Control of Robot Manipulators

CONTROL OF ROBOT MANIPULATORS IN JOINT SPACE
Rafael Kelly Centro de Investigaci on Cient ca y de Educaci on Superior de Ensenada Mexico V ctor Santib an ez Instituto Tecnol ogico de la Laguna Mexico Antonio Lor a Centre National de la Recherche Scientique France
Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York Hong Kong London Milan Paris Tokyo
Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space
Part I PRELIMINARIES
R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria
Introduction
Introduction
Robots occupy a privileged place in the modernization of numerous industrial sectors. The word robot nds its origins in robota which means work in Slavic languages. Was introduced by the Czech science ction writer Karel Capek. The term robot is nowadays used to denote autonomous machines.
Introduction
These machines may be roughly classied as follows: Robot manipulators Ground robots Wheeled robots Legged robots Mobile robots Submarine robots Aerial robots. This book is exclusively devoted to robot manipulators.
Introduction
Robotics Term coined by the science ction writer Isaac Asimov Science devoted to the study of robots Incorporates a variety of elds: Electric engineering, mechanical engineering, industrial engineering, computer science and applied mathematics Automatic control of robot manipulators (spine of robotics).
Introduction
The International Federation of Robotics (norm ISO/TR 8373) denes:
A manipulating industrial robot is an automatically controlled, reprogrammable, multipurpose manipulator programmable in three or more axes, which may be either xed in place or mobile for use in industrial automation applications.
Introduction
The number of joints of a manipulator determines as well, its number of degrees of freedom (DOF ) typically 6 DOF . 3 determine the position of the end of the last link in the Cartesian space 3 more specify its orientation.
q1
q2
q3
Figure 1: Robot manipulator.

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria 6
Introduction
In the present textbook: A robot manipulator or simply manipulator is a mechanical articulated arm that is constituted of links interconnected through hinges or joints that allow a relative movement between two consecutive links.
Introduction
The joint positions of the robot are collected in the vector q , i.e., q1 q2 . q := . . qn := The joint velocities are: q
d dt q
1 2 . The torques and forces are collected in the vector: := . . n

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?
Robot control consists in studying how to make a robot manipulator perform a task. Control design may be divided roughly in the following steps: Familiarization with the physical system under consideration, Modeling. Control specications.
Familiarization with the physical system under consideration
Figure 2: Freely moving robot. For this robot, the outputs y , are the positions q and joint velocities q or the position and orientation of the end eector.
Figure 3: Robot interacting with its environment.
In this case, the output y may include the torques and forces f exerted by the end tool over its environment.
11
Image
Camera
Figure 4: Robotic system: xed camera. In this system, the output y may correspond to the coordinates associated to each of the marks with reference to a screen on a monitor.
12
Image
Camera
Figure 5: Robotic system: camera in hand. Output y may correspond to the coordinates of the screen.
13
q
-
ROBOT q
Figure 6: Input-output representation of a robot. The input variables, are basically the torques and forces , The outputs are the joint positions and velocities: , f) = y = y (q , q q q
14
Derivation of the dynamic model
The systems mathematical model is obtained typically via one of the two following techniques. Analytic. Physics laws of the systems motion. Experimental. Experimental data collected from the system itself.
15
Some interesting topics related with modelling are: Robustness. Faculty of a control system to cope with errors due to neglected dynamics. Parametric identication. The objective is to obtain the numeric values of dierent physical parameters. The dynamic model of robot manipulators is derived in the analytic form using basically the laws of mechanics. an n DOF system (multivariable nonlinear system).
Control specications
Denition of control objectives: Stability Regulation Trajectory tracking (motion control) Optimization.
17
Stability. Consists in the property of a system by which it goes on working at certain regime or closely to it for ever. Lyapunov stability theory. input-output stability theory. In the case when the output y corresponds to the joint position q and . velocity q Regulation Position control in joint coordinates Trajectory tracking Tracking control in joint coordinates
18
Motion control of robot manipulators
Point-to-point. Determines a series of points in the manipulators workspace, by which the end eector is required to pass.
Figure 7: Point-to-point motion specication.

(Continuous) trajectory. The control problem consists in making the end-eector follow a trajectory as closely as possible.
Figure 8: Trajectory motion specication. Set-point control problem. The specied trajectory is simply a point in the workspace.
Robot navigation problem consists in solving, in one single step, the following subproblems. Path planning. Determines a curve in the state space of the desired posture Trajectory generation. Parameterizes in time above curve Control design. Solves the control problem
21
Ch. 2. Introduction to Lyapunov stability theory
Basic notation Throughout the text we employ the following symbols. for all there exists belong(s) to = implies is equivalent to or if and only if tends to := and =: is dened as and equals by denition to .
22
Preliminaries: Linear algebra
Vectors IRn denotes the real Euclidean space of dimension n Vector x of dimension n x1 x2 = [x1 x2 xn]T x= . . xn Denoted by bold small letters, either Latin or Greek.
Euclidean norm The Euclidean norm x of a vector x IRn is dened as

n
x :=
i=1
x2 i
= xTx
Matrices IRnm denotes the set of real matrices A of dimension n m a11 a12 a1m a21 a22 a2m . A = {aij } = . . . . .. . . . an1 an2 anm
24
Eigenvalues
For each square matrix A IRnn there exist n eigenvalues (in general, complex numbers) denoted by 1{A}, 2{A}, , n{A}. satisfy: det [i{A}I A] = 0, for i = 1, 2, , n
For the case of a symmetric matrix A = AT IRnn, 1{A}, 2{A}, , n{A} IR. theorem of RayleighRitz establishes that for all x IRn Max{A} x
2
xTAx min{A} x
25
Spectral norm
The spectral norm A of a matrix A IRnm is dened as A = Max{ATA},
26
Fixed points
Consider a continuous function f : IRn IRn. The vector x IRn is a xed point of f (x) if f (x ) = x . If x is a xed point of the function f (x), then x is a solution of f (x) x = 0. The Contraction Mapping Theorem provides a sucient condition for the existence and unicity of xed points.
27
Theorem 2.1 Contraction Mapping. following continuous function
Consider IRm and the
f : IRn IRn x f (x , ) where stands for a vector of parameters. Assume that there exists a non-negative constant k such that f (x , ) f (y , ) k x y for all x, y IRn and all .
If k < 1, then for each , the function f (x, ) possesses a unique xed point x IRn.
Lyapunov stability
Second method of Lyapunov or direct method of Lyapunov. Dynamical systems described by = f (t, x), x where x corresponds to the state. We will use x(t) to denote a solution to (1) in place of x(t, t, x(t)).
x IRn, t IR+ ,
(1)
We assume that f : IR+ IRn IRn is continuous in t and x and is such that it has a unique solution corresponding to each initial condition t, x(t) and the solution x(t, t, x(t)) depends continuously on the initial conditions t , x ( t ) . If f (t, x) = f (x) then, is said to be autonomous. we can safely consider that t = 0. f (t, x) = A(t)x + u(t) is linear dierential equation In the opposite case it is nonlinear
The concept of equilibrium
Denition 2.1 A constant vector xe IRn is an equilibrium or equilibrium = f (t, x), if state of the system x f (t, xe) = 0 t 0.
= f (t, x). If this is not the Typically x = 0 IRn is an equilibrium of x case, this may be translated to the origin.
31
x1 1 x (t) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
x 62 x(0) = xe
x 62 x(0) = xe t
. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
x1
Figure 9: Equilibrium If the initial state x(t) IRn is an equilibrium (x(t) = xe IRn) then, x ( t) = x e ( t) = 0 x t t 0 t t 0 .
32
Example 2.2
Consider a pendulum whose dynamic model is Jq + mgl sin(q ) = (t)
l g m
Figure 10: Pendulum.

where m is the mass of the pendulum J is the total moment of inertia about the joint axis l is the distance from its axis of rotation to the center of mass q is the angular position. In terms of the state [q q ]T , the dynamic model is given by q q d . = dt q J 1 [ (t) mgl sin(q )]
If (t) = 0, the equilibrium states are given by [q q ]T = [n 0]T for n = , 2, 1, 0, 1, 2, since mgl sin(n ) = 0. If (t) = such that | | > mgl, there does not exist any equilibrium since there is no q IR such that = mgl sin(q ).
Denitions of stability
x (t ) x1 x2 1 6 . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . .... .. . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x ( t ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . t . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. .
x (t ) x2 6 . . . . . . .. .. . . @ . . .. .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . @ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . R ... ...@ . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . x1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . ..
Figure 11: Stability Denition 2.2 Stability. The origin is a stable equilibrium (in the sense of Lyapunov) of Equation (1) if, for each pair of numbers > 0 and t 0, there exists = (, t) > 0 such that x(t) < = x ( t) < t t 0 . (2)
36
Example 2.3
. . . . . ............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . ... .. .... . .. ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .... . . . . . . . . . x . . . . e . . . . . . . . ... .................. . ..... . ... . . ........ . . . .. ............ ............... . . . .
x2
x1
Figure 12: Harmonic oscillator: Phase plane System described by the equations: x 1 = x2 x 2 = x1 The origin is the unique equilibrium point and is stable.
Denition 2.3 Uniform stability. The origin is a uniformly stable equilibrium (in the sense of Lyapunov) of Equation (1) if for each number > 0 there exists = () > 0 such that (2) holds.
38
x(0) x1 . .. .. . . . . .. . 1 . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x( t ) .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. . .. . . .. .. .. . . . .. . . . ..
x2 6 .. . . . . .. .. . . .
Figure 13: Asymptotic stability Denition 2.4 Asymptotic stability. The origin is an asymptotically stable equilibrium of (1) if 1. the origin is stable and 2. the origin is attractive, i.e., for each t, there exists = (t) > 0 : x ( t ) <
x(t) 0 as
t , t 0 .
(3)
39
. . . . ...................... . . . . . . .............. .... . . . . . . . ....... ... . . ............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . .. ... .. . ........... . . ... .... . .. . . ... ........ . . . . . . . .... ....... .. . .......... ... .... .. .... ............. . . . . . ................... . .. . ........ . .. . ....... ... . . . . . ..... ... . . . . . . ..................... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. ..... .... .... .... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .... .......... . . . . . . . ..... ... .. . . .. . . . .. .. .. ......... .... .... ..... . . ...... ... .. .. . . . . . ...... ........ .... . . . . . . . . . ............................ . ............................................. . .. . . . . ................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
x2
x1
Figure 14: Attractive but unstable equilibrium (x1 = rcos() and x2 = r sin()) Example 2.4 5 r = r(1 r) 100 = sin2(/2) [0, 2 ). Equilibria at the origin [r ]T = [0 0]T and at [r ]T = [1 0]T .
Denition 2.5 Uniform asymptotic stability. The origin is an uniformly asymptotically stable equilibrium of (1) if 1. the origin is uniformly stable and 2. the origin is uniformly attractive, that is, there exists a number > 0 such that (3) holds with a rate of convergence independent of t.
41
Denition 2.6 Global asymptotic stability. The origin is a globally asymptotically stable equilibrium 1. the origin is stable and 2. the origin is globally attractive, that is, x(t) 0 as t , x(t) IRn, t 0.
42
Denition 2.7 Global uniform asymptotic stability. The origin is a globally uniformly asymptotically stable equilibrium of Equation (1) if: 1. the origin is uniformly stable with () in (2) which satises () as (uniform boundedness) and 2. the origin is globally uniformly attractive, i.e., for all x(t) IRn and all t 0 , x(t) 0 as t with a convergence rate that is independent of t.
Denition 2.8 Global exponential stability. The origin is a globally exponentially stable equilibrium of (1) if there exist positive constants and , independent of t, such that x(t) < x(t) e (tt), t t 0 , x(t) IRn .
44
. . ......... . . . . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . ........... .. .. .. .. . .. .. . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ..... ..... .. ..... ..... ..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . . . ..... .... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . ....... .. . . . . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . ... . .. . . .... . . . ......... ................ ... . ........................ . . . . . .. . ..... . . ....... .............. ............. . . .............. . . .
x2
x1
Figure 15: Van der Pol: Phase plane. Denition 2.9 Instability. The origin of Equation (1) is unstable if it is not stable. Example 2.6 Van der Pol system, x 1 = x2 , x 2 = x1 + (1 x2 1 )x 2 .
Lyapunov functions
Denition 2.10 Locally and globally positive denite function. A continuous function W : IRn IR+ is said to be locally positive denite if 1. W (0) = 0, 2. W (x) > 0 for small x = 0.
It is said to be globally positive denite (or simply positive denite) if 1. W (0) = 0, 2. W (x) > 0 x = 0.
46
W (x) is said to be (locally) negative denite if W (x) is (locally) positive denite. A function V : IR+ IRn IR+ is (resp. locally) positive denite if there exists a positive denite function W : IRn IR+ such that 1. V (t, 0) = 0 t 0 2. V (t, x) W (x), t 0, x IRn (resp. for small x ).
47
Denition 2.11 Radially unbounded function and decrescent function. A continuous function W : IRn IR is said to be radially unbounded if W (x ) as x .
V (t, x) is radially unbounded if V (t, x) W (x) for all t 0. A continuous function V : IR+ IRn IR is (resp. locally) decrescent if there exists a (resp. locally) positive denite function W : IRn IR+ such that V (t, x) W (x) t0 x IRn (resp. for small x ).
If V (t, x) = V (x) then V (x) is decrescent.

Example 2.7
Consider the graphs of the functions Vi(x) with i = 1, . . . , 4 as depicted in Figure 16. V1(x) is locally positive denite but is not (globally) positive denite. V2(x) is locally positive denite and (globally) positive denite. Also it is radially unbounded. V3(x) is locally positive denite and (globally) positive denite but it is not radially unbounded. V4(x) is positive denite and radially unbounded.
. . . . . . . . . . . . V ( x ) . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . ..... ..... .... .. . ... . .... .... . ... .. ..... ..... . .... . . ... ..... ..... ...0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .... . . .
. . ( x ) V . . . 2 . . . . . ... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . . . . . ... . .... .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ... ... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... . . . .
x 0
. . . . . . . ........................... . . ........................... .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . .... ..... ..... .... .... .... .... .... ..... .. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ...0 . . . . .
x 0 V4 (x) . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . ... . ... . . .. ... . . . . ... . .... . ... . . ..... . . . . ........ . .... .... .... .... ..... ....... .. .. ....... ........ ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... . . . . . . x 0
V3 (x)
x 0
Figure 16: Examples

Denition 2.12 Lyapunov function candidate. A function V : IR+ IRn IR+ is said to be a Lyapunov function candidate = f (t, x) if for the equilibrium x = 0 IRn of the equation x 1. V (t, x) is locally positive denite, 2. 3.
V (t,x) t V (t,x) x
is continuous with respect to t and x, is continuous with respect to t and x .
51
Denition 2.13 Time derivative of a Lyapunov function candidate. = f (t, x). Let V (t, x) be a Lyapunov function candidate for the equation x The total time derivative of V (t, x) along the trajectories of (1), denoted (t, x), is given by by V (t, x) := d {V (t, x)} = V (t, x) + V (t, x) f (t, x). V dt t x
T
52
Denition 2.14 Lyapunov function. A Lyapunov function candidate V (t, x) for Equation (1) is a Lyapunov function for (1) if its total time derivative along the trajectories of (1) satises (t, x) 0 V t0 and for small x .
53
Lyapunovs direct method

Theorem 2.2 Stability and uniform stability. = f (t, x), if there exists The origin is a stable equilibrium of Equation x V (t, 0) = 0 t 0 V (t, x) W1(x) > 0, (t, x) 0, V t0 t0 locally
for small x .
If moreover V (t, x) W2(x), t 0 (decrescent) for small x , then the origin is uniformly stable. W1(x) and W2(x) are positive denite functions.
Theorem 2.3 (Uniform) boundedness of solutions plus uniform stability. = f (t, x) and the solutions The origin is a uniformly stable equilibrium of x x(t) are uniformly bounded for all initial conditions (t, x(t)) IR+ IRn if there exists V (t, x) W1(x) > 0, t 0 x IRn
and V (t, 0) = 0 t 0 (positive denite condition) as x (radially unbounded) with W1(x) V (t, x) W2(x) (t, x) 0 V t0 x IRn (decrescent) x IRn .
t t 0
W1(x) and W2(x) are positive denite functions.

