0
Research Papers

Quantitative Feedback Input Shaping for Flexible-Joint Robot Manipulator

[+] Author and Article Information
Withit Chatlatanagulchai

Control of Robot and Vibration Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
Kasetsart University,
50 Ngam Wong Wan Road,
Lat Yao, Chatuchak,
Bangkok 10900, Thailand
e-mail: fengwtc@ku.ac.th

Dumrongsak Kijdech

Control of Robot and Vibration Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
Kasetsart University,
50 Ngam Wong Wan Road,
Lat Yao, Chatuchak,
Bangkok 10900, Thailand
e-mail: dumrongsak_kijdech@hotmail.com

Takat Benjalersyarnon

Control of Robot and Vibration Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
Kasetsart University,
50 Ngam Wong Wan Road,
Lat Yao, Chatuchak,
Bangkok 10900, Thailand
e-mail: tac_m@msn.com

Supparat Damyot

Control of Robot and Vibration Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
Kasetsart University,
50 Ngam Wong Wan Road,
Lat Yao, Chatuchak,
Bangkok 10900, Thailand
e-mail: supparat.d@gmail.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received August 10, 2015; final manuscript received February 23, 2016; published online March 30, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Hashem Ashrafiuon.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 138(6), 061006 (Mar 30, 2016) (13 pages) Paper No: DS-15-1371; doi: 10.1115/1.4032931 History: Received August 10, 2015; Revised February 23, 2016

