse.

 According to the newtons model the coefficient of

restitution is the ratio of the relative velocity after impact to
the approach velocity.
 According Stronge’s model is based on the energy
dissipation theory, the coefficient of restitution is square
root of ratio of energy released due to restitution to energy
absorbed during compression.

 Discrete analysis using impulse momentum principle

(geometric constraints, impulse associated with external
force).
 Lagrange’s equation is utilized to describe the impact
 2.2) Continuous contact dynamics models

 Continuous model is compliant contact model that is utilized

to overcome the problems associated with discrete models.

 Coulomb friction cases no solution or multiple solutions.

 Conservation of energy principle violated during frictional

impacts.
 Discrete approach is not easily extendible to generic multi
body system.
 Continuous contact dynamics models utilize compliance
where the impact force is a function of local indentation
(deformation).
 The normal contact force Fn as an explicit function of local
indentation δ and its rate

 According to the spring dashpot model linear

damper(dashpot) for the dissipation of energy in parallel
with linear spring,
 This model has lacks that the contact

force at the beginning of impact (point

A) is discontinuous.

 In more realistic model, both elastic and

damping force should be initially at zero

and increase over time

 The objects are separating at point B i.e. the indentation tends to zero,
 Their relative velocity tends to be negative and the negative force
holding the objects together presents.
 According to the Hertz’s model utilizes nonlinear model
 It is limited to impact with elastic limit
 Does not include damping,
 The impact force is modeled as

 Hertzian model does not account for the energy dissipation

 The coefficient of restitution e is unity
 It is utilized for the low speed impact and hard material type.
 hysteresis contact force law is accomplished by using force
indentation relationship.
 According to the nonlinear damping model to mitigate the
problems of linear spring dashpot model & remember the
advantage of Hertz’s model
 Alternative model for energy dissipation was modeled by Hunt
and Crossley, by utilizing the nonlinear damping term
impact/contact force

 The nonlinear compliant model introduced by Hunt and

Crossley the force model was compressed in equation of
motion.
 Coefficient of restitution e as a function of initial velocity

 The coefficient of damping is summarized as;

 Due to the reason that smaller coefficient of restitution, the

greater influence of damping force on kinetic energy loss.
 Herbert and McWhannell used direct method to determine 𝞴.

 Lee and Wang also make additional approximation

 Lankarani and Nikraveshi model is based on the assumptions of Hunt

and Crossley, compared the dissipated kinetic energy with work done

by damping force to obtain the damping coefficient as,

 Their quantitative values have the following orders.

 The above models have errors depending on the impact velocity or

the coefficient of restitution.
 And for contact dynamics analysis the properties of contacting bodies
should be studied
 Modified by [5] through expression for
equivalent velocity

Then the approximate dynamic equation can be described as

follows:
Dynamic behaviors of the system dynamic equation and the approximate dynamic
equation with n=1.5 &2 [5]

 Approximate equation does not perfectly match the system

dynamics equation.
 The smaller the coefficient of restitution cr , the larger the
deviation.
  Smaller modification of the damping factor and stiffness
constant.

The optimum values and fitting curve of modification parameter α for different values of restitution
coefficient c r as n = 1.5. and relation between the post- and pre-restitution coefficients for different
values of n [5]
 Based on the trial calculation [5] postulated the expression for the
function of curve fitting as
 The modified damping factor is postulated and the expression of
the new contact force

 And finally, the approximate dynamic equation can be modified

as:

 The indentation and the peak contact force were simulated

different models give accurate results for different values of the
coefficient of restitution.
 The best fit for the post-restitution coefficient vs. pre-restitution
coefficient relative to other models.
 Over the entire range of restitution
coefficient,
 High accuracy on the consistency of
post- and pre-restitution coefficient
 contact duration time and peak
contact force,
 3) Methods of contact force analysis of space robot

 The essential spring damper contact model based on the trend

Hertz model with hysteresis damping function utilized.
 To simulate the impact between the end effector and its
environment.
Assumptions
 The contact nature is point surface contact,
 The material is rigid and
 The initial parameters except mass and moment of inertia,
such as initial relative linear and angular velocities is zero at
the beginning of contact.

 Newton-Euler formulation as follows;

 As well as they derived the dynamic equation of the target.

  The spring damping force model based on the Hertz theory
 Continuous dynamics problems as the contact force is equal to
the spring damping model.

 The equivalent spring-damping contact model

 Contact behavior is the point to surface

contact and after all the conducted the
sphere to plane contact
Configuration of a 7-dof manipulator [7]

Restitution coefficient of 0.8.

 4) Contact force minimization parameters of space robot

 Expression for the integrated effective mass from the integration

of the inertial properties of the contact bodies.
 Optimize these mass by configuration optimization to minimize
the contact force.

 Inertial properties perceived at the end effector

 The new integrated effective mass Mie derived [6]

  The contact force

 The integrated effective

mass based on the
continuous contact model.