Example 2.11
Consider the dynamic model of an ideal pendulum without friction Jq + mgl sin(q ) = 0 or, in the state-space form x 1 = x2 mgl sin(x1), x 2 = J . where x1 = q and x2 = q Autonomous nonlinear equation
with
q (0), q (0) IR
It has multiple equilibria, at [q q ]T = [n 0]T for n = , 2, 1, 0, 1, 2, the origin is an equilibrium

x2
.......... ............. ............. .... .... .... .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .......... ...... ........... ...... ............ . . . . . ... ... ... .. .. ...... .. .. .. ... ........... .. . . . .... . ... ... .. ............ .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .... . ... .. ... . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . ... . . ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . .... .. .... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . ... .. .. .. ... ... .. .. .... . ... ... ... ... ... . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... .......... ...... ... ... ... ... . . . . . . . . ... .... ... ... . . . ... .... .. .. ... ..... ....... .... .............. .... .... ............. .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ...... ....... ...... ....... ...... .... ... ...
x1
Figure 17: Pendulum: Phase plane
57
Lyapunov function candidate x2 V (x1, x2) = mgl [1 cos(x1)] + J 2 . 2 which is locally positive denite Total time derivative of V (x1, x2) (x1, x2) = mgl sin(x1)x V 1 + Jx2x 2 = 0. According with Theorem 2.2 the origin is a stable equilibrium.
58
Theorem 2.4 Global (uniform) asymptotic stability = f (t, x) is globally asymptotically stable if there exists The origin of x V (t, x) W1(x) > 0, t 0 x IRn
and V (t, 0) = 0 t 0 (positive denite condition) with W1(x) as x (radially unbounded) (t, x) W3(x) < 0 V t0 x IRn .
(t, 0) = 0 t 0 (negative denite condition) and V If moreover V (t, x) W2(x) t 0 x IRn (decrescent), the origin is globally uniformly asymptotically stable. W1(x), W2(x) and W3(x) are positive denite functions.
Theorem 2.5 Global exponential stability. = f (t, x) is globally exponentially stable if there exists a The origin of x Lyapunov function candidate V (t, x) and positive constants , , and p 1 such that: x
p
V (t, x) x ,
p
(t, x) x V
t t 0
x IRn .
If all the above conditions hold only for small x then we say that the origin is an exponentially stable equilibrium.
60
Theorem 2.6 Consider the dierential equation = f (t, x), x = f (x ), x x IRn, x IRn. t IR+
The unicity of an existing equilibrium point is necessary for the following properties (or, in other words, the following properties imply the unicity of an equilibrium) Global asymptotic stability, Global exponential stability.
Theorem 2.7 La Salle = f (x), whose origin Consider the autonomous dierential equation x x = 0 IRn is an equilibrium. Assume that there exists a globally positive denite and radially unbounded Lyapunov function candidate V (x), such that (x ) 0 V x IRn.
(x) = 0 . If Dene the set = x IRn : V x(0) = 0 is the only initial state in , such that x(t) for all t 0, then the origin x = 0 IRn is globally asymptotically stable.
Corollary 2.1 Simplied La Salle. Consider the set of autonomous dierential equations = f x (x , z ) , x z = f z (x , z ) , x IRn z IRm .
where f x(0, 0) = f z (0, 0) = 0. That is, the origin is an equilibrium point. Let V : IRn IRm IR+ be globally positive denite and radially unbounded in both arguments. Assume that there exists a globally positive denite function W : IRm IR+ such that (x , z ) = W (z ) . V If x = 0 is the only solution of f z (x, 0) = 0 then the origin [xT z T ]T = 0 is globally asymptotically stable.
Lemma 2.2 Consider the continuously dierentiable functions x : IR+ IRn, z : IR+ IRm, h : IR+ IR+ and P : IR+ IR(n+m)(n+m). Assume P (t) = P (t)T > 0 for each t IR+. T x x Dene: V (t, x, z , h) = P (t) + h(t) 0 . z z T x (t, x, z , h) = Q(t) If V 0 z x 0 0 0 z
for all t IR+, x IRn, z IRm and h IR+, where Q(t) = Q(t)T > 0 for all t 0, then,
1. x(t), z (t) and h(t) are bounded for all t 0 and 2. x(t) is square-integrable, i.e.,
x ( t)
0
dt < .
is also bounded then we have that If moreover x lim x(t) = 0 .
65
Ch. 3. Robot dynamics
We consider robot manipulators formed by an open kinematic chain.

z0 joint 2 q2 z1 link 1 joint 1 q1 q3 z2 link 2 z3 qn
x1 x.2 x= . . xm
zn joint n link n
y0 x0
Figure 18: Abstract diagram of an n-DOF robot manipulator.

The generalized joint coordinate qi is the angular displacement around zi (revolute) or linear displacement along zi (prismatic).
z1 z0 z2 q3 z4 z3
q2 q1 q4
x= x1 x2 x3
y0 x0
Figure 19: Example of a 3-DOF robot.

The vector of joint positions q has n elements q1 q2 n q= IR . . . qn The position and orientation of the robots end-eector, are collected in the vector x of operational positions . x1 x2 x= . . xm where m n.
The direct kinematic model describes the relation betwwen q and x. It is a function : IRn IRm such that x = (q ). The inverse kinematic model consists on the inverse relation of the direct kinematic model q = 1(x). The computation may be highly complex.
69
The dynamic model of a robot consists of an ordinary dierential equation. In general, these are second order nonlinear models ,q , ) = 0 , f EL(q , q , x, ) = 0 . f C (x , x stands for the forces and torques applied. The dynamic model (4) is called joint dynamic model, while (5) corresponds to the operational dynamic model. We focus on the joint dynamic model.
(4) (5)
Lagranges equations of motion

Now we describe how to derive the dynamic model of a robot. Consider the robot manipulator with n links depicted in Figure 20.
z0 joint 2 q2 z1 link 1 joint 1 q1 q3 z2 link 2 z3 qn
x1 x.2 x= . . xm
zn joint n link n
y0 x0
Figure 20: Abstract diagram of an n-DOF robot manipulator.

) is dened as The Lagrangian L(q , q ) = K (q , q ) U (q ) . L (q , q where ) is the kinetic energy function K (q , q U (q ) is the potential energy function (we assume only conservative forces) The total energy E of a robot manipulator of n DOF is ) = K (q , q ) + U (q ) E (q , q where q = [q1, , qn]T .
(6)
The equations of motion of Lagrange for a manipulator of n DOF, are given by ) ) d L(q , q L(q , q = , dt q q or in the equivalent form by ) ) d L(q , q L(q , q = i, dt q i qi where i correspond to the external as well as to other non conservative forces and torques at each joint.
i = 1, , n
(7)
The use of Lagranges equations in the derivation of the robot dynamics can be reduced to four main stages: ). 1. Computation of the kinetic energy function K(q , q 2. Computation of the potential energy function U (q ) . ). 3. Computation of the Lagrangian (6) L(q , q 4. Development of Lagranges equations (7).
74
Example 3.3
Consider the robot manipulator with 2 DOF shown in Figure 21.

z x l1 q1 I1 m1 1 lc1
q2 lc2
m2 I2
Figure 21: 2-DOF robot.

where, l1 is the length the rst link m1 and m2 are the masses of the links lc1 and lc2 are the distances of the rotating axes to the centers of their respective mass I1 and I2 denote the moments of inertia of the links q = [q1 q2]T denes the vector of joint positions Notice that the center of mass of link 2 may be physically placed out of the link itself! This is determined by the value of the constant angle
) may be decomposed by The kinetic energy function K(q , q ) + K2(q , q ), ) = K1(q , q K (q , q where ) is the kinetic energy associated to the mass m1 K1(q , q ) is the kinetic energy associated to the mass m2 K2(q , q with 1 2 2 2 ) = 1 K1(q , q m l q + 1 1 c1 1 2 2 I1 q ) = K2(q , q
m2 2 2 m2 2 2 l q + 2 2 1 1 2 lc2 q 2 +1 2 . 2 I2 q
+ m2l1lc2 cos(q1 q2 + )q 1q 2
77
) = K (q , q ) U (q ) , takes the form The Lagrangian L(q , q
) + K2(q , q ) ) = K1(q , q L(q , q 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 = (m1lc1 + m2l1 )q 1 + m2lc 2 2q 2 2 + m2l1lc2 cos(q1 q2 + )q 1q 2 1 2 1 2 + I1 q + I2 q . 2 1 2 2
78
By using Lagranges equations we have
d dt
) L(q ,q q i
) L(q ,q qi
= i,
i = 1, , n
1 =
2 2 m1lc + m l 1 2 1 1 + I1 q
+ m2l1lc2 cos(q1 q2 + ) q2
2 + m2l1lc2 sin(q1 q2 + )q 2
and, q1 2 = m2l1lc2 cos(q1 q2 + )

2 + [m2lc q2 2 + I2 ] 2 m2l1lc2 sin(q1 q2 + )q 1 .
Denoting C21 = cos(q2 q1), S21 = sin(q2 q1), one obtains 1 =

2 2 m1lc + m l 1 2 1 1 + I1 q
+ [m2l1lc2 cos( )C21 + m2l1lc2 sin( )S21] q2

2 + [m2l1lc2 cos( )S21 + m2l1lc2 sin( )C21]q 2
(8) and q1 2 = [m2l1lc2 cos( )C21 + m2l1lc2 sin( )S21]

2 + [m2lc q2 2 + I2] 2 + [m2l1lc2 cos( )S21 m2l1lc2 sin( )C21]q 1
(9)
which are of the form (4) with ,q , ) = f EL(q , q 1 RHS(8) 2 RHS(9)
where RHS(8) and RHS(9) denote the terms on the right hand side of (8) and (9) respectively.
81
Example 3.4
Consider the 3-DOF Cartesian robot manipulator shown in Figure 22.
z0 q2 z0 m3 q3 q1 y0 x0 x0 q2 m1 m2
q1 y0 q3
Figure 22: 3-DOF robot. ) = K (q , q

1 2 2 2 2 3 + [m1 + m2]q 2 + [m1 + m2 + m3]q 1 m1q .
U (q ) = [m1 + m2 + m3]gq1 .
We obtain the Lagrangian as: ) = K (q , q ) U (q ) L(q , q 1 2 2 2 m1q = 3 + [m1 + m2]q 2 + [m1 + m2 + m3]q 1 2 [m1 + m2 + m3]gq1 ,
hence, the dynamic equations result q1 + [m1 + m2 + m3]g = 1 [m1 + m2 + m3] [m1 + m2] q2 = 2 m1q 3 = 3
83
In terms of the state vector [q1 q2 q3 q 1 q 2 q 3] , above equations may be expressed as q 2 q2 q 3 q3 d = . 1 dt [ [ m + m + m ] g ] 1 1 2 3 q 1 m1 + m2 + m3 1 q 2 2 m + m 1 2 1 q 3 3 m1

q1
q 1
The necessary and sucient condition for the existence of equilibria is 1 = [m1 + m2 + m3]g , 2 = 0 and 3 = 0 Actually we have an innite number of them:
1 q 2 q 3] = [q1 q2 q3 0 0 0] [q1 q2 q3 q T T
with q1 , q2 , q3 IR.
Dynamic model in compact form

Consider a robot manipulator of n DOF composed of rigid links interconnected by frictionless joints.
T ) = 1 K (q , q M (q )q q 2
expresses the kinetic energy
where M (q ) = M (q )T > 0 for all q IRn is the n n inertia matrix. U (q ) denotes the potential energy The Lagrangian results 1 T ) = q U (q ) . M (q )q L(q , q 2
The Lagranges equations of motion ) ) L(q , q d L(q , q = , dt q q may be written as d 1 T M (q )q q 2 dt q which takes the compact form, )q + g (q ) = M (q ) q + C (q , q 1 T U (q ) + M (q )q =. q q 2 q
87
where )q C (q , q 1 (q )q TM (q )q = M q 2 q U (q ) . g (q ) = q
)q is a vector of dimension n called vector of centrifugal and C (q , q Coriolis forces, g (q ) is a vector of dimension n of gravitational forces or torques and is a vector of dimension n called the vector of external forces
) IRnn may be not unique, but C (q , q )q is indeed unique. C (q , q ) is through the Christoel symbols One way to obtain C (q , q cijk (q ) = 1 Mkj (q ) Mki(q ) Mij (q ) + . 2 qi qj qk
), is given by ), Ckj (q , q The kj th element of the matrix C (q , q c1jk (q ) c2jk (q ) q ) = Ckj (q , q . . . cnjk (q )
)q + g (q ) = may be viewed as The model M (q ) q + C (q , q q

-
ROBOT q
Figure 23: Input-output representation of a robot.
90
Example 3.6
z x l1 q1 I1 m1 1 lc1
q2 lc2
m2 I2
91
The dynamic model, for this robot, in compact form is ) C12(q , q ) C11(q , q M11(q ) M12(q ) + q q ) C22(q , q ) M21(q ) M22(q ) C21(q , q M (q ) where M11(q ) =
2 2 m1lc + m l 2 1 1 + I1
= ( t)
) C (q , q
M12(q ) = [m2l1lc2 cos( )C21 + m2l1lc2 sin( )S21] M21(q ) = [m2l1lc2 cos( )C21 + m2l1lc2 sin( )S21]
2 M22(q ) = [m2lc 2 + I2 ]
) = 0 C11(q , q ) = [m2l1lc2 cos( )S21 + m2l1lc2 sin( )C21]q 2 C12(q , q ) = [m2l1lc2 cos( )S21 m2l1lc2 sin( )C21]q C21(q , q 1 ) = 0 C22(q , q That is, the gravitational forces vector is zero.
93
)q + g (q ) = in terms of the state The dynamic model M (q ) q + C (q , q T ]T can be expressed as vector [q T q q q d . = dt )q g (q )] q M (q )1 [ (t) C (q , q
(10)
The necessary and sucient condition for the existence of equilibria is (t) be constant (say, ) and there exist a solution q IRn to g (q ) = . T ]T = [q T 0T ]T IR2n. The equilibria are given by [q T q
T ]T = When 0, the possible equilibria of (10) are given by [q T q [q T 0T ]T where q is a solution of g (q ) = 0 U (q ) As g (q ) = q , we have that q corresponds to the vectors where the potential energy possesses extrema.
95
Dynamic model of robots with actuators

q2
v2
v1
q1
Figure 25: 2-DOF robot. On a real robot manipulator the torques vector , is delivered by actuators electromechanical, pneumatic or hydraulic.
They have their own dynamics,
v2
q2
q1
v1

Actuators with linear dynamics

Ka , Kb , Ra Jm v fm q
1:r
Figure 27: Diagram of a DC motor. Simplied linear dynamic model of a DC motor KaKb Ka q + 2 = v Ra r rRa
Jmq + fmq +
where:
Jm : rotors inertia [kg m2], Ka : motor-torque constant [N m/A], Ra : armature resistance [], Kb : back emf [V s/rad], fm : rotors friction coecient with respect to its hinges [N m], : net torque applied after the set of gears at the loads axis [N m], q : angular position of the loads axis [rad], r : gear reduction ratio (in general r v : armature voltage [V].
1),
We can obtain + Bq + R = K v Jq with J = diag {Jmi } KaKb B = diag fmi + Ra 1 R = diag 2 ri Ka 1 K = diag Ra i ri
100
The complete dynamic model of a manipulator (considering friction in the joints) including its actuators is + R C (q , q )q + R g (q ) + R f (q ) + B q = K v . (11) (R M (q ) + J ) q
v ACTUATORS
ROBOT q
q q
Figure 28: Block-diagram of a robot with its actuators.
101
Example 3.8
Consider the pendulum depicted in Figure 29.
fL lb Jm v fm Ka , Kb , Ra
1:r
mb , J m q
Figure 29: Pendular device with a DC motor. The equation of motion for this device including its load is given by + [mblb + ml] g sin(q ) = Jq + fLq
where J : arms inertia without load (i.e., with m=0), mb : arms mass (without load), lb : distance from the rotating axis to the arms center of mass (without load), m : loads mass (assumed to be punctual), l : distance from the rotating axis to the load m, g : gravity acceleration, : applied torque at the rotating axis, fL : friction coecient of the arm and its load.
The equation above may also be written in the compact form + fLq + kL sin(q ) = JLq
where JL = J + ml2 kL = [mblb + ml]g .
104
The complete dynamic model of the pendular device may be obtained as: Jm + JL fL KaKb Ka kL + + sin( q ) = v, q + f q + m 2 2 2 r r Ra r rRa
where, we identify M (q ) = JL 1 R = r2 KaKb B = fm + Ra C (q, q ) = 0 = Jm Ka K = rRa f (q ) = fLq g (q ) = kL sin(q ) . J
105
When the gear ratios ri are suciently large, the robot-with-actuators equation (11) may be approximated by + Bq Kv . Jq
In the opposite case, the equation (11) may be rewritten as )q + g (q ) + f (q ) + R1B q = R1K v M (q ) q + C (q , q where M (q ) = M (q ) + R1J .
106
] we have In terms of the state vector [q q
q q d . = dt C (q , q )q g (q ) f (q ) q M (q )1 R1 K v R1 B q The problem of motion control is: d and q d, given q d, q determine v , to be applied to the motors, in such a manner that q follow precisely q d .
107
Ch. 4. Properties of the dynamic model

Dynamic model for n-DOF robots )q + g (q ) = . M (q ) q + C (q , q These properties, may be classied as follows. Properties of the inertia matrix M (q ), ), Properties of the centrifugal and Coriolis forces matrix C (q , q Properties of the gravitational forces and torques vector g (q ), Residual dynamics.
Properties of the inertia matrix