Input shaping technique has been applied to flexible-joint robot to suppress its residual vibration from fast point-to-point movement. Input shaping performance deteriorates when the knowledge of the mode parameters of the robot is not accurate. Several robust input shapers were proposed at the expense of longer move time. A novel input shaping system, consisting of a quantitative feedback controller, a feed-forward reference model, and a simple zero-vibration (ZV) input shaper, is proposed in this paper. Advantages over the existing robust input shapers include toleration of substantially larger amount of uncertainty in the mode parameters, shorter move time that does not increase with insensitivity, application to nonlinear and time-varying systems, and suppression of vibration induced by disturbance and noise.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Sweet, L. M. , and Good, M. C. , 1984, “ Re-Definition of the Robot Motion Control Problem: Effects of Plant Dynamics Drive System Constraints, and User Requirements,” 23rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Las Vegas, NV, Dec. 12–14, pp. 724–731.
Smith, O. J. M. , 1957, “ Posicast Control of Damped Oscillatory Systems,” Proc. IRE, 45(9), pp. 1249–1255. [CrossRef]
Singer, N. C. , and Seering, W. C. , 1990, “ Preshaping Command Inputs to Reduce System Vibration,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control, 112(1), pp. 76–82. [CrossRef]
Elbadawy, A. A. , and Shehata, M. M. G. , 2015, “ Anti-Sway Control of Marine Cranes Under the Disturbance of a Parallel Manipulator,” Nonlinear Dyn., 82(1), pp. 415–434. [CrossRef]
Aribowo, W. , Yamashita, T. , and Terashima, K. , 2015, “ Integrated Trajectory Planning and Sloshing Suppression for Three-Dimensional Motion of Liquid Container Transfer Robot Arm,” J. Rob., 2015, pp. 1–15. [CrossRef]
Zhang, Y. , and Zhang, J.-R. , 2013, “ Combined Control of Fast Attitude Maneuver and Stabilization for Large Complex Spacecraft,” Acta Mech. Sin., 29(6), pp. 875–882. [CrossRef]
Pridgen, B. , and Singhose, W. , 2012, “ Comparison of Polynomial Cam Profiles and Input Shaping for Driving Flexible Systems,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 134, pp. 1–7. [CrossRef]
Boettcher, U. , Fetzer, D. , Li, H. , Callafon, R. A. D. , and Talke, F. E. , 2012, “ Reference Signal Shaping for Closed-Loop Systems With Application to Seeking in Hard Disk Drives,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 20(2), pp. 335–345. [CrossRef]
Maleki, E. , Pridgen, B. , Singhose, W. , Glauser, U. , and Seering, W. , 2012, “ Educational Use of a Small-Scale Cherrypicker,” Int. J. Mech. Eng. Educ., 40(2), pp. 104–120. [CrossRef]
Burns, D. J. , Youcef-Toumi, K. , and Fantner, G. E. , 2011, “ Indirect Identification and Compensation of Lateral Scanner Resonances in Atomic Force Microscopes,” Nanotechnology, 22(31), pp. 1–10. [CrossRef]
Fortgang, J. , Singhose, W. , Márquez, J. D. J. , and Perez, J. , 2011, “ Command Shaping Control for Micro-Milling Operations,” Int. J. Control, Autom. Syst., 9(6), pp. 1136–1145. [CrossRef]
Palunko, I. , Fierro, R. , and Cruz, P. , 2012, “ Trajectory Generation for Swing-Free Maneuvers of a Quadrotor With Suspended Payload: A Dynamic Programming Approach,” 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Saint Paul, MN, May 14–18, pp. 2691–2697.
Shah, U. H. , and Hong, K.-S. , 2014, “ Input Shaping Control of a Nuclear Power Plant's Fuel Transport System,” Nonlinear Dyn., 77(4), pp. 1737–1748. [CrossRef]
Zolfagharian, A. , Noshadi, A. , Zain, M. Z. M. , and Bakar, A. R. A. , 2013, “ Practical Multi-Objective Controller for Preventing Noise and Vibration in an Automobile Wiper System,” Swarm Evol. Comput., 8, pp. 54–68. [CrossRef]
Chatlatanagulchai, W. , and Saeheng, K. , 2009, “ Real-Time Reference Position Shaping to Reduce Vibration in Slewing of a Very-Flexible-Joint Robot,” J. Res. Eng. Technol., 6(1), pp. 51–66.
Yun, S.-K. , Kang, S. , Kim, M. , and Yoon, S.-S. , 2004, “ Input Preshaping Control of the Safe Arm With MR-Based Passive Compliant Joints,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, New Orleans, LA, Apr. 26–May 1, pp. 2788–2793.
Ahmad, M. A. , Tumari, M. Z. M. , and Nasir, A. N. K. , 2013, “ Composite Fuzzy Logic Control Approach to a Flexible Joint Manipulator,” Int. J. Adv. Rob. Syst., 10, pp. 1–9.
Pereira, E. , Trapero, J. R. , Díaz, I. M. , and Feliu, V. , 2012, “ Adaptive Input Shaping for Single-Link Flexible Manipulators Using an Algebraic Identification,” Control Eng. Pract., 20(2), pp. 138–147. [CrossRef]
Fliess, M. , and Sira-Ramirez, H. , 2008, “ Closed-Loop Parametric Identification for Continuous-Time Linear Systems Via New Algebraic Techniques,” Identification of Continuous-Time Models From Sampled Data, H. Garnier , and L. Wang , eds., Springer, London, pp. 363–391.
Yavuz, H. , Mıstıkoglu, S. , and Kapucu, S. , 2012, “ Hybrid Input Shaping to Suppress Residual Vibration of Flexible Systems,” J. Vib. Control, 18(1), pp. 132–140. [CrossRef]
Singhose, W. E. , Seering, W. P. , and Singer, N. C. , 1990, “ Shaping Inputs to Reduce Vibration: A Vector Diagram Approach,” 1990 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Cincinnati, OH, May 13–18, pp. 922–927.
Rew, K.-H. , Ha, C.-W. , and Kim, K.-S. , 2013, “ An Impulse-Time Perturbation Approach for Enhancing the Robustness of Extra-Insensitive Input Shapers,” Automatica, 49(11), pp. 3425–3431. [CrossRef]
Singer, N. C. , and Seering, W. P. , 1992, “ An Extension of Command Shaping Methods for Controlling Residual Vibration Using Frequency Sampling,” 1992 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Nice, France, May 12–14, pp. 800–805.
Singh, T. , 2002, “ Minimax Design of Robust Controllers for Flexible Systems,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., 25(5), pp. 868–875. [CrossRef]
Pao, L. Y. , Chang, T. N. , and Hou, E. , 1997, “ Input Shaper Designs for Minimizing the Expected Level of Residual Vibration in Flexible Structures,” American Control Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico, June 4–6, pp. 3542–3546.
Singh, T. , Singla, P. , and Konda, U. , 2010, “ Polynomial Chaos Based Design of Robust Input Shapers,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control, 132(5), pp. 1–13. [CrossRef]
Conord, T. , and Singh, T. , 2006, “ Robust Input Shaper Design Using Linear Matrix Inequalities,” 2006 International Conference on Control Applications, Munich, Germany, Oct. 4–6, pp. 1470–1475.
Chatlatanagulchai, W. , and Kaveesoontornsanoh, P. , 2014, “ Improving Robustness of Input Shaping Technique With Model Reference Iterative Learning Control,” 28th Conference of Mechanical Engineering Network of Thailand (MENETT 28), Khonkaen, Thailand, pp. 1–8.
Pai, M.-C. , 2012, “ Robust Input Shaping Control for Multi-Mode Flexible Structures Using Neuro-Sliding Mode Output Feedback Control,” J. Franklin Inst., 349(3), pp. 1283–1303. [CrossRef]
Hu, Q. , Gao, X.-Z. , and Ma, G. , 2009, “ Reference Model Variable Structure Output Feedback for Attitude Maneuvers Control of Flexible Spacecrafts,” Intell. Autom. Soft Comput., 15(1), pp. 53–62. [CrossRef]
Yuan, D. , and Chang, T. , 2008, “ Model Reference Input Shaper Design With Applications to a High-Speed Robotic Workcell With Variable Loads,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 55(2), pp. 842–851. [CrossRef]
Yu, L. , and Chang, T. N. , 2010, “ Zero Vibration On-Off Position Control of Dual Solenoid Actuator,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 57(7), pp. 2519–2526. [CrossRef]
Fujioka, D. , and Singhose, W. , 2014, “ Control Effort Reduction Analysis of Zero-Vibration Model Reference Control for Controlling a Time-Varying Plant,” American Control Conference, Portland, OR, June 4–6, pp. 3110–3115.
Lewis, F. L. , Jagannathan, S. , and Yesildirek, A. , 1998, Neural Network Control of Robot Manipulators and Non-Linear Systems, CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Chatlatanagulchai, W. , 2015, Input Shaping for Vibration Suppression in Flexible Systems, Misterkopy, Bangkok, Thailand, Chap. 2.
Singhose, W. , Seering, W. , and Singer, N. , 1994, “ Residual Vibration Reduction Using Vector Diagrams to Generate Shaped Inputs,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 116(2), pp. 654–659. [CrossRef]
Chatlatanagulchai, W. , Poedaeng, P. , and Meckl, P. H. , 2014, “ Integrating an Input Shaper With a Quantitative-Feedback-Theory-Based Controller to Effectively Reduce Residual Vibration in Slewing of a Two-Staged Pendulum With Uncertain Payload,” Kasetsart J., 48(1), pp. 150–166.
Chatlatanagulchai, W. , 2011, System Modeling and Control, Misterkopy, Bangkok, Thailand, Chap. 10.
Yaniv, O. , 1999, Quantitative Feedback Design of Linear and Nonlinear Control Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA.
Vyhlídal, T. , Kučera, V. , and Hromčík, M. , 2013, “ Signal Shaper With a Distributed Delay: Spectral Analysis and Design,” Automatica, 49(11), pp. 3484–3489. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Diagram of the experimental setup and pertaining software and hardware