 After integration of the continuous contact model and

mathematical manipulation.
 The expression of the maximum deformation when the impact
velocity is zero derived
 The Hertzian contact model the maximum contact force is derived.
 The maximum contact force in terms the integrated effective mass
and the error is[6]

 To minimize the maximum contact force is reducing the M ie,

 To decrease the effective integrated mass Mie is optimizing m_e
by regulating the capture configuration
 The integrated effective mass and the capture configuration θ
established as;
 Simulation of 3DOF and &DOF robot manipulator
conducted
  Total energy of the space flexible manipulator calculated
through Lagrangian approach as [7]

The continuous contact force modeling according to the Hertz theory

 The peak contact force is as a function of the collision parameters
and the initial indentation velocity, and also the relative mass.
 Function that is utilized to minimize effective mass is g e=min(me).
 The factors that affect the effective mass is the configuration of the
space flexible manipulator and the collision direction.

 The minimization of the contact

force requires to drive the best pre-
configurations and to choose the
best collision direction
 The simulation of the 7DOF
conducted.
 5) Critics and summary
 Let’s compare and contrast the simulation of 7DOF b/n [6] &[7]

Seven-DOF free-floating space robot capturing tumbling target.[6]

Model of 7-DOF flexible manipulator [7]

 Accuracy of maximum-contact-force model for 7-DOF space robot. [6]

Corresponding effective mass and peak contact force of the pre-configurations. [7]
 Simulation comparison results of 7-dof space robot [6]

Comparison between the best and the worst pre-configurations [7]

 The difference is due to the integrated effective mass and effective mass.

ge=min(me).

 [6] reduce the mass by 83.4% and force by 67%

 [7]87.1% mass reduced and 39.34% mass reduced
  May be the size and length of the manipulator
 Efficiency of the calculations

 The left graph is utilized dynamic model and there is error

 The right graph is the new approximated dynamic model
 The maximum contact force reach the maximum indentation
 It is better to use the new model(updated contact model)
 Efficient equivalent mass formulation and expression of mass as a
function of angular displacement and effective simulation.
 References
[1] L. S. Siciliano, Advanced Textbooks in Control and Signal Processing ロバ
スト制御が理論から詳しく説明されている サンプルコードも豊富 研
究 に は 不 必 要 か , vol. 17, no. 3. 2019. [Online]. Available:
http://weekly.cnbnews.com/news/article.html?no=124000%0Ahttp://books.
google.com/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=9FljXoISr8AC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&
dq=geometric+fundamentals+of+robotics&ots=4rDiBRo6ea&sig
=RvtGOQTxmzJnBOoEDeEGwDaeYz0%0Ahttp://onlinel
[2] A. De Luca and C. Manes, “Robots in Contact with,” IEEE Trans. Robot.,
vol. L, no. 4, pp. 542–548, 1994.
[3] G. Gilardi and I. Sharf, “Literature survey of contact dynamics modelling,”
Mech. Mach. Theory, vol. 37, no. 10, pp. 1213–1239, 2002, doi:
10.1016/S0094-114X(02)00045-9.
[4] Y. Zhang and I. Sharf, “Compliant force modelling for impact analysis,”
Proc. ASME Des. Eng. Tech. Conf., vol. 2 A, pp. 595–601, 2004, doi:
10.1115/detc2004-57220.
[5] J. Zhang, W. Li, L. Zhao, and G. He, “A continuous contact force model
for impact analysis in multibody dynamics,” Mech. Mach. Theory, vol.
153, p. 103946, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2020.103946.
[6] H. Ji, M. Li, X. Wang, Y. Li, and L. Dou, “Contact-impact dynamics
simulation for space manipulator using equivalent spring-damping
model,” Proc. World Congr. Intell. Control Autom., vol. 2015-March,
no. March, pp. 3186–3191, 2015, doi: 10.1109/WCICA.2014.7053240.
[7] L. Zhang, Q. Jia, G. Chen, H. Sun, and L. Cao, “Impact analysis of
space manipulator collision with soft environment,” Proc. 2014 9th
IEEE Conf. Ind. Electron. Appl. ICIEA 2014, pp. 1965–1970, 2014, doi:
10.1109/ICIEA.2014.6931490.
[8] L. Zhang, “Configuration Optimization for Free-Floating Space Robot
Capturing Tumbling Target,” Aerospace, vol. 9, no. 2, p. 69, Jan. 2022,
doi: 10.3390/aerospace9020069.
[9] G. Chen, D. Liu, Y. Wang, Q. Jia, and X. Liu, “Contact force
minimization for space flexible manipulators based on effective mass,”
J. Guid. Control. Dyn., vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 1870–1877, 2019, doi:
10.2514/1.G003987.
[10] A. N. Sharkawy, “An investigation on the effective mass of the
robot: Dependence on the end-effector position,” Eng. Trans., vol. 69,
no. 3, pp. 293–313, 2021, doi: 10.24423/EngTrans.1329.20210826.
[11] A.-N. Sharkawy, “Effect of Joints’ Configuration Change on
the Effective Mass of the Robot,” Int. J. Robot. Control Syst., vol. 2,
no. 1, pp. 105–114, 2022, doi: 10.31763/ijrcs.v2i1.564.
[12] C. Pei-Chao and S. Zhao-wei, “Pre-impact configuration
planning for capture object of space manipulator,” 2008 2nd Int. Symp.
Syst. Control Aerosp. Astronaut. ISSCAA 2008, pp. 1–6, 2008, doi:
10.1109/ISSCAA.2008.4776179.
Thank you!
Ethiopian Space
Science and
Technology Institute