Property 4.1 Inertia matrix M (q ) The inertia matrix M (q ) = M (q )T > 0 IRnn, satises the following properties:
There exists a real positive number such that 1. M (q ) I q IRn
where I denotes the identity matrix of dimension n n. The matrix M (q )1 exists and is positive denite.
109
For robots having only revolute joints there exists a constant > 0 such that Max{M (q )} q IRn . One way of computing is 2. n max |Mij (q )|
i,j,q
where Mij (q ) stands for the ij th element of the matrix M (q ).
110
For robots having only revolute joints there exists a constant kM > 0 such that 3. M (x)z M (y)z kM xy z
for all vectors x, y , z IRn. One simple way to determine kM is as follows. Mij (q ) . kM n2 max i,j,k,q qk
111
For robots having only revolute joints there exists a number kM > 0 such that 4. for all x, y IRn. M (x)y kM y
112
The centrifugal and Coriolis forces matrix
) Property 4.2 Coriolis matrix C (q , q ) IRnn satises the The centrifugal and Coriolis forces matrix C (q , q following.
1.
) may be not unique For a given manipulator, the matrix C (q , q )q is unique. but the vector C (q , q
2.
C (q , 0) = 0 for all vectors q IRn.
113
For all vectors q , x, y , z IRn and scalars we have that 3. C (q , x )y = C (q , y )x C (q , z + x)y = C (q , z )y + C (q , x)y .
114
The vector C (q , x)y may be written in the form xTC1(q )y T C (q , x )y = x C 2 (q )y . . xTCn(q )y where for all matrix of the
1 2
4.
Ck (q ) are symmetric matrices of dimension n n k = 1, 2, , n. The ij -th element Ckij (q ) of the Ck (q ) corresponds to the so-called Christoel symbol rst kind cjik (q ) and which is dened as cijk (q ) = Mkj (q ) Mij (q ) Mki (q ) . + qi qj q
k
115
For robots having exclusively revolute joints, there exists a number kC1 > 0 such that 5. for all q , x, y IRn. C (q , x)y kC1 x y
116
For robots having exclusively revolute joints, there exist numbers kC1 > 0 and kC2 > 0 such that 6. C (x , z )w C (y , v )w kC1 z v +kC2 x y for all vector v , x, y , z , w IRn. w w z
117
), dened using the Christoel symbol is related to The matrix C (q , q the inertia matrix M (q ) by the expression x 7.
T
1 ) x = 0 M (q ) C (q , q 2
, x IRn q, q
and as a matter of fact, 1 2 M (q ) C (q , q ) is skewsymmetric. Equivalently, (q ) 2 C (q , q ) is antisymmetric, and it is also true that the matrix M (q ) = C (q , q ) + C (q , q )T . M
118
) is derived, it always Independently of the way in which C (q , q satises q

T
1 ) q =0 M (q ) C (q , q 2
IRn . q, q
119
The vector of gravitational torques

Property 4.3 Gravity vector g (q ) The gravitational torques vector g (q ) IRn is continuous and therefore bounded for each bounded q and also satises the following.
are correlated as The vector g (q ) and the velocity vector q

T
1.
0
(t) dt = U (q (T )) U (q (0)) g (q (t))Tq for all T IR+ .
120
For robots having only revolute joints there exists a number kU such that 2.
0 T
(t) dt + U (q (0)) kU g (q (t))Tq for all T IR+ and where kU = min {U (q )}.
q
121
For robots having only revolute joints, the vector g (q ) is Lipschitz, that is, there exists a constant kg > 0 such that g (x) g (y ) kg x y 3. for all x, y IRn. A simple way to compute kg is by evaluating its partial derivative gi(q ) kg n max . i,j,q qj
122
Furthermore, kg satises g (q ) g (q ) Max kg q q .
123
4.
For robots having only revolute joints there exists a constant k such that g (q ) k for all q IRn.
124
Residual dynamics
) is dened as follows. The residual dynamics h( q, q ) = [M (q d) M (q d q )] q d h( q, q ) q d ) C (q d q , q d q d + C (q d , q ), + g (q d ) g (q d q and with an abuse of notation it may be written as ) = [M (q d) M (q )] q d + [C (q d, q d ) C (q , q )] q d + g (q d ) g (q ). h( q, q
125
Denition 4.1 Vectorial tangent hyperbolic function tanh(x1) . . tanh(x) := tanh(xn)

tanh(x)
1.0 0.5 0.0
. . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .. . . . . ...................................................... . . . . ........... . . . . . . . ... . . ...... . ... . .. . .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... . . . .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... .... .... .. ... . . . . ... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... .... .... .. . . . ....................................... .. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... . .
(12)
0.5 1.0
4 3 2 1
3 x 4
Figure 30: Tangent hyperbolic tanh(x).

The rst partial derivative of tanh(x) is given by tanh (x) =: Sech2(x) = diag{sech2(xi)} x where sech(xi) := 1 . x x i i e e
127
The vectorial tangent hyperbolic function satises the following properties. IRn For any x, x tanh(x) 1 x tanh(x) 2 tanh(x)
2
3 tanh(x)T x
4 x Sech2(x)x
where 1, , 4 > 0. With tanh(x) dened as in (12), the constants 1 = 1, 2 = n, 3 = 1, 4 = 1.

) Property 4.4 Vector residual dynamics h( q, q ) of n 1 depends on The vector of residual dynamics h( q, q , , q q d, and q d (supposed to be bounded) q d, q d M the supreme values over the norms d M and q We denote by q of the desired velocity and acceleration. ) has the following property: In addition, h( q, q
129
There exist constants kh1, kh2 0 such that the norm of the residual dynamics satises 1. ) kh1 q + kh2 tanh( h( q, q q) IRn, where tanh( , q q ) is the vectorial tangent for all q hyperbolic function introduced in the latter Denition.
130
where kh2
s2 s2 tanh s1
d kC1 q with
kh1 ,
d s1 = kg + kM q and d s2 = 2 k + kM q
d M + kC2 q
2 M
d M + kC1 q
2 M
.
131
Ch. 5. Case study: The Pelican prototype robot
Figure 31: Pelican: experimental prototype from CICESE, Robotics lab. The prototype is a vertical planar manipulator two links connected to revolute joints.
The links are direct driven by two brushless DC motors.

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2
Figure 32: Diagram of the Pelican prototype robot with 2 degrees of freedom.
Table 1: Physical parameters of Pelican prototype manipulator.

Description Length of Link 1 Length of Link 2 Distance to the center of mass (Link 1) Distance to the center of mass (Link 2) Mass of Link 1 Mass of Link 2 Inertia rel. to center of mass (Link 1) Inertia rel. to center of mass (Link 2) Gravity acceleration Notation Value 0.26 0.26 0.0983 0.0229 6.5225 2.0458 0.1213 0.0116 9.81 Units m m m m kg kg kg m2 kg m2 m/sec2
l1 l2 lc1 lc2 m1 m2 I1 I2 g
134
The chapter is organized as follows: Direct kinematics. Inverse kinematics. Dynamic model. Model properties of the dynamic model. Reference trajectories.
Direct kinematics
For this case, the problem consists on expressing x = (q 1 , q 2 ) , y where : IR2 IR2. The direct kinematic model is given by x = l1sin(q1) + l2sin(q1 + q2) y = l1cos(q1) l2cos(q1 + q2) .
136
It may also be obtained the relation between the velocities, x y = l1cos(q1) + l2cos(q1 + q2) l2cos(q1 + q2) l1sin(q1) + l2sin(q1 + q2) l2sin(q1 + q2) q 1 q 2 q 1 q 2
= J (q ) where
(q ) IR22 is called Jacobian matrix or, Jacobian of the J (q ) = q robot,
137
and the Relation of accelerations d x = J (q ) y dt where we have dened d J (q ) := dt (q ) q i. i =1 q i

n
q 1 q 1 + J (q ) q 2 q 2
138
Inverse kinematics
q1 = 1(x, y ), where 1 : IR2 and IR2. q2
y
It has the form
qd 1
qd 2
Figure 33: Two solutions to the inverse kinematics problem. It may have multiple solutions or no solution at all!
qd1 x
Figure 34: No solution to the inverse kinematics problem.

y qd2
x qd1
Figure 35: No solution to the inverse kinematics problem.

A practical interest relies on its utility to dene q d = [qd1 qd2 ]T from specied desired positions xd and yd. q d1 = 1(x, y ). q d2 q d1 q d2 = tan1 = cos
1
xd yd
tan1
l2sin(qd2 ) l1 + l2cos(qd2 ) .
2 2 2 x2 d + yd l1 l2 2 l1 l2
The desired joint velocities may be obtained as q d1 q d2

= J 1(q d)
x d y d
141
and the desired joint accelerations as q d1 q d2 = J

1
d x d x d 1 1 J (q d ) J (q d ) (q d ) + J (q d ) y d y d dt d 1 J (q d ) dt
S12 C12 l S l S 1 2 1 2 1 J (q d ) = l1S1 l2S12 l1C1 + l2C12 , l1l2S2 l1l2S2 and d1 l2S12(q d1 + q d2 ) l2S12(q d1 + q d2 ) l1S1q d , [J (q d)] = dt l 1 C1 q d1 + l2C12(q d1 + q d2 ) l2C12(q d1 + q d2 )
where
where for simplicity S1 = sin(qd1 ), S2 = sin(qd2 ), C1 = cos(qd1 ), S12 = sin(qd1 + qd2 ), C12 = cos(qd1 + qd2 ) . Typically, singular congurations are those in which the end-eector of the robot is located at the physical boundary of the workspace
y qd2
x qd1
Figure 36: Bentover singular conguration.
143
Dynamic model
Lagrangian equations We start by writing the kinetic energy: ) = K1(q , q ) + K2(q , q ) K (q , q
where ) is the kinetic energy associated to the mass m1 K1(q , q ) is associated to the mass m2 K2(q , q
with ) = K1(q , q = and ) = K2(q , q = 1 1 T m2v 2 v 2 + I2(q 1 + q 2)2 2 2 m2 2 2 m2 2 2 2 l1 q lc2 q 1 + 1q 2 + q 2 1 + 2q 2 2 2 + m2l1lc2 q +q 1q 2 cos(q2) 1 1 + I 2 (q 1 + q 2)2. 2
1 1 2 T m1v 1 v 1 + I1q 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 m1lc1q 1 + I1q . 2 2 1
Similarly the potential energy is given by U (q ) = U 1 (q ) + U 2 (q ) where, assuming that the potential energy is zero at y = 0, we obtain that U1(q ) = m1lc1g cos(q1) U2(q ) = m2l1g cos(q1) m2lc2g cos(q1 + q2) .
146
The Lagrangian is ) = K (q , q ) U (q ) L(q , q 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 [m1lc1 + m2l1 ]q = 1 + m2lc + 2q 1q 2 + q 2 2 q 2 2 2 1 +q 1q 2 + m2l1lc2 cos(q2) q + [m1lc1 + m2l1]g cos(q1) + m2glc2 cos(q1 + q2) 1 2 1 + I1 q 1 + I2[q 1 + q 2]2. 2 2
d dt L q i L q = i i
Applying the Lagranges equations that

i = 1, 2 we get
147
1 =
2 2 2 m1lc + m l + m l 1 2 2 1 1 c2 + 2m2 l1 lc2 cos(q2) + I1 + I2 q 2 2 + m2lc 2 + m2 l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I2 q 2 2m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q 1q 2 m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q 2
+ [m1lc1 + m2l1]g sin(q1) + m2glc2 sin(q1 + q2) and 2 =

2 2 m2lc + m l l cos( q ) + I + [ m l q2 q 2 1 c 2 2 2 1 2 2 c2 + I2] 2 + m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q 1 + m2glc2 sin(q1 + q2)
148
Model in compact form ) C12(q , q ) C11(q , q g (q ) M11(q ) M12(q ) + + 1 q q ) C22(q , q ) M21(q ) M22(q ) C21(q , q g 2 (q ) M (q ) ) C (q , q g (q ) = ,
149
where
2 2 2 M11(q ) = m1lc + m + l l 2 1 1 c2 + 2l1 lc2 cos(q2) + I1 + I2 2 M12(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2) + I2 2 M21(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2) + I2 2 M22(q ) = m2lc 2 + I2
) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q C11(q , q 2 ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2) [q C12(q , q 1 + q 2] ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q 1 C21(q , q ) = 0 C22(q , q g1(q ) = [m1lc1 + m2l1] g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) .
In terms of these state variables, the dynamic model of the robot may be written as q1 q 1 d q2 = q 2 . q dt 1 1 )q g (q )] M ( q ) [ (t) C (q , q q 2 The formulas and numeric values of the constants Max{M }, kM , kC1 , kC2 and kg are summarized in Tables below
151
Table 2: Parameters for the Pelican prototype.

Max {M } n max Mij (q )
i,j,q
kM
n2
i,j,k,q
max
Mij (q) qk
k C1
n2
max Ckij (q ) i,j,q
k C2
i,j,k,l,q
max
Ckij (q ) ql
kg
max
gi (q ) i,j,q qj
152
Table 3: Numeric values of the parameters for the CICESE prototype.

Parameter Value 0.7193 0.0974 0.0487 0.0974 23.94 Units
Max {M } kM k C1 k C2 kg
kg m2 kg m2 kg m2 kg m2 kg m2 /sec2
153
Desired reference trajectories
We have selected the following reference trajectories in joint space: q d1 q d2 = b1[1 e

2.0 t3
3
] + c1[1 e
2.0 t3
3
] sin(1t) ] sin(2t)
[rad] (13)
b2[1 e2.0
] + c2[1 e2.0
where b1 = /4 [rad], c1 = /9 [rad] and 1 = 4 [rad/sec], and b2 = /3 [rad], c2 = /6 [rad] and 2 = 3 [rad/sec].
The gure depicts the graphs of above reference trajectories against time.
2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
[rad]
.. d2 ...... ...... ...... ... .... . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q d1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . ... .. ... . . ... .. ... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .... .... .... .... .... . ...... . . . . .. .. .. . . ..... ..... ..... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..
10 t [sec]
Figure 37: Desired reference trajectories.
155
||qd (t)|| [rad] 2.0

1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
....... . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ......... . . . . . . . . . .... ..... . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . ......... .. . ........ . . .. . . . ... .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . ...... ..... . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . .....
10 t [sec]
Figure 38: Norm of the desired reference positions.
156
d(t)|| [ rad ||q sec ] . 2.4 .. . . .

1.8 1.2 0.6 0.0
.. . . . . . .... .... .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ..
10 t [sec]
Figure 39: Norm of the desired reference velocities vector. q d1 = 6b1t e q d2 = 6b2t e
2 2.0 t3
+ 6c1t e + 6c2t e
2 2.0 t3
sin(1t) + [c1 c1e
2.0 t3
] cos (1t)1, (14)

157
2 2.0 t3
2 2.0 t3
sin(2t) + [c2 c2e
2.0 t3
] cos (2t)2 .
in [ rad/sec ].
d (t)|| [ rad ||q sec ] 10 .. . . .

8 6 4 2 0
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... ... ... ... ... . . . .. . . . . .. .. . .. ... ... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... . . . . . . .. . . . . . . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ... ... . ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10 t [sec]
Figure 40: Norm of the desired reference accelerations vector.
158
Reference accelerations: q d1 = 12b1te

2.0 t3
36b1t e
t3
4 2.0 t3
+ 12c1te
2.0 t3
sen(1t)
36c1t e
4 2.0 t3
sen(1t) + 12c1t e
2 ]sen(1t)1
2 2.0 t3
cos (1t)1
[c1 c1e2.0
2.0 t3
rad / sec2 ,
2.0 t3
q d2 = 12b2te
36b2t e
4 2.0 t3
+ 12c2te
sin (2t)
36c2t e
4 2.0 t3
sin (2t) + 12c2t e

2 ] sin (2t)2
2 2.0 t3
cos (2t)2
[c2 c2e
2.0 t3
rad / sec2 . (15)
159
From above gures we deduce the following upperbounds on the norms:
qd d q d q
Max Max Max
1.92 [rad] 2.33 [rad/sec] 9.52 [rad/sec] .

2
160
Part II SET-POINT CONTROL
161
Introduction
Introduction
Motion controllers are clasied Set-point controllers (q d(t) = q d, is a constant vector), and tracking controllers (q d(t) is a time variant vector). )q + Consider the dynamic model of a robot manipulator M (q ) q + C (q , q g (q ) = , which can be written as: q q d = dt )q g (q )] q M (q )1 [ (t) C (q , q
162
Introduction
where M (q ) IRnn is the inertia matrix, )q IRn is the vector of centrifugal and Coriolis forces, C (q , q g (q ) IRn is el vector of gravitational forces and torques and IRn is a vector of external forces and torques applied at the joints. ,q IRn denote the position, velocity and joint The vectors q , q acceleration respectively.
163
Introduction
The objective of set-point control consists on nding such that

t
lim q (t) = q d
where q d IRn is a given constant vector which represents the desired set-point. It is convenient to rewrite the set point control objective as
t
( t) = 0 lim q
IRn stands for the joint position errors where q (t) := q d q (t) . q
Introduction
In general, a control law may be expressed as ,q , q d , M (q ), C (q , q ), g (q )) . = (q , q However, for practical purposes, it is desirable that the controller does not . depend on the joint acceleration q
qd d q d q
CONTROLLER
ROBOT
q q
Figure 41: Set-point control: closed-loop system.