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Flexible-joint robot manipulator

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Top-view diagram of the flexible-joint robot

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Preliminary simulation result without input shaping: (a) link position, (b) control input, (c) linearized spring constant, (d) deadzone, and (e) backlash

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Application of the input shaping technique

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Diagram of the proposed QF-IS

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Plant templates for eight pertaining frequencies

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Open-loop shaping: (top) original shape and (bottom) after shaping

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Diagram of the traditional robust input shaping

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Bode magnitude plots: (top) the proposed QF-IS system and (bottom) traditional robust input shaping system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Link position tracking result for 27 plant variations: (top) traditional robust input shaping system with ZVD input shaper and (bottom) proposed QF-IS system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of sensitivity curves: (left) percentage vibration as a function of normalized frequency and (right) percentage vibration as a function of damping ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Link position tracking experimental result for nonlinear plant with time-varying payload: (top) traditional robust input shaping system with ZV input shaper and (bottom) proposed QF-IS system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Simulation result of link position tracking: (a) traditional ZV input shaper with linear plant, (b) traditional ZV input shaper with nonlinear plant, (c) proposed QF-IS with linear plant, and (d) proposed QF-IS with nonlinear plant

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison between simulation and experiment for the proposed QF-IS: (top) percentage vibration as a function of normalized frequency and (bottom) percentage vibration as a function of damping ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of input shaper lengths

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Simulation result of link position under step disturbance: (a) traditional ZVD input shaper under step plant-output disturbance, (b) proposed QF-IS under step plant-output disturbance, (c) traditional ZVD input shaper under step plant-input disturbance, and (d) proposed QF-IS under step plant-input disturbance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Disturbance rejection: (top) plant-input disturbance rejection and (bottom) plant-output disturbance rejection

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In