Introduction
A methodology to analyze the stability may be summarized in: 1. Derivation of the closed loop dynamic equation. 2. Representation of the closed loop equation in the state-space form, i.e., d qd q q dt ), g (q )) . , q d , M (q ), C (q , q = f (q , q
qd
CONTROLLER + ROBOT
q q
Figure 42: Set-point representation.

control
closed-loop
system:
Input-output
166
Introduction
3. Study of the existence and possible unicity of the equilibrium for the closed loop equation. 4. Proposition of a Lyapunov function candidate to study the stability 5. Alternatively to step 4), determine the qualitative behavior of the solutions of the closed loop equation.
167
Introduction
The controllers that we present may be called conventional (commonly used in industrial robots). Velocity feedback Proportional control and Proportional Derivative (PD) control PD control with gravity compensation PD control with precalculated gravity compensation Proportional Integral Derivative (PID) control
168
Ch. 6. Velocity feedback proportional control and PD control

qd Kp ROBOT q q
Kv
Figure 43: Velocity feedback proportional control. Kv q , where Control law given by = Kpq Kp, Kv IRnn are symmetric positive denite matrices q d IRn corresponds to the desired joint position, = q d q IRn is called position error. q
ROBOT
q q
Kv d q qd
Kp
Figure 44: PD Control. , where + Kv q The PD control law is given by: = Kpq Kp, Kv IRnn are also symmetric positive denite = q (both control laws are identical). When q d, is constant, then, q
170
We assume a constant q d, then, the closed loop equation may be rewritten q q d . = dt Kv q C (q , q )q g (q )] q M (q )1 [Kpq It may have multiple equilibria given by q
T
T T
= [sT 0T ]T where s IRn is solution of Kps g (q d s) = 0 .
171
Robots without gravity term

Dynamic model given by )q = . M (q ) q + C (q , q Assuming that q d is constant, the closed loop equation becomes q q d = dt )1 [Kpq , q )q ] Kv q C (q d q q M (q d q It represents an autonomous dierential equation (since q d is constant). T q T The origin q
= 0 is the only equilibrium of this equation.

172
To study the stability of the equilibrium, consider Lyapunov function candidate T q K 1 p 2 0 q 0 ) M (q d q q q
) = V ( q, q
1 T 1 T + q . M (q )q Kpq q 2 2
) is positive denite since M (q ) > 0 and Kp > 0. V ( q, q
173
) results The total derivative of V ( q, q ( ) = q TKv q V q, q T 0 0 q q 0, = 0 Kv q q By Theorem 2.3 we conclude that the origin is stable and, (t) and q (t) are bounded. the solutions q By applying the La Salles theorem (Theorem 2.7) we have that
174
the set is given by = = (x ) = 0 x IR2n : V x= q q ( ) = 0 q, q IR2n : V
IRn, q = 0 IRn} , = {q (0)T q (0)T where q = 0 IR2n is the only initial condition in for which x(t) for all t 0. This is enough to establish global asymptotic stability of the origin, T T T q = 0 IR2n. q
T
175
Robots with gravity term

The closed loop equation is q q d . = dt Kv q C (q , q )q g (q )] q M (q )1 [Kpq
(16)
The study of this section is limited to robots having only revolute joints. It may have multiple equilibria given by q
T
T T
= [sT 0T ]T where s IRn is solution of Kps g (q d s) = 0 .
176
Example 6.1
Consider the model of an ideal pendulum Jq + mgl sin(q ) = .
l g m

The equilibria expression takes the form kps mgl sin(qd s) = 0 . For the sake of illustration consider the following numeric values J =1 mgl = 1 kp = 0.25 qd = /2. The closed loop system under PD control has the equilibria q q 1.25 2.13 3.56 , , 0 0 0 .
178
Unicity of the equilibrium. The equilibria of the closed loop equation (16) satisfy T T q q
T
= sT 0T
, where
1 g (q d s ) = f (s , q d ) . s IRn is solution of s = Kp
For all vectors x, y , q d IRn, we get that f (x , q d ) f (y , q d ) kg xy min{Kp}
If min{Kp} > kg we have (by contraction mapping theorem) the only equilibrium is q
T
= s
179
Arbitrarily bounded position and velocity error. Case where Kp is not restricted to satisfy min{Kp} > kg , but it is enough that Kp be positive denite. Dene the following non-negative function 1 T 1 T + q ) = q + U (q ) kU 0 . M (q )q Kpq V ( q, q 2 2 where kU = minq {U (q )}
) yields The time derivative of V ( q, q 1 T ( +q ) = q TM (q ) +q TKpq T g (q ) , M (q )q V q, q q+ q 2

Q
T Kv q = q T 0 0 q q 0. = 0 Kv q q Invoking Lemma 2.2, we conclude (t) and q (t) are bounded for all t, and q the velocities vector is square integrable, that is,
(t) 2dt < . q

181
Moreover, the exact explicit bounds hold, for all t 0: (0)) 2V ( q (0), q min{Kp} (0) + q (0)TKpq (0)TM (q (0))q (0) + 2U (q (0)) 2kU q = min{Kp} (17) (0)) 2V ( q (0), q min{M (q )} (0)TM (q (0))q (0) + q (0)TKpq (0) + 2U (q (0)) 2kU q = min{M (q )} (18)
( t) q
( t) q
Example 6.2
Consider again the ideal pendulum from Example 6.1 Jq + mgl sin(q ) = ,
l g m

The potential energy function is U (q ) = mgl(1 cos(q )) and the constant kU is zero. Consider next the numeric values J =1 mgl = 1 kp = 0.25 kv = 0.50 qd = /2. Assume that we apply the PD controller to drive it from the initial conditions q (0) = 0 and q (0) = 0
184
According to the bounds (17) and (18), we get q 2(t) q 2(0) = 2.46 rad2 t0
3 2 1 0 0
q (t)2 [rad2 ]
..... ... ... ... ... ............ ...... ................................................................................................................ ... . . . . ....... ........ ..
10
15
20 t [sec]
Figure 47: Graph of q (t)2 .

and kp 2 2 q (0) = 0.61 q ( t) ml2

0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00
2 q (t)2 [( rad sec ) ]
rad sec
t0
.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . ... ...... . . . . . ..... ................... ......... . . ..... .... .......... .............................................................................. ..
10
15
20 t [sec]
Figure 48: Graph of q ( t) 2
186
Is interesting to observe lim q (t) 1.25 = q ( t) 0 .
That is, the solutions tend to one of the three equilibria determined in Example 6.1
187
Example 6.3
Consider the 2-DOF prototype robot studied in Chapter 5,
y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2
whose vector of gravitational torques g (q ) is g1(q ) = (m1lc1 + m2l1)g sin(q1) + m2glc2 sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2glc2 sin(q1 + q2). The control objective consists on making that lim q (t) = q d = /10 /30 [rad].
It may be veried that g (q d) = 0 T T q = 0 IR4 of the closed loop equation with the The origin q PD controller, is not an equilibrium.
Consider the PD controller Kv q = Kpq with the following numeric values Kp = 30 0 , 0 30 Kv = 7 0 . 0 3
(0) = 0. The initial conditions are xed to q (0) = 0 and q
190
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
[rad]
..... ... q ....1 .... ...... .......... ....................................................................................................... 0.1309 ......................... ..... q ...... 2 ................. 0.0174 .......................................................................................................... . . . . ..... . .... . . . .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ... .. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... .... . . . .. .. .. .. . . .. . ..
0.1
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 t [sec]
Figure 50: Position errors q 1 and q 2. One may appreciate that limt q 1(t) = 0.1309 and limt q 2(t) = 0.0174 therefore, as it was expected, the control objective is not achieved
191
Ch. 7. PD control with gravity compensation

g (q ) q q Kv d q qd Kp
ROBOT
Figure 51: PD control with gravity compensation. + g (q ) where + Kv q The control law is given by = Kpq Kp, Kv IRnn are positive denite symmetric matrices.
Global asymptotic stability by La Salles theorem
Considering q d as constant, the closed loop equation may be written as q q d = dt )1 [Kpq , q )q ] Kv q C (q d q q M (q d q T q T The origin q
T
= 0 IR2n is the unique equilibrium.
193
To study the stability of the origin, consider Lyapunov function candidate T q K 1 p 2 0 q q 0 ) q M (q d q
) = V ( q, q
1 T 1 T + q M (q )q Kpq q 2 2
) is positive denite since M (q ) > 0 and Kp > 0 V ( q, q
194
Its total derivative with respect to time is ( ) = q TKv q V q, q T 0 0 q q 0 = 0 Kv q q ( ) 0 because Kv > 0 V q, q Consequently, by Theorem 2.3 the origin is stable and all the solutions (t) and q (t) are bounded. q
195
By applying the La Salles theorem (Theorem 2.7) we have that the set is given by = = (x ) = 0 x IR2n : V q x= q ( ) = 0 q, q IR2n : V
IRn, q = 0 IRn} , = {q (0)T = 0 IR2n is the only initial condition in (0)T q where q for which x(t) for all t 0. This is enough to establish global asymptotic stability of the origin, T T q T = 0 IR2n. q (t) = 0 and limt q (t) = 0 (the set-point control Hence, limt q objective is achieved).
Example 7.1
Consider the Pelican robot studied in Chapter 5

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2
Figure 52: Diagram of the Pelican robot.

The components of the vector of gravitational torques g (q ) are given by g1(q ) = (m1lc1 + m2l1)g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) . Consider the PD control with gravity compensation, where Kp = diag{kp} = diag{30} [Nm/rad] Kv = diag{kv } = diag{7, 3} [Nm sec/rad] .
The components of , are given by 1 kv q 1 + g1(q ) 1 = kpq 2 kv q 2 + g2(q ) . 2 = kpq
198
The initial conditions are chosen as q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 q 1(0) = 0, q 2(0) = 0 , and the desired joint positions as qd1 = /10, qd2 = /30 [rad] , hence, the initial state is taken to be 0.3141 /10 (0) q /30 0.1047 = 0 = 0 . (0) q 0 0
199
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
[rad]
..... ... ... q .... 1 .... .... ...... ........ ..... q ................. ...... 2 0.0620 ................................................................................... .......................... .............. ............................................................................................................. 0.0144 . .. . . . . . .... . . .. .. .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ... . ..... . . .... . . . .. . .. .. .
0.1
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 t [sec]
Figure 53: Position errors q 1 and q 2. From Figure above, steady state position errors due to to unmodelled friction phenomenon, can be seen.
200
Lyapunov function for global asymptotic stability

It is convenient to cite some properties of the vectorial function. tanh(x) = [ tanh(x1) tanh(x2) tanh(xn)]T tanh(x)
1.0 0.5 0.0
. . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... .................................................. . ..... ..... ..... .. . ................ . . . . . . . ... . .... . . . . . .. . .. . ... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ... . . .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... .... .... .. . .... . . . .. . . ... . . . . .. . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... .... .... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................................... .. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... . .
0.5 1.0
4 3 2 1
Figure 54: Tangent hyperbolic function, tanh(x) where tanh(x) =

ex ex ex +ex
.
201
|x| | tanh(x)|, and 1 | tanh(x)| for all x IR therefore,

n x x IR tanh(x) n x IRn tanh(x) = 0 if and only if x = 0. For a symmetric positive denite matrix A, it has
1 T 1 min{A} tanh( Aq q) q 2 2 If moreover, A is diagonal, then
IRn q
min{A} tanh( q) tanh( q )T A q

IRn . q
202
We present now an alternative stability analysis. Consider the Lyapunov function candidate 1 T 1 T ) = q + q tanh( M (q )q Kpq V ( q, q q )T M (q )q 2 2 where > 0 is a constant suciently small so as to satisfy simultaneously, min{Kp}min{M } 2 > 2 Max {M } (20) (19)
4min{Kp}min{Kv } >. (21) 2 { K } + 4 { K } [ n k + { M } ] v min p C1 Max Max There always exists > 0 arbitrarily small satisfying (20) and (21). ) > 0 because Kp > 0 and satises (20). V ( q, q
The time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate yields (19). ( tanh( + q T Sech2( ) = q T Kv q q )T M (q )q q )T Kpq V q, q )T q tanh( , q )T C (q , q + tanh( q )T Kv q and is upperbounded by ( ) V q, q where min{Kp} Q= 1 2 Max {Kv }
tanh( q) q
tanh( q) q
1 Max {Kv } 2 . 1 { K } n k { M } v C1 Max min

204
( ) is a negative denite function because V q, q min{Kp} > 0 and
4min{Kp}min{Kv } > . 2 Max{Kv } + 4min{Kp}[ nkC 1 + Max{M }]
Finally, Theorem 2.4 allows to establish global asymptotic stability of the origin.
205
Ch. 8. PD control with desired gravity compensation

g (q d ) ROBOT q q
Kv d q qd
Kp
Figure 55: PD Control with desired gravity compensation. + g (q d), where + Kv q Control law given by = Kpq Kp, Kv IRnn are symmetric positive denite matrices g (q d) may be evaluated oine, it is not necessary anymore to evaluate g (q ) in real time.
Considering the desired position q d to be constant, the closed-loop equation may be written as q q d = dt Kv q C (q , q )q + g (q d) g (q )] q M (q )1 [Kpq T q T q
T
(22)
= 0 IR2n is an equilibrium point.
, may have the equation There are as many equilibria as solutions in q ) g (q d ) . = g (q d q Kpq = 0 IRn is the unique solution. If Kp > > 0 (suciently ), then q
Example 8.1
Consider the model of an ideal pendulum Jq + mgl sin(q ) =
l g m

where g (q ) = mgl sin(q ). The equilibria equation takes the form: = mgl [sin(qd q ) sin(qd)] . kpq Consider the following numeric values, J =1 mgl = 1 kp = 0.25 qd = /2 . Either via a graphical method or numeric algorithms, one may verify the equilibria, q 0 0.51 4.57 , , . q 0 0 0
Consider now a larger value for kp (suciently large), e.g., kp = 1.25 In this scenario the origin is the unique equilibrium, i.e., q 0 = IR2 . q 0
210
Boundedness of position and velocity errors, q and q

Assume that Kp and Kv are positive denite (without assuming that Kp is suciently large). Then For a desired constant position q d, the closed loop equation has an equilibrium at the origin, but there might also be other equilibria. (t) and q (t) remain bounded for all initial conditions. In spite of this, q
Dene the following non-negative function: 1 T ) = K (q , q ) + U (q ) kU + q Kpq V ( q, q 2 1 T 1 g (q d ) + q g (q d) + g (q d)TKp 2 where

T ) = 1 denotes the kinetic energy K (q , q M (q )q q 2
U (q ) denotes the potential energy and kU = minq {U (q )} .

) along the trajectories of the closed loop The time derivative of V ( q, q system results
Q
( ) = q T Kv q . V q, q By invoking Lemma 2.2, we conclude that (t) and q (t) are bounded q (t), is square integrable, that is, q
(t) 2dt < . q

0
213
The explicit upper-bounds on the position and velocity errors are: g (q d ) + g (q d )

2
( t) q
(0)) + 2min{Kp}V ( q (0), q
min{Kp}
(23)
for all t 0, and ( t) q for all t 0.

2
(0)) 2V ( q (0), q min{M (q )}
(24)
214
Example 8.2
Consider again the model of the ideal pendulum Jq + mgl sin(q ) = ,
l g m

The potential energy function is U (q ) = mgl[1 cos(q )] and kU = 0. Consider the numeric values J =1 mgl = 1 kp = 0.25 kv = 0.50 qd = /2 . Assume that we use the PD control with desired gravity compensation to control it from the initial conditions q (0) = 0 and q (0) = 0. It is easy to verify that g (qd) = mgl sin(/2) = 1 1 1 2 kpq (0) + mglq (0) + (mgl)2 = 3.87 . V ( q (0), q (0)) = 2 2kp
According to the bounds (23) and (24), we get mgl + 2 q ( t) [mgl + kpq (0)] + (mgl)2 2 117.79 [ rad ] kp
2
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
q (t)2 [rad2 ]
..... .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . ........... .. . ... ...... .......................................................................... . . ......... . . . . . .. . . .. . . ........ .............. ..............
10
20
30 t [sec]
Figure 58: Graph of position errors, q (t)2.

and
q 2 ( t)
2 kp 2 1 q (0) + mglq (0) + (mgl)2 7.75 J 2 2kp
rad sec
3 2 1 0
2 q (t)2 [( rad sec ) ]

.... . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . ..... . . . . . . . . .. .... . . ............... . . . .... .................................................................................................... ..
10
20
30 t [sec]
Figure 59: Graph of velocities, q ( t) 2 .

Evidence from simulation shows lim q (t) 4.57 = q ( t) 0 .
The solutions tend precisely to one among the three equilibria which do not correspond to the origin. PD control with desired gravity compensation may fail to verify the set-point control objective.
219
Unicity of equilibrium
For robots having only revolute joints and considering the closed-loop equation (22), we have. The equilibria satisfy q
T
T T
= q
T T
IR2n where
1 = Kp ) g (q d)] = f ( IRn is solution of q [g (q d q q , q d) . q
For all vectors x, y IRn, we have that f (x , q d ) f (y , q d ) kg xy , min{Kp}
If min{Kp} > kg we have (by contraction mapping theorem) T q T the unique equilibrium is the origin, q
= 0T 0T
IR2n.
220
Global asymptotic stability

To study stability of the equilibrium of closed loop equation, consider min{Kp} > kg (the origin is the unique equilibrium) Lyapunov function candidate ) = V ( q, q 1 T )q + U (q d q ) U (q d ) M (q d q q 2 1 T T + q . Kpq + g (q d ) q 2
) is radially unbounded and positive denite because M (q ) > 0 V ( q, q and min{Kp} > kg .
( ) results in V ) = q T Kv q 0 The time derivative of V ( q, q q, q By applying the La Salles Theorem 2.7, we have The set is given by = = (x ) = 0 x IR2n : V q x= q ( ) = 0 q, q IR2n : V
IRn, q = 0 IRn} . = {q (0)T q (0)T q = 0 IR2n is the unique initial condition in for which x(t) for all t 0. This is enough to guarantee global asymptotic stability of the origin T T q T = 0 IR2n. q
Example 8.3
Consider the 2-DOF prototype robot studied in Chapter 5,

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2
whose components of the gravitational torques vector g (q ) are given by g1(q ) = [m1lc1 + m2l1]g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) .
The constant kg may be obtained as kg = n max gi(q ) qj
i,j,q
= n [[m1lc1 + m2l1]g + m2lc2g ] = 23.94 kg m2/sec2 .
224
Consider the PD controller with desired gravity compensation where min{Kp} > kg . In particular, we pick Kp = diag{kp} = diag{30} [Nm/rad] , Kv = diag{kv } = diag{7, 3} [Nm sec/rad] .
The components of the control input are given by 1 kv q 1 + g1(q d) , 1 = kpq 2 kv q 2 + g2(q d) . 2 = kpq
225
The initial conditions corresponding to the positions and velocities, are set to q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 , 2(0) = 0 . q 1(0) = 0, q The desired joint positions are chosen as qd1 = /10 [rad] qd2 = /30 [rad] , hence, the initial state is set to 0.3141 /10 (0) q /30 0.1047 [ rad ] . = = 0 0 (0) q 0 0
Figure shows the experimental results

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
[rad]
.... ... q ... 1 ... ... ... .. ..... q 2 .............. .... .......... .....................................................................................................0.0359 . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .................................................................................................................. . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . ..... ..... ..... . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... . . .. .. . . . .. .. .. . . . 0.0138
0.1
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 t [sec]
Figure 61: Position errors q 1 and q 2 The position errors do not vanish due to nonmodeled friction eects.
227
Lyapunov function for global asymptotic stability
We show now a global asymptotic stability analysis without using La Salles theorem Consider the following Lyapunov function candidate, T 0 2 M ( q ) K q q 2 p 1+ q 1 2 1+ 0q M (q ) q q M (q ) 1 T + q Kpq , + U (q ) U (q d ) + g (q d ) q 1 ) f (q
T
) = V ( q, q
which can be rewritten as ) = V ( q, q 1 T + U (q ) U (q d) + g (q d)Tq M (q )q q 2 1 1 0 T Kpq TM (q )q + q + q 1 2 1+ q
where 0 > 0, 1 > 2 and 2 > 2 are chosen so that 2min{Kp} > 1 > 2 kg 2 = 21 >2 1 2
2min{Kp} > 0 > 0 with ( Max{M (q )} ) . 2

To show positive denitness, we rearrange ) = V ( q, q 1 T 2 1 + q ]T M (q ) [q + q ] + q [q Kp 2M (q ) q 2 2 2 1 T T Kpq , + U (q ) U (q d ) + g (q d ) q + q 1 ) f (q .
with =
0 1+ q
) is positive denite because M (q ) > 0, and V ( q, q 2 2 K M (q ) > 0 and min{Kp} > kg . p 2
230
The time derivative of the above Lyapunov function candidate takes the form ( q TKpq ) = q TKv q + q TM (q )q + q TKv q V q, q ) T [g (q d) g (q )] TM (q )q , TC (q , q q q q q which is upperbounded by q q T
Q
( ) V q, q
min{Kp} kg 1 2 Max {Kv }
1 2 Max {Kv }
1 20 min {Kv } 2
q q
1 [min{Kv } 20(kC1 + 2 )] q 2
231
The matrix Q is positive denite if it holds that min{Kp} > kg , 2min{Kv }(min{Kp} kg ) 2 Max {Kv } and we have that > 0 if min{Kv } > 0 . 2[kC1 + 2 ] > 0 ,
232
Under this scenario, we get
( ) V q, q
0 min{Q} 1+ q
+ q
2
q 2
2 q 0min{Q} q 1+ q 2 which is a negative denite function. T q T We conclude that the origin q asymptotically stable (Theorem 2.4).
T
= 0 IR2n is a globally
233
Ch. 9. PID control
Ch. 9. PID control

ROBOT q q
Kv d q qd
Kp
Ki
t
0
Figure 62: PID control. + Ki + Kv q The PID control law is given by = Kpq
t ( ) q 0
d , where
Kp, Kv , Ki IRnn, are symmetric positive denite matrices.
234
Ch. 9. PID control
The control law may be expressed via the two following equations, + Ki + Kv q = Kpq = q . The closed loop equation is q d q = q dt + Ki C (q , q d M (q )1 Kpq )q g (q ) + Kv q q q
235
Ch. 9. PID control
If the desired position q d(t) is constant, the equilibrium is 1 Ki g (q d) q IR3n . = 0 q 0 This equilibrium may be translated to the origin (via change of variable) z = Ki1g (q d) .
236
Ch. 9. PID control
The corresponding closed loop equation is z q d . = q q dt )q g (q )] Kv q + Kiz + g (q d) C (q , q M (q )1 [Kpq q (25) Above equation is autonomous and its unique equilibrium is the origin T T q T = 0 IR3n. zT q
237
Ch. 9. PID control
For the sequel,we adopt the following global change of variables, w I q = 0 q 0 I I 0 0 z with > 0. 0q I q
238
Ch. 9. PID control
The closed loop equation (25) may be expressed as d q = dt q q q q M (q )1

1 1 )q g (q ) + Kv q Kp Ki q Kiw + g (q d) C (q , q
. (26)
239
Ch. 9. PID control
Above equation is autonomous T q T The origin of the state space, wT q equilibrium.

T
= 0 IR3n is the unique
If Kp and Kv are suciently large and Ki suciently small in the following sense min{M }min{Kv } Max{Ki} , > 2 { K } k Max {M } min p g and moreover min{Kp} > kg , then, the set-point control objective is achieved locally.
Ch. 9. PID control
Lyapunov function candidate

A positive denite Lyapunov function candidate is w 1 q 2 q T
1 Ki
, w) = V ( q, q
0 0
w 0 0 M (q ) q Kv M (q ) M (q ) q
1 1 T ) U (q d ) + q T g (q d ) + U (q d q Kp Ki q + q 2 U (q ) denotes as usual, the robots potential energy, and is a positive constant satisfying Max{Ki} min{M }min{Kv } > > . 2 min{Kp} kg Max {M }
Ch. 9. PID control
Time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate

It may be written as ( q T [Kp Ki] q , w ) = q T [Kv M (q )] q V q, q )T q T C (q , q q T [g (q d) g (q )] q It can be upperbounded by ( , w) V q, q where Q11 = [min{Kp} kg ] Max{Ki}, ) = min{Kv } [Max{M } + kC1 q ]. Q22(q q q
T
Q11 0
0 ) Q22(q
q q
242
Ch. 9. PID control
It is possible to prove that there exists a ball D , q , w IRn : D := q w q q
<
( , w) is negative semidenite. on which V q, q Therefore, according with Theorem 2.2, the origin of the closed loop equation (26), is a stable equilibrium.
243
Ch. 9. PID control
Asymptotic stability
We may use La Salles theorem (Theorem 2.7). The set is given by = (x ) = 0 x IR3n : V w ( , w) = 0 IR3n : V q, q = x=q q = 0 IRn, q = 0 IRn} . = {w IRn, q (0)T q (0)T w(0)T q = 0 IR3n is the only initial condition in for which x(t) for all t 0. We conclude that the origin is locally asymptotically stable.
Ch. 9. PID control
Tuning procedure
The preceding stability analysis allows to extract a simple tuning procedure. Max{Ki} min{Ki} > 0 Max{Kp} min{Kp} > kg Max{Ki} Max2{M } . Max{Kv } min{Kv } > min{Kp} kg min{M } It requires the knowledge of the structure of M (q ) and g (q ). Nonetheless, it is sucient to have upper bounds on Max{M (q )} and kg , and a lower bound for min{M (q )}.
245
Ch. 9. PID control
Example 9.2
Consider the 2-DOF prototype robot showed in Figure 63.
y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2
Figure 63: Diagram of the Pelican prototype robot.
246
Ch. 9. PID control
The elements of the inertia matrix M (q ) are

2 2 2 M11(q ) = m1lc 1 + m2 l1 + lc2 + 2l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I1 + I2 2 M12(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2) + I2 2 M21(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2) + I2 2 M22(q ) = m2lc 2 + I2 .
The components of the gravitational torques vector g (q ), are given by g1(q ) = (m1lc1 + m2l1)g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2).
247
Ch. 9. PID control
Firstly, we compute the value of kg using the numeric values listed in Table 5.1 kg = n Max
i,j,q
gi(q ) qj
= n(m1lc1 + m2l1 + m2lc2)g = 23.94 kg m2/sec2
We proceed now to compute numerically min{M (q )} and Max{M (q )} min{M (q )} = 0.011 Max{M (q )} = 0.361, which correspond to q2 = 0.
kg m2 , kg m2
Ch. 9. PID control
By following the tuning procedure, we nally determine the following matrices, Ki = diag{1.5} [Nm / (rad sec)] , Kp = diag{30} [Nm / rad] , Kv = diag{7, 3} [Nm sec / rad] .
249
Ch. 9. PID control
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
[rad]
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q ........... .....1 .......................... . . . ......................................... . . .................................................. . . q ........... 2 . .. . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . .... .. .. . .... . . . .. . .. .. .. .. . . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... .. . . .. . .. . .. .............................................................................. . . .. . . .. . . . .
0.1
0.0 12.5 25.0 37.5 50.0 t [sec]
Figure 64: Position errors q 1 and q 2 From Figure we may conclude that the transient response is slower This is due to the fact that the tuning procedure limits min{Ki} by a relatively small upperbound.
Ch. 9. PID control
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
[rad]
..... ... ... q ... 1 ... ... .... ..... q 2 ........... ..... ......... ....... ........................... . . . . . . . . . . ..... ..... ..... ........ . . . .. . . .. .. .... . .................. . . .. . . . . ...... . . . . . . . ..... . . . .... ............................................................... . ..... . . . . . . ..... . . . .... . . . .. . . . . ...... .
0.1
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 t [sec]
Figure 65: Position errors q 1 and q 2 If the tuning procedure is violated the performance of the PID controller improves up. The latter results have been obtained increasing the values of Ki to Ki = diag{70, 100} [Nm / (rad sec)] .
Part III TRACKING CONTROL
252
Introduction
Introduction
Consider the dynamic model )q + g (q ) = . M (q ) q + C (q , q

T
T In terms of the state vector q T q
gives
q q d = dt )q g (q )] q M (q )1 [ (t) C (q , q
253
Introduction
where M (q ) IRnn is the inertia matrix, )q IRn is the vector of centrifugal and Coriolis forces, C (q , q g (q ) IRn is el vector of gravitational forces and torques and IRn is a vector of external forces and torques applied at the joints. ,q IRn denote the position, velocity and joint The vectors q , q acceleration respectively.
254
Introduction
d and q d referred to as Given a set of vectorial bounded functions q d, q desired joint positions, velocities and accelerations. The objective of tracking control consists on nding such that
t
( t) = 0 lim q
where IRn stands for the joint position errors vector q (t) := q d(t) q (t) , q ( t) = q (t) stands for the velocity error. d ( t) q q
Introduction
In general, a control law may be expressed as d, q d , M (q ), C (q , q ), g (q )) . ,q , q d, q = (q , q For practical purposes it is desirable that the controller does not depend on . the joint acceleration q
qd d q d q
CONTROLLER
ROBOT
q q
Figure 66: Tracking control: closed loop system.
256
Introduction
A methodology to analyze the stability may be summarized in: 1. Derivation of the closed loop dynamic equation. 2. Representation of the closed loop equation in the state-space form, d qd q d q dt q
qd d q d q
d, q d , M (q ), C (q , q ), g (q )) . , q d, q = f (q , q
CONTROLLER + ROBOT
q q
Figure 67: Tracking representation.

control
closed-loop
system:
Input-output
257
Introduction
3. Study of the existence and possible unicity of the equilibrium 4. Proposition of a Lyapunov function candidate to study the stability of any equilibrium of interest 5. Alternatively to step 4), determine the qualitative behavior of the solutions of the closed loop equation.
258
Introduction
The controllers that we consider are, in order, Computed torque control and Computed torque+ control. PD control with compensation and PD+ control. Feedforward control and PD plus feedforward control.
259
Ch. 10. Computed-torque control and Computed-torque+ control
In this chapter we study two controllers that do not present explicitly the linear PD term Computedtorque control, Computedtorque+ control.
260
Computed-torque control
g (q ) d q M (q ) ROBOT q q
Kv d q qd
Kp
) C (q , q
Figure 68: Computed-torque control. The corresponding equation to computed-torque control is given by + Kpq + C (q , q )q + g (q ) , d + Kv q = M (q ) q where Kp and Kv are symmetric positive denite matrices.
(27)
The closed loop equation is + Kpq . d + Kv q M (q ) q = M (q ) q Above equation reduces to + Kpq =0 + Kv q q which in turn, may be expressed in terms of the state vector q q q 0 d = = dt Kv q q Kpq Kp where I is the identity matrix of dimension n.
T q
as
q I , Kv q
(28)
It is important to remark that the closed loop equation (28) is represented by a linear autonomous dierential equation, whose unique equilibrium point is given by q
T
T T
= 0 IR2n.
263
Consider next the globally positive denite Lyapunov function candidate ) = V ( q, q T q K + Kv 1 p 2 I q 1 + q q 2

T
I q I q
1 T + q + q Kp + Kv 2I q (29) q 2
where the constant satises, Kv I > 0 . Kp + Kv 2I > 0 .

) we get that Evaluating the total time derivative of V ( q, q

T q ) = q TKpq [Kv I ] q V ( q, q T q 0 Kp q . = q 0 Kv I q
(30)
( ) in (30) is globally negative denite. V q, q
265
q In view of Theorem 2.4, we get that the origin q globally uniformly asymptotically stable and therefore
T t
T T
= 0 IR2n is
( t) = 0 lim q
( t) = 0 . lim q
For practical purposes, we can choose,

2 2 , , n Kp = diag 1
Kv
= diag {21, , 2n} .
266
Example 10.2
Consider the Pelican prototype robot studied in Chapter 5

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2
Figure 69: Diagram of the Pelican prototype.

Consider the Computed-torque control (27) on this robot for tracking control. The desired reference trajectory, q d(t), is given by Equation (13).
2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
[rad]
.. d2 .. .. .. ... ... ... ... ... .... ... .... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . q d1 . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. ... . . .. . . .. ... . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ..... ...... ... ...... ..... .. ...... .. ............ ... . .. .. .. . . ............ ..... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..
10 t [sec]

q d1 q d2
b1[1 e
2.0 t3
3
] + c1[1 e
2.0 t3
3
] sin(1t) ] sin(2t)
[rad]
b2[1 e2.0
] + c2[1 e2.0
where b1 = /4 [rad], c1 = /9 [rad] and 1 = 4 [rad/sec], and b2 = /3 [rad], c2 = /6 [rad] and 2 = 3 [rad/sec]. d(t), were analytically found, and they correspond to d(t) and q q Equations (14) and (15), respectively.
269
The symmetric positive denite matrices Kp and Kv are chosen as

2 2 , 2 } = diag{1500, 14000} [1 / sec] Kp = diag{1
Kv
= diag{21, 22} = diag{77.46, 236.64}
1 / sec2 ,
where we used 1 = 38.7 [rad / sec] and 2 = 118.3 [rad / sec]. The initial conditions are chosen as q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 q 1(0) = 0, q 2(0) = 0 .
270
0.02 0.01 0.00
[rad] q 1 . ........ . ................... ...... ...... . . ........... ............ ............. . ............. ... . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ........ ...... . .. .... . .. . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... .. . .. .... . . ....... . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ....... .......... .......... ...... q 2
0.01 0.02
10 t [sec]
Figure 71: Position errors. The steady state position errors are not zero due to the friction eects of the actual robot which nevertheless, are neglected in the analysis.
271
Computed-torque+ control
g (q ) M (q ) ROBOT q q
d q
1 p+
) C (q , q
Kv Kp p p+ d q qd
Figure 72: Computed-torque+ control.

The equation corresponding to the computed-torque+ controller is given by + Kpq + C (q , q )q + g (q ) C (q , q ) d + Kv q = M (q ) q where Kv and Kp are symmetric positive denite design matrices, , and velocity q IRn is obtained by ltering the errors of position q that is, b bp + Kpq , Kv q (32) q = p+ p+ p is the dierential operator (i.e., p := , b are positive design constants.
(31)
d dt )
273
The computed-torque+ control law is dynamic The expression (32) in the state space form is a linear autonomous system given by q I 0 1 Kp Kv d 1 + = dt 2 2 0 I q 0 I q 1 = [ I I ] [ 0 I ] 2 q where 1, 2 IRn are the new state variables.
(33)
(34)
274
Now, we have the following closed loop equation q q
1 M (q ) C (q , q q Kv q Kpq ) 1 + 2 + q d , = dt + Kv q 1 + Kpq 1 2 2 q the origin q

T T T T q 1 2 T
(35)
= 0 IR4n is an equilibrium point.
275
The study of global asymptotic stability of the origin of the closed loop equation (35) is actually an open problem. Nevertheless, using Lemma 2.2 and Corollary A.2 we will show that (t) and (t) are bounded, and ( t) , q the functions q that the motion control objective is veried.
276
Toward this end, we can get an equivalent closed loop equation + ] + C (q , q ) = 0 . M (q ) [ Consider now the following non-negative function 1 ) 0 ) = TM (q d q V (t, , q 2 P ) is given by The derivative with respect to time of V ( , q ( , q ) = TM (q ) 0 V Q
277
We conclude
n L Ln 2 and
(t)T (t)
(t) 2 This means that that (t) 0 exponentially.
(0)) 2t 2V ( (0), q e .
Making use of the latter and of Corollary A.2 we get that

n Ln , q L q 2
( t) = 0 , lim q
278
Example 10.3
Consider the 2-DOF prototype robot studied in Chapter 5

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2
Figure 73: Diagram of the Pelican prototype.

Consider the Computed-torque+ control described by (31), (33) and (34) applied to this robot. d(t) and q d(t) are those used in the previous example. q d ( t) , q
2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
[rad]
d2 ...... ........ ......... ......... . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q d1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . .. .. ... . .. .. ... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . ....... . .. . ...... . . ... .. ....... . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . ... ..... ..... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..
10 t [sec]

Kp and Kv , and the constant are taken as

2 2 , 2 } = diag{1500, 14000} [1 / sec] Kp = diag{1
Kv
= diag{21, 22} = diag{77.46, 236.64}
1 / sec2
= 60 . The initial conditions of the controller state variables are xed at 1(0) = 0, 2(0) = 0 . The initial conditions of the actual positions and velocities are set to q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 q 1(0) = 0, q 2(0) = 0 .
0.02 0.01 0.00
[rad] q 1 . ......... .......... ..... .......... .......... . . ......... . . . ...... . . . . ....... .. .. ............ . .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... .. ...... .. . .. .......... . ....... q 2
0.01 0.02
10 t [sec]
Figure 75: Position errors. It is interesting to remark that the plots obtained with the Computedtorque control, present a considerable similarity to those of gure 75.
282
Ch. 11. PD+ Control and PD Control with Compensation
We present two controllers whose control laws are based on the dynamic equations of the system but which also involve certain nonlinearities that are evaluated along the desired trajectories. PD control with compensation PD+ control.
283
PD Control with Compensation

) Kv C (q , q
Kp
d q qd
Figure 76: PD control with compensation. The PD control law with compensation may be written as + C (q , q + M (q ) q ) [q d + + Kv q d + q = Kpq q ] + g (q ),
T T > 0, Kv = Kv > 0 IRnn and = Kv 1Kp . where Kp = Kp
(36)
The equation of closed loop is , + C (q , q + Kv q + q ) q M (q ) q q = Kpq which may be expressed in terms of the state vector q
T
T T
as
q q d = dt C (q , q + Kv q ) q M (q )1 Kpq q q It is non-autonomous and has the origin q

T
T T
= 0 IR2n as an equilibrium point.
285
The stability analysis may be carried out by considering Lyapunov function candidate T T T ) M (q d q ) q q 2Kp + M (q d q 1 ) = . , q V (t, q 2 ) ) M (q d q q M (q d q q We rewrite it in the following form
T 1 + ) = q , q + TKpq V (t, q q M (q ) q q +q 2
(37)
286
which is equivalent to 1 V (t, q , q ) = 2 q q

T
I T 0 I
Kp 0 0 M (q ) B T AB
I 0 I
q q
It is easy to see ) 1 Min{B T AB } , q V (t, q 2 + q q

2
It is positive denite (because Kp > 0, Kv > 0 and hence B T AB > 0) and radially unbounded.
287
Correspondingly, since the inertia matrix is bounded uniformly in q , we have that 1 + , q ) Max{M } q q V (t, q 2 ) is also decrescent. , q hence, V (t, q
2
+ Max{Kp} q
288
The time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate (37) is
T q , q ) = q Kv q TTKv V (t, q q T T Kv 0 q q . = 0 Kv q q
Globally negative denite function. From Theorem 2.4 we conclude immediately global uniform asymptotic T T T q stability of the equilibrium q = 0 IR2n.
289
Example 11.1
Consider the Pelican robot presented in Chapter 5

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

Consider this robot under PD control with compensation (36). d(t) and q d ( t) It is desired that the robot tracks the trajectories q d(t), q represented by Equations (13)(15).
2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
[rad]
d2 ......... ......... ......... ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q d1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. ... . . . .. . . . . . .. ... . .. . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .......... ....... ..... ................. ....... ..... ....... . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . ............ ..... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..
10 t [sec]
291
q d1 q d2
b1[1 e
2.0 t3
3
] + c1[1 e
2.0 t3
3
] sin(1t) ] sin(2t)
[rad]
b2[1 e2.0
] + c2[1 e2.0
where b1 = /4 [rad], c1 = /9 [rad] and 1 = 4 [rad/sec], and b2 = /3 [rad], c2 = /6 [rad] and 2 = 3 [rad/sec]. d(t), were analytically found, and they correspond to d(t) and q q Equations (14) and (15), respectively.
292
The symmetric positive denite matrices Kp and Kv are chosen so that Kp = diag{200, 150} [N m / rad] , Kv = diag{3} [N m sec / rad] ,
1 Kp = diag{66.6, 50} [1/sec]. and therefore = Kv
The initial conditions corresponding a the positions and velocities are q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 2(0) = 0 . q 1(0) = 0, q
293
0.02 0.01 0.00
[rad]
1 ....... .. ..... ........ ..... ...... . ........ .... . . . . ......... .......... . . . .... . . . ... .. . .. ... ... ........ ..... . . . . . .. ....... ......... . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .... . . .... ... . . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... .......... ......... ......... ... q 2
0.01 0.02
10 t [sec]
Figure 79: Position errors. (t), by virtue of The experimental steady state tracking position errors q friction phenomena in the actual robot, are not zero.
294
PD+ control
) C (q , q d q qd
Kv
Kp
Figure 80: PD+ control. The control law of PD+ control is given by + M (q ) )q d + g (q ) + Kv q = Kpq q d + C (q , q where Kp, Kv IRnn are symmetric positive denite matrices
(38)
The closed loop equation may be written as q q d . = dt )q C (q d q )1 Kpq , q d q Kv q M (q d q q Nonlinear nonautonomous dierential equation The only equilibrium point is the origin q
T
T T
= 0 IR2n.
296
To analyze the stability of the origin consider now Lyapunov function candidate T K q 1 p 2 0 q 0 q ) M (q d q q (39) P
) = , q V (t, q
1 T + 1q , M (q )q TKpq q 2 2
which is positive denite since M (q ) > 0 and Kp > 0.
297
Taking the time derivative of (39) we obtain

Q
(t, q ) = q Kv q , q V T 0 q = 0 q
0 q 0 Kv q
From Theorem 2.3 we conclude stability of the origin. La Salles theorem cannot be used to conclude global asymptotic stability. Alternatively, we may use Lemma 2.2 position and velocity errors are bounded and the velocity error is square-integrable (
0
( t) q
dt < . )
298
Example 11.3

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

Consider the application of the PD control+ (38) on this robot. The joint desired trajectories of position, velocity and acceleration: q d(t), d(t), are given by Equations (13)(15). d(t) and q q
2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
[rad] q d2 ....... ....... ....... ........ . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q d1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ... .. .. .. . . . . . ... . . . . . . .. ... . . . .. ... . .. ..... . .. ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . ....... ....... .... .. ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ... ... ... ... . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . ............ ..... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..
0 2 4 6 8 10 t [sec]
300
The symmetric positive denite matrices Kp and Kv are chosen as Kp = diag{200, 150} [N m / rad] Kv = diag{3} [N m sec / rad] .
The initial conditions corresponding to the positions and velocities, are xed as q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 2(0) = 0 . q 1(0) = 0, q
301
0.02 0.01 0.00
[rad] q . 1 . .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ..... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ .... . .......... . ... .. . . ............. . . .. . .. . .... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q . . . . . . . . 2 . . . .
0.01 0.02
10 t [sec]
Figure 83: Position errors. (t), by virtue of The experimental steady state tracking position errors q friction phenomena (neglected in the analysis) in the actual robot, are not zero.
302
Lyapunov function for asymptotic stability

We present an alternative stability analysis. Consider now, Lyapunov function candidate, T Kp q 1 0 2 q M (q ) 1+ q
0 1+ q
M (q )
) = , q V (t, q
M (q )
q (40) q
) + , q = W (t, q
0 T M (q )q q 1+ q ( q)
T + 1q TM (q )q ) = 1q , q is the Lyapunov function Kpq where W (t, q 2 2 (39).

The positive constant 0 is chosen so as to satisfy simultaneously min{Kp} > 0 > 0 Max{M (q )} min{Kv } > 0 > 0 2 (kC1 + 2Max{M (q )}) 2min{Kp}min{Kv } 2 > 0 > 0 d Max) (Max{Kv } + kC1 q This, implies that the matrix Kp 2M (q ) > 0 The function (40) may be rewritten as
T 1 1 T ) = q + q + q , q M (q ) q Kp 2M (q ) q + q V (t, q 2 2
which is positive denite since so is M (q ) as well as Kp 2M (q ).

) satises , q Notice that V (t, q 1 , q ) V (t, q 2 q q

T
0 Max{M } Max{Kp} 0 Max{M } Max{M }
q q
, (41)
The matrix on the right hand side of inequality (41) is positive denite in view of the condition on 0, Max{Kp} > 0 > 0 Max{M (q )} q IRn
Thus, the function (40) is positive denite, radially unbounded and decrescent.
The time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate (40) is given by
( ) = q + ( + ( TKv q TM (q )q T C (q , q ) V q, q q q )q q )q ) a( q, q + . + Kv q ( q ) q T Kpq ( q ) q TM (q )q ) b( q, q
306
It may be upperbounded in the following manner T Q
q q
q q
(t, q ) , q V
) , q h( q 1 [min{Kv } 20 (kC1 + 2Max{M })] q 2

2
307
where the symmetric matrix Q is given by min{Kp} 1 2 (Max {Kv } + kC1 q d ) 1 2 d ) (Max{Kv } + kC1 q
1 20 min {Kv }
Q=
(t, q ) is negative denite , q The function V

T q Thus, using Theorem 2.4 we conclude that the origin q T T
=0
IR2n is globally uniformly asymptotically stable.
308
Ch. 12. Feedforward control and PD plus feedforward control

Practical implementation of controllers is via digital technology. , Sampling of the joint position q and of the velocity q computation of the control action from the control law, the order to apply this control action is sent to the actuators. d(t) and q d ( t) , Control strategies using precomputed terms based on q d(t), q has advantages: Reduction in the time of computation of Higher processing frequency (larger potential for fast tasks)
Feedforward control
d q M (q d ) ROBOT q q
d) C (q d , q
g (q d )
d q qd
Figure 84: Feedforward control. The feedforward controller is given by d )q d + g (q d ) . q d + C (q d , q = M (q d) (42)
310
The behavior of the control system is described by q q d , = dt + gd g] d Cq q d + Cd q q M 1 [(Md M ) where ), C d = C (q d , q d) M = M (q ), Md = M (q d), C = C (q , q g = g (q ) and g d = g (q d). T = 0 IR2n is an equilibrium point of the previous q The origin q equation but in general, it is not the only one.
T
Example 12.3

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

Consider the application of feedforward control (42) on this robot. The desired trajectory is given by q d(t) which is dened in (13).
2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
[rad] q d2 ... ... ... ........ . ... ... ... ... ... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q d1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . ... . . . . . .. . .. . . .. ... . . . .. . . . .. ... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . ..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...... .... ...... .. ...... . ..... .. ............ ... .... . .. . .. . . . ............ ..... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..
0 2 4 6 8 10 t [sec]
Figure 86: Desired reference trajectories. The initial conditions are chosen as q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 q 1(0) = 0, q 2(0) = 0 .
2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
[rad]
...... ........... ........... . . ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . .... .. . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. 1 .... ... . . . . . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . ..... ............ .. . . . ..... .... ...... ...... . ............ ..... .. . ..... ... .. ..... ... ... ..... . ... . . ..... .... .. ... ... ........ ... ..... . .. . ... . ... . . ........ ........ ... ... . ..... .... ....
q 2..............
0.5
10 t [sec]
Figure 87: Position errors (t) tend to an oscillatory behavior. Figure shows the position errors q Naturally, this behavior is far from satisfactory. A rigorous generic analysis of stability or instability seems to be an impossible task.
PD plus feedforward control

d q M (q d ) ROBOT q q
d) C (q d , q
g (q d )
Kv
Kp
d q qd
Figure 88: PD plus feedforward control. Control law is given by + M (q d) d )q d + g (q d ), + Kv q q d + C (q d , q = Kpq

T T > 0, Kv = Kv > 0 IRnn. where Kp = Kp
315
The closed loop equation may be written as: q q d , = dt C (q , q h( ) )q Kv q M (q )1 Kpq q, q q where the so-called residual dynamics, is given by ) = [M (q d) M (q )] d ) C (q , q )]q d + g (q d ) g (q ) . h( q, q q d + [C (q d, q The origin [q
T T q ]T = 0 IR2n of the state space is an equilibrium.
(43)
However, the number of equilibria depends on the proportional gain Kp.

Unicity of the equilibrium

The equilibria are the constant vectors T ]T = [ [q T q q T 0T ]T IR2n, IRn is a solution of Kpq + h( q , 0) = 0 . where q = 0 IRn It always is satised by the trivial solution q Explicit conditions to ensure unicity of the equilibrium are presented next.
1 Dene k( q ) = Kp h( q , 0) . For all vectors x, y IRn, we have
k (x ) k (y )
1 Kp [h(x, 0) h(y , 0)]
1 Max Kp
h(x, 0) h(y , 0) .
317
On the other hand, we have that h(x, 0) h(y , 0) d [M (q d y ) M (q d x)] q d ) C (q d x , q d)] q d + [C (q d y , q + g (q d y ) g (q d x ) .
d h(x, 0) h(y , 0) kg + kM q
d M + kC2 q
2 M
xy .
318
We get that k (x ) k (y ) 1 d kg + kM q min {Kp} d M + kC2 q

2 M
xy .
Invoking the contraction mapping theorem, we conclude that d min {Kp} > kg + kM q d M + kC2 q
2 M
It is a sucient condition for k( q ) to have a unique xed point, and therefore, for the origin of the state space to be the unique equilibrium of the system in closed loop (43).
319
Global uniform asymptotic stability
We assume that given a constant > 0, Kv is chosen suciently large in the sense that Max{Kv } min{Kv } > kh1 + b , and so is Kp but in the sense that Max{Kp} min{Kp} > 3 [2 a + kh2] + kh2 4 [min{Kv } kh1 b]
2
320
so that
2 2 2 1 Max {M } Max{Kp} min{Kp} > min{M }
(44)
where kh1 and kh2 are dened in Chapter 4 while the constants a and b are given by 1 d M + kh1] , a = [Max{Kv } + kC1 q 2 b = 4 Max{M } + 2 kC1 .
321
Lyapunov function candidate. To carry out the stability analysis, consider Lyapunov function candidate + 1q ) = 1q T M (q )q , q + tanh( T Kpq V (t, q q )T M (q )q 2 2 where > 0 is a given constant and tanh(x1) . . tanh(x) = tanh(xn) with x IRn.
(45)
The Lyapunov function candidate (45) satises the following inequality ) 1 , q V (t, q 2 q q
T
1 Max{M } min{Kp} 1 Max{M } min{M }
q q
It is positive denite and radially unbounded since Kp is positive denite min{Kp} > 0, and it is chosen so as to satisfy (44). Max{Kp} min{Kp} >
2 2 1
2 Max {M } . min{M }
323
One may also show 1 , q ) V (t, q 2 q q

T
Max{Kp} 1 Max{M }
1 Max{M } Max{M }
q q
whose right hand side is positive denite and radially unbounded since the condition 2 Max{Kp} > 21 Max{M }, is satised under hypothesis (44) on Kp. ) is decrescent. , q This means that V (t, q
324
Time derivative. The time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate yields
T T tanh( Kv q , q ) = q q Sech2( V (t, q q )T M (q )q q )T Kpq + tanh( )T q tanh( q )T Kv q q )T C (q , q T ) tanh( ). h( q, q q )T h( q, q q
325
which can be upperbounded by (t, q , q ) V min {Kp } T kh2 tanh( q) 3 1 kh2 q a 2 where a =
1 kh2 a 2 1 [min {Kv } kh1] b
tanh( q) q
R ( ) 1 d [Max{Kv } + kC1 q 2 b = 4 Max{M } + 2 kC1 .
+ kh1] ,
R( ) is positive denite (t, q ) is globally negative denite. , q therefore, V Theorem 2.4 concludes global uniform asymptotic stability of the origin.
Tuning procedure. It can be summarized as Derivation of the dynamic robot model to be controlled. Particularly, ) and g (q ) in closed form. computation of M (q ), C (q , q Computation of the constants Max{M (q )}, min{M (q )}, kM , kM ,kC1 , kC2 , k and kg . For this, it is suggested to use the information given in Table 4.1. d Computation of q to the robot.
Max,
d q
Max
from the specication of a given task
327
Computation of the constants s1 and s2 given by d s1 = kg + kM q and d s2 = 2 k + kM q Computation of kh1 and kh2 given by d M, kh1 kC1 q s2 kh2 . 2 tanh s s1
d M + kC2 q
2 M
d M + kC1 q
2 M
Computation of the constants a and b given by a = 1 d [Max{Kv } + kC1 q 2 b = 4 Max{M } + 2 kC1 , + kh1] ,
where 2 =
n, 4 = 1.
329
Select > 0 and determine the design matrices Kp and Kv so that their smallest eigenvalues satisfy min{Kv } > kh1 + b, [2 a + kh2] + kh2 , min{Kp} > 3 4 [min{Kv } kh1 b] 2 2 2 1 Max {M } , min{Kp} > min{M } with 1 = 1, 3 = 1.
2
330
Example 12.5
Consider the 2-DOF prototype robot showed in the Figure

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

The elements of the inertia matrix M (q ) are

2 2 2 M11(q ) = m1lc 1 + m2 l1 + lc2 + 2l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I1 + I2 2 M12(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2) + I2 2 M21(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2) + I2 2 M22(q ) = m2lc 2 + I2 .
332
) are given The elements of the centrifugal and Coriolis forces matrix C (q , q by ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q C11(q , q 2 ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2) (q C12(q , q 1 + q 2) ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q 1 C21(q , q ) = 0. C22(q , q The elements of the vector of gravitational torques g (q ) are g1(q ) = (m1lc1 + m2l1)g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) .
333
Using the numeric values of the constants given in Table 5.1 as well as the formulas on Table 4.1, we get kM kC1 kC2 kg kM = 0.0974 kg m2 , = 0.0487 kg m2 , = 0.0974 kg m2 , = 23.94 kg m2/sec2 , = Max{M (q )} = 0.3614 kg m2 ,
min{M (q )} = 0.011 kg m2 . Numerically, we get: k = 7.664 d q [N m] , and d q

Max
Max = 2.33 [ rad/sec] and,
= 9.52 [ rad/sec2] .
334
Using this information and the denitions of the constants from the tuning procedure, we get that s1 = 25.385 [N m] , s2 = 22.733 [N m] , kh1 = 0.114 kg m2/sec , kh2 = 31.834 [N m] , a = 1.614 kg m2/sec , b = 0.43 kg m2 .
Finally, we set = 2 [sec1],

An appropriate choice of the gains is Kp = diag{200, 150} [N m] , Kv = diag{3} [N m sec/rad] .
The initial conditions corresponding to the positions and velocities, are chosen as q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 2(0) = 0 . q 1(0) = 0, q
336
0.02 0.01 0.00
[rad] q .1 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ..... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . .... . . .. ......... . .. .. .. . ......... . .... . .... .. .. ... . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . q . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . .
0.01 0.02
10 t [sec]
Figure 90: Position errors In contrast to example 12.3 where the controller did not carry the PD term, the behavior abtained here is satisfactory.
337
Part IV ADVANCED TOPICS
338
Introduction to Part IV
Introduction to Part IV
We deal with a variety of topics: Control without velocity measurements Control under model uncertainty. Specically: PD control with gravity compensation and PD control with desired gravity compensation Introduction to adaptive robot control PD control with adaptive gravity compensation PD control with adaptive compensation.
Ch. 13. PD Control
Ch. 13. PD Control with gravity compensation and PD Control with precalculated gravity compensation
The interest to count on controllers without measurement of velocity, is twofold: no poor quality for certain bands of operation suppression of velocity sensors (no tachometers and resolvers) reduction in the production cost robot lighter.
340
Ch. 13. PD Control
The design of controllers that do not require velocity measurements to control robot manipulators is a topic of investigation broached in the decade of the 1990s to date, many questions remain open. the common idea: to propose state observers to estimate the velocity. In this chapter we present an alternative: , by the ltering of q substituting q through a rst order system of zero relative degree, whose output is denoted, by .
Ch. 13. PD Control
Specically, IRn is given by: bip = diag q p + ai

d , ai and bi are arbitrary strictly positive real constants, where, p = dt for i = 1, 2, , n.
A state-space representation of above Equation is: = Ax AB q x = x + Bq where, x IRn represents the state vector of the lters, A = diag{ai} and B = diag{bi}.
Ch. 13. PD Control
In this chapter we present the study of the proposed modication for the following controllers: PD control with gravity compensation PD control with desired gravity compensation. the derivative part of both controllers is no longer proportional to the derivative of the position error q this motivates the quotes in D in the name of the controller.
343
Ch. 13. PD Control
PD Control with gravity compensation

Control law: d ] + g (q ) + Kv [q = Kpq
= Ax AB q x = x + Bq where Kp, Kv IRnn are diagonal positive denite matrices, A = diag{ai} and B = diag{bi} and ai and bi are arbitrary real strictly positive constants for i = 1, 2, , n.
Ch. 13. PD Control
g (q ) Kv d q qd Kp ROBOT B
(pI + A)1AB
Figure 91: PD Control with gravity compensation. When q d is a constant vector the control law becomes Kv diag = Kpq bip q + g (q ). p + ai
345
Ch. 13. PD Control
it veries the set-point control objective: limt q (t) = q d (with q d IRn constant) The closed loop equation may be rewritten as A + AB q d = q q dt )1 [Kpq ] C (q d q , q )q ] Kv [ B q M (q d q q which is an autonomous dierential equation = x + B q d. the origin
T
= 0 IR3n is the unique equilibrium.
346
Ch. 13. PD Control
Stability of the origin, Lyapunov function candidate 1 T 1 )T Kv B 1 ( B q ) , q ) = K (q , q ) + q + ( B q Kpq V ( , q 2 2 where

T ) = 1 is the kinetic energy function K (q , q M (q )q q 2 Kv B 1 is positive denite. , q ) is globally positive denite. Hence, V (, q
347
Ch. 13. PD Control
Time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate 1 T T +q TKpq , q ) = q M (q ) M (q )q V ( , q q+ q 2 Bq . ]T Kv B 1 + [ B q Using the closed loop equation we obtain ( , q , q ) = [ B q ]T Kv B 1A [ B q ] V T 1 Kv B A Kv A 0 Kv A BKv A 0 = q 0 0 0 q ( , q , q ) is globally negative semidenite. V The origin is asymptotically stable (use the La Salles Theorem).
q q
Ch. 13. PD Control
Example 13.1
Consider the Pelican robot

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

Ch. 13. PD Control
The components of the vector of gravitational torques g (q ) are given by g1(q ) = (m1lc1 + m2l1)g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) .
Consider the PD controller with gravity compensation with Kp = diag{kp} = diag{30} [Nm/rad] , Kv B = diag{kv } = diag{7, 3} [Nm sec/rad] , = diag{bi} = diag{30, 70} [1/sec] . A = diag{ai} = diag{30, 70} [1/sec] ,
350
Ch. 13. PD Control
The components of the control input are given by 1 kv 1 + g1(q ) 1 = kpq 2 kv 2 + g2(q ) 2 = kpq x 1 = a1x1 a1b1q1 x 2 = a2x2 a2b2q2 1 = x1 + b1q1 2 = x2 + b2q2 .
Initial conditions q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 2(0) = 0 q 1(0) = 0, q x1(0) = 0, x2(0) = 0 .

Ch. 13. PD Control
The desired joint positions are chosen as
qd1 = /10, qd2 = /30 [rad] .
In terms of the state vector of the closed loop equation, the initial state is b1/10 9.423 (0) b2/30 7.329 /10 0.3141 q (0) = /30 = 0.1047 . 0 0 (0) q 0 0
Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
Ch. 13. PD Control
[rad] ..... ... q ... 1 ... .... ...... ......... .... q ...... 2 ......................................................................................................... 0.0587 ......................... ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .... . . .. .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... . . .... . . . .. . . .. .. 0.0151
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 t [sec]
0.1
Figure 93: Position errors q 1 (t) and q 2 ( t) . Figure presents the experimental results, (t) tends asymptotically to a constant nonzero value (due to the q non-modeled friction eects).
353
Ch. 13. PD Control
PD Control with desired gravity compensation

Control law d ] + g (q d ) + Kv [q = Kpq
= Ax AB q x = x + Bq where Kp, Kv IRnn are diagonal positive denite matrices, A = diag{ai} and B = diag{bi} with ai and bi arbitrary real strictly positive constants for all i = 1, 2, , n.
Ch. 13. PD Control
g (q d ) q
Kv d q qd Kp
ROBOT B
(pI + A)1AB
Figure 94: PD Control with desired gravity compensation. When q d is a constant vector the control law may be expressed by bip Kv diag = Kpq q + g (q d ), p + ai
Ch. 13. PD Control
If min{Kp} > kg , then it veries the set-point control objective that is, limt q (t) = q d The closed loop equation may rewritten as: A + AB q d q q = dt ]+ g(q d) C (q d q , q )q g (q d q )] Kv [ B q M (q )1 [Kpq q which is an autonomous dierential equation. = x + B q d. the origin
T
= 0 IR3n is the unique equilibrium
356
Ch. 13. PD Control
Stability of the origin Consider the Lyapunov function candidate 1 )T Kv B 1 ( B q , q ) + f ( ) , q ) = K (q d q q ) + ( B q V ( , q 2 where

T , q ) = 1 )q K (q d q M (q d q q 2 T ) U (q d ) + g (q d )T q +1 . f ( q ) = U (q d q Kpq q 2 Since Kv B 1 is positive denite and min{Kp} > kg , q ) is also globally positive denite. Consequently, V (, q
357
Ch. 13. PD Control
The time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate yields 1 T T T , q ) = q M (q ) q ) + g (q d )T q g (q d q M (q )q V ( , q q+ q 2 Bq . + [ B q ]T Kv B 1 TKpq +q Using the closed loop equation we obtain ( , q , q ) = ( B q )T Kv B 1A ( B q ) V
( , q , q ) is a globally semidenite negative function. V The origin is global asymptotically stable (use La Salles Theorem).
358
Ch. 13. PD Control
Example 13.2

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

Ch. 13. PD Control
The components of the vector of gravitational torques g (q ) are given by g1(q ) = (m1lc1 + m2l1)g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) .
The constant kg may be obtained as (see Property , 4.3): gi(q ) qj

2
kg
= n
max
i,j,q
= n((m1lc1 + m2l1)g + m2lc2g ) = 23.94

kg m2/sec
.
360
Ch. 13. PD Control
Consider the PD control with desired gravity compensation satisfying: min{Kp} > kg .
In particular, these matrices are taken to be Kp = diag{kp} = diag{30} [Nm/rad] , Kv B = diag{kv } = diag{7, 3} [Nm sec/rad] , = diag{bi} = diag{30, 70} [1/sec] . A = diag{ai} = diag{30, 70} [1/sec] ,
361
Ch. 13. PD Control
The components of the control input are given by 1 kv 1 + g1(q ) 1 = kpq 2 kv 2 + g2(q ) 2 = kpq x 1 = a1x1 a1b1q1 x 2 = a2x2 a2b2q2 1 = x1 + b1q1 2 = x2 + b2q2 .
Initial conditions q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 2(0) = 0 q 1(0) = 0, q x1(0) = 0, x2(0) = 0 .

Ch. 13. PD Control
The desired joint positions are
qd1 = /10, qd2 = /30 [rad] .
In terms of the state vector of the closed loop equation, the initial state is b1/10 9.423 (0) b2/30 7.329 /10 0.3141 q (0) = /30 = 0.1047 . 0 0 (0) q 0 0
Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
Ch. 13. PD Control
[rad] .... . . q 1 . . . . . . . . . . . ... .... ..... q ..... 2............................ .........................................................................................0.0368 ........ ....... . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .... . . .... . .... . .... . . . .... .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .... . .... . . . . . . .. .... . .. .. .... . . .... . . . .... .. . . . . . .... . . .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. . .. . . . .. . . .. .. . . .. ..... ..... ......... ..... .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . . . ..... . . . .... . . .. . .. .. .. . . . . .... . . .. . .. .. .. . . .. . . . . .. ..... . . .. . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . ..... 0.0145
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 t [sec]
0.1
Figure 96: Position errors q 1 (t) and q 2 ( t) Figure shows the experimental results, (t) tends asymptotically to a constant nonzero value (due to the q friction eects in the actual robot).
364
Ch. 14. Introduction to adaptive robot control
Ch.14. Introduction to adaptive robot control

The implicit assumptions in the preceding chapters are: The model is accurately known The constant physical parameters are accurately known. Two general techniques deal with the absence of above considerations: Robust control aims at controlling, with a small error, a class of robot manipulators (model is not accurately known) with the same controller. Adaptive control deals with uncertainty in the systems parameters (unknown constant parameters) it requires the precise knowledge of the structure of the system.
In the subsequent chapters we describe and analyze two adaptive controllers for robots.
PD control with feedforward gravity compensation. PD control with adaptive compensation.
366
Parameterization of the dynamic model

The dynamic model of robot manipulators as we know, is given by )q + g (q ) = M (q ) q + C (q , q To emphasize the dependence of the dynamic model on the dynamic parameters, we write , )q + g (q , ) = . M (q , ) q + C (q , q where IRm is the m vector of parameters m is some known constant , do not necessarily correspond to the physical parameters of the robot
(46)
Example 14.1
Consider the example of an ideal pendulum Dynamic model + mgl sin(q ) = ml2q where its mass m is concentrated at the tip, at a distance l from its axis of rotation. We identify: , and g (q, ) = mgl sin(q ). M (q, ) = ml2q ml2 = (assuming that both parameters are unknown) mgl it is a nonlinear vectorial function of the physical parameters.
Linearity in the Dynamic Parameters

Above example also shows that the dynamic model is linear in the parameters . ml q + mgl sin(q )
2
[ q
sin(q )]
ml2 mgl
=: (q, q ) . contains nonlinear terms of the state, and is the vector of dynamic parameters. Property known as parameterization.
linearity
in
the
parameters
or
linear
369
Property 14.1. Linearity in the dynamic parameters.

For all u, v , w IRn it holds that M (q , )u+C (q , w, )v +g (q , ) = (q , u, v , w)+(q , u, v , w) 1. where (q , u, v , w) is a vector of n 1, (q , u, v , w) is a matrix of n m and the vector IRm depends only on the dynamic parameters of the manipulator and its load.
2.
nm Moreover, if q , u, v , w Ln . then (q , u, v , w ) L
370
The Nominal Model
The dynamics (46), may be expressed as M (q , )u + C (q , w , )v + g (q , ) = (q , u, v , w) + M0(q )u + C0(q , w)v + g 0(q ),
where the nominal model or nominal part of the model is, (q , u, v , w) = M0(q )u + C0(q , w)v + g 0(q ) .
M0(q ), C0(q , w) and the vector g 0(q ) are the parts of ) and g (q ) M (q ), C (q , q do not depend on (unknown dynamic parameters). IRm, we have Given a vector = (q , u, v , w) )u + C (q , w , )v + g (q , ) M0(q )u C0(q , w)v g (q ). M (q , 0 A particular case is when u = v = w = 0 IRn. In this scenario g (q , ) = (q , 0, 0, 0) + g 0(q ) .
372
Example 14.7

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

Dynamic model ) C12(q , q ) C11(q , q g 1 (q ) M11(q ) M12(q ) = q+ q+ ) C22(q , q ) M21(q ) M22(q ) C21(q , q g 2 (q ) ) M (q ) g (q ) C (q ,q where
2 2 2 l M11(q ) = m1lc + m + l 2 1 1 c2 + 2l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I1 + I2 2 M12(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I2 2 M21(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I2 2 M22(q ) = m2lc 2 + I2
) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q C11(q , q 2

) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2) [q C12(q , q 1 + q 2] ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q 1 C21(q , q ) = 0 C22(q , q g1(q ) = [m1lc1 + m2l1] g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) . We have selected as parameters of interest, m2, I2 and lc2 We dene the vectors u=
u1 u2
v=
v1 v2
w=
w1 w2
.
375
The parameterization leads to M (q , )u + C (q , w , )v + g (q , ) = 11 12 13 1 2 + M0(q )u + C0(q , w)v + g 0(q ), 21 22 23 3 where

2 11 = l1 u1 + l1g sin(q1)
12 = 2l1 cos(q2)u1 + l1 cos(q2)u2 l1 sin(q2)w2v1 l1 sin(q2)[w1 + w2]v2 + g sin(q1 + q2) 13 = u1 + u2 21 = 0

22 = l1 cos(q2)u1 + l1 sin(q2)w1v1 + g sin(q1 + q2) 23 = u1 + u2 m2 1 = 2 = m2lc2 2 3 m2lc 2 + I2 M0(q ) = C 0 (q , w ) = g 0 (q ) =

2 m1lc 1 + I1 0
0 0
0 0 0 0 m1lc1g sin(q1) 0 .
depends exclusively on the parameters of interest m2, I2 and lc2.

The Adaptive Robot Control Problem

Consider the dynamic equation , )q + g (q , ) = M (q , ) q + C (q , q or equivalently, )q + g 0 (q ) = . , q ,q ) + M0(q ) q + C 0 (q , q (q , q ) IRnn and , q ,q ) IRnm, M0(q ), C0(q , q Assume that (q , q g 0(q ) IRn are known but IRm is unknown d and q d, Given a set of vectorial bounded functions q d, q we seek to design controllers that achieve the position or the motion control objectives.
Parameterization of the controller
The control laws may be written in the functional form d, q d , M (q ), C (q , q ), g (q )) . , q d, q = (q , q Giving a little more structure we have , q d, q d, q d ) + M (q )u + C (q , w )v + g (q ), = 1 (q , q where
379
, q d, q d, q d), usually corresponds to linear control The rst term 1(q , q terms of PD type, i.e., , q d, q d, q d) = Kp[q d q ] + Kv [q d q ] 1 (q , q where Kp is the gain matrix of position Kv is the velocity (or derivative gain). It does not depend explicitly on the dynamic model and on q d, q d and q d. In the second term u, v , w IRn depend on q , q It depends explicitly on the dynamic model
380
In general an adaptive controller is formed by two main parts: Control law or controller. Adaptation law. Control law in the generic form )u + C (q , w , )v + g (q , ) , q d, q d, q d ) + M (q , = 1 (q , q
where is the vector of adaptive parameters

An adaptation law (integral law or gradient type)

t
( t) =
0
(0) ,q , q d, q d, q d) ds + (s, q , q
where (0) IRm are design parameters = T IRmm and is usually diagonal and positive denite (adaptation gain) is a vectorial function to determine, of dimension m. (0) is an arbitrary vector in practice, we choose it as the best approximation available on .
382
qd d q d q
) ,q d, q d , (t, q , q
ROBOT
qd q
,q , qd, q d, q d ) ds (s, q , q
0
Figure 98: Adaptive control of robots: block-diagram. An equivalent representation of the adaptation law d, q d) . ,q , q d, q (t) = (s, q , q It is desirable from a practical viewpoint, that the control law as well as the adaptation law, do not depend explicitly . on q
Stability and Convergence of Adaptive Control Systems

An adaptive system guarantees the parametric convergence if (t) when t exists and is such that the limit of
t
( t) = lim
Parametric convergence is not an intrinsic characteristic of an adaptive controller. Stability analysis is based on Lyapunov theory, with the inclusion of =
(parametric errors vector)

384
General form of the closed loop equation q d q , q d, q d, q d, = f t, q , q dt the origin is an equilibrium point. In general, is not the only equilibrium point We study only stability and convergence of the position errors: ( t) = 0 . limt q Certainty equivalence (the achievement of the control objective under parameter uncertainty)
Ch. 15. PD control with adaptive desired gravity compensation
Ch.15. PD Control with Adaptive Desired Gravity Compensation

We consider the scenario where all the joints of the robot are revolute. The Control and Adaptive Laws IRm and x IRn Making use of (47), we have that for any vector ) = (x, 0, 0, 0) + g (x ) . g (x , 0 For simplicity, in the sequel we use g (x) = (x, 0, 0, 0) .
(47)
The PD control with adaptive desired gravity compensation is described ) Kv q + g (q d , = Kpq + g (q ), Kv q + g (q d ) = Kpq 0 d and
t
(t) = g (q )T d
0
0 q q 1+ q
(0), ds +
where Kp, Kv IRnn and IRmm are symmetric positive denite design matrices 0 is a suitable positive constant. It was used (47) with x = q d.
Design parameters Only Kp and 0 must be chosen carefully. To that end, we start by dening Max{M }, kC 1 and kg as Max{M (q , )} Max{M } , ) kC 1 q C (q , q g (x, ) g (y , ) kg x y q IRn, IRm IRn, IRm q, q x, y IRn, IRm.
The constants Max{M }, kC 1 and kg are considered known. , ), g (q , ) and , It is necessary to dispose of M (q , ), C (q , q but one does not require to know . In practice the set is determined from upper and lowerbounds on the dynamic parameters
Kp and 0 are chosen so that C.1) C.2) C.3) C.4) min{Kp} > kg , 2min{Kp} > 0 , 2Max{M } 2min{Kv }[min{Kp} kg ] > 0 , 2 Max{Kv } min{Kv } > 0 2 [kC 1 + 2Max{M }]
where 2 and 1 are dened so that 21 2 = 1 2 2min{Kp} > 1 > 2 . kg

= . We dene the parametric errors vector as: It is introduced only for analytical purposes (not used by the controller) It may be veried that = g (q ) + g (q ) g (q d ) d d + g (q , ) g (q ), = g (q d ) d 0 d The control law may be written as + g (q , ) . Kv q + g (q d ) = Kpq d Using above control law in the robot model, we obtain + g (q , ) g (q , ) . , )q = Kpq Kv q + g (q d ) M (q , ) q + C (q , q d
As = , we get that = (q )T g d 0 q . q 1+ q
From all the above we have that the closed loop equation is formed by q q C (q , q d M (q )1 Kpq )q + g (q d ) g (q ) ( q ) K q + v g q d = dt q g (q d)T 1+0 q q
Autonomous dierential equation (the origin is an equilibrium point).

Stability analysis
Lyapunov function candidate P T q 0 M (q , ) 2 K p 2 1+ q 1 q 0 M (q , ) 2 M (q , ) 1+ q 0 0 1 T + q Kpq + U (q , ) U (q d , ) + g (q d , ) q 1 f ( q)

T
) = , q , V (t, q
q 0 q 0 1
Equivalent form ) = , q , V (t, q 1 T + U (q , ) U (q d, ) + g (q d, )Tq M (q , )q q 2 1 1 0 T TM (q , )q Kpq + + q q 1 2 1+ q 1 T 1 + , 2
393
The constants 0 > 0, 1 > 2 and 2 > 2 are chosen so that 2min{Kp} > 1 > 2 kg 21 2 = 1 2 2min{Kp} > 0 > 0 . 2Max{M } (48)
(49) (50)
Condition (48) guarantees that f ( q ) is a positive denite function (50) ensures that P is a positive denite matrix 1 1 1 Finally (49) implies that + = 2 2. 1
Dene as ) := = ( q
0 . 1+ q
Inequality (50) implies that the matrix 2 Kp 2 0 1+ q

2
2 M (q , ) = Kp 2M (q , ) > 0 2
395
The Lyapunov function candidate may be rewritten as, ) = , q , V (t, q 1 + q ]T M (q , ) [q + q ] [q 2 1 T 2 + q Kp 2M (q , ) q 2 2 1 T 1 + 2 1 T Kpq , q 1
+ + U (q , ) U (q d, ) + g (q d, )Tq
) f (q
which is obviously a positive denite function since 2 2 M (q , ) > 0 , K M (q , ) > 0, > 0, and p 2 f ( q ) is also a positive denite function (since min{Kp} > kg )
Time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate ) = q (t, q q TKpq + q TM (q )q + q TKv q , q , TKv q V ) T [g (q d) g (q )] TC (q , q q q q . TM (q )q q It can be upper bounded, getting: T Q min{Kp} kg 1 2 Max {Kv } 1 2 Max {Kv }
1 20 min {Kv } 2
q q
) (t, q , q , V
q q
1 [min{Kv } 20(kC1 + 2Max{M })] q 2

397
Q is positive denite if min{Kp} > kg 2min{Kv }(min{Kp} kg ) 2 Max {Kv } while we have that > 0 if min{Kv } > 0 . 2(kC1 + 2Max{M }) > 0
398
Finally we obtain that ) (t, q , q , V 0 min{Q} 1+ q q

2
+ q
2
q 2
2 q q 0min{Q} 1+ q 2 It is a globally negative semidenite function. ) > 0 (globally) , q , Since moreover V (t, q
the origin of the closed loop equation is stable, and m , q Ln its solutions are bounded, that is: q and L .
Because:
2 d q ( t ) (t)) 0min{Q} ( t) , q ( t) , V (t, q , ( t) dt 1+ q
we have V0
0min{Q} 0 (0)). (0), q (0), where V0 := V (0, q q Ln That is: 2 . 1+ q Ln Using Lemma A.7 we obtain that: q 2
( t) 2 q dt , 1 + q ( t)
n , q Ln Thus, from q and q L 2 , and Lemma A.5 we obtain
(t) = 0 IRn (control objective achieved). lim q
400
Example 15.2

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

Dynamic model: ) C12(q , q ) M11(q ) M12(q ) C11(q , q g (q ) + + 1 = q q ) C22(q , q ) M21(q ) M22(q ) C21(q , q g 2 (q ) ) M (q ) g (q ) C (q ,q where
2 2 2 + m + l l M11(q ) = m1lc 2 1 1 c2 + 2l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I1 + I2 2 M12(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I2 2 M21(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I2 2 M22(q ) = m2lc 2 + I2
) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q C11(q , q 2

) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2) [q C12(q , q 1 + q 2] ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q 1 C21(q , q ) = 0 C22(q , q g1(q ) = [m1lc1 + m2l1] g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) . We consider parametric uncertainty in m2, I2 and lc2; the numeric values of these constants are not known exactly. Nevertheless, we assume to know their upper-bounds: m2, I2 and lc2, that is, m2 m2; I2 I2 ; lc2 lc2 .
(t) = 0 (with a constant q d). The control problem: limt q

Dynamic parameters vector IR3, m2 1 = 2 = m2lc2 . 2 3 m2lc 2 + I2 PD control with adaptive desired gravity compensation. + g (q ) Kv q + g (q d ) = Kpq 0 d
t 0
(t) = g (q )T d
0 q q 1+ q
(0) ds +
Kp, Kv IRnn and IRmm are symmetric positive denite design matrices 0 is a suitable positive constant.
Vector g 0(q d) g 0 (q d ) = Matrix g (q d) g (q d) = (q d, 0, 0, 0) = l1g sin(qd1) g sin(qd1 + qd2) 0 0 g sin(qd1 + qd2) 0 . m1lc1g sin(qd1) 0 .
We rst need to determine the numeric values of Max{M (q , )} Max{M } , ) kC 1 q C (q , q g (x, ) g (y , ) kg x y

q IRn, IRn, q, q x, y IRn, .

405
It is necessary to characterize the set IR3, to which , as: = x1 2 x2 IR3 : |x1| m2; |x2| m2lc2; |x3| m2lc2 + I2 . x3 Expressions for Max{M }, kC 1 and kg for the case of parametric uncertainty are: Max{M }
2 m1lc 1
2 m2 l1
+ 2lc2 + 3lc1lc2 + I1 + I2
kC 1 n2m2l1lc2 kg
n m1lc1 + m2l1 + m2lc2 g .

406
Fixing the following values for the bounds m2 = 2.898 I2 = 0.0125 lc2 = 0.02862 [kg] kg m2 [m],
and considering the numeric values showed in table 5.1 we nally obtain: Max{M } = 0.475 kC 1 = 0.086 kg = 28.99 kg m2 kg m2 kg m2/sec2 .
407
The next step consists on calculating Kp, Kv and 0 and 2. Condition C.1: min{Kp} > kg As, kg = 28.99, hence Kp = diag{kp} = diag{30}. Kv is chosen arbitrarily but symmetric positive denite. We may x it to Kv = diag{kv } = diag{7, 3}. We chose 1 according with 2min{Kp} > 1 > 2, kg so an appropriate value is 1 = 2.01. 2 is determined from 21 , 2 = 1 2 so we get 2 = 402 .
Using above information, it is immediate to verify that 2min{Kp} 2Max{M } 2min{Kv }[min{Kp} kg ] 2 Max {Kv } min{Kv } 2 [kC 1 + 2Max{M }]
= 0.561 = 0.124 = 1.448
According to conditions C.2 through C.4, 0 must be strictly smaller than the previous quantities. Therefore, we choose 0 = 0.12. must be symmetric positive denite. A choice is e.g., = diag{1, 2} = diag{500, 10}.
The vector of initial adaptive parameters is arbitrary, and here it is taken (0) = 0. to be: In summary, the control law may be written as 1 + g sin(qd1 + qd2) 2 1 = kpq 1 kv q 1 + l1g sin(qd1) + m1lc1g sin(qd1) 2 . 2 = kpq 2 kv q 2 + g sin(qd1 + qd2) 3. Notice that the control law does not depend on
410
Consequently, the adaptation law only has the following two components:
t
1(t) = l1g sin(qd1)

0
0 q 1 q 1 1+ q
t
1(0) ds + ds 2(0) . ds +
2(t) = g sin(qd1 + qd2)

0
0 q 1 q 1 1+ q
t
+ g sin(qd1 + qd2)
0
0 q 2 q 2 1+ q
Laboratory experimental results. Initial conditions: q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 q 1(0) = 0, q 2(0) = 0 .

Desired joint positions: qd1 = /10, qd2 = /30 [rad] .
In terms of the state vector of the closed loop equation, the initial state is 0.3141 /10 (0) q /30 0.1047 [rad] . = = 0 0 (0) q 0 0
412
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
[rad]
..... .... q ..... 1 ...... ...... .... 2 ................. .........q . ............ .................. ............................... ..................................... ...... .. .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. .. .. .. . . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ...... . . .. .. . . .. .. .. ..........................................................
0.1
0.0 12.5 25.0 37.5 50.0 t [sec]
Figure 100: Position errors q 1 and q 2. (t) tend Above Figure shows that the components of the position error q asymptotically to zero in spite of the non-modeled friction phenomenon.
413
Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space 10.0 7.5 5.0 2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
3.2902 1 ...................................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ .. . .. 0.1648 .. . ........................................................................................ .. . . .......................... .. . . ............................ ........... ... . . .. . ..... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ........ ... ..... . . . . .. .... .
0.0 12.5 25.0 37.5 50.0 t [sec]
1 and 2. Figure 101: Estimated parameters From Figure we appreciate that both parameters tend to values which are relatively near of the unknown values of 1 and 2, i.e., lim 1(t) 3.2902 1 m2 2.0458 = = = 2(t) 0.1648 0.047 2 m2lc2 .
In general, the parameters do not converge to their true values (persistency of excitation is not veried)
If instead of limiting the value of 0 we use the same gains as for the latter controllers, the performance is improved.
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
[rad] .... . . . q 1 . . . . . ... ...... .... ..... ... q . ...... 2 ........... ................. .......................................... . . ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... . . .. ................. .. .. .........................................................................................................
0.1
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 t [sec]
Figure 102: Position errors q 1 and q 2.
415
For this, we set the gains to Kp = 30 0 7 0 500 0 0 3 10 10 0 30 [Nm / rad] ,
Kv
[Nm sec / rad] ,
[Nm / (rad sec)] ,
and 0 = 5, i.e., Kp and Kv have the same values as for the PD controllers.
416
10.0 7.5 5.0 2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . .... ............................................... ..... ...................................................2.9053 ........................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 2 .................................................................... ....................................................0.1942 .......................... .. ...... . .. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . ..
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0 t [sec]
1 and 2. Figure 103: Estimated parameters
417
Ch. 16. PD Control with Adaptive Compensation
Ch.16. PD Control with Adaptive Compensation
The control and adaptation laws Firstly we recall that the PD controller with compensation is given by + C (q , q + M (q ) q ) [q d + + Kv q d + q = Kpq q ] + g (q ), where Kp, Kv IRnn are symmetric positive denite design matrices, = q d q denotes the position error, q and is dened as = Kv 1Kp .
Now we recall the following property Parameterization of the dynamic model M (q , )u + C (q , w , )v + g (q , ) = (q , u, v , w) + M0(q )u + C0(q , w)v + g 0(q ) where (q , u, v , w) IRnm, M0(q ) IRnn, C0(q , w) IRnn, g 0(q ) IRn and IRm. contains elements that depend on the dynamic parameters. M0(q ), C0(q , w) and g 0(q ) represent parts of ) and g (q ) that do not depend on . M (q ), C (q , q
419
IRm, we obtain For any vector ) = ) q ) [q + C (q , q , d + d + q q ] + g (q , M (q , + M0(q ) q ,q d + ) d + q d + q q, q (q , q ) [q d + q ] + g 0 (q ) . + C 0 (q , q where we dened d + q u = q d + q v = q . w = q ,q d + ). d + q q, q In the sequel we use the abbreviation: = (q , q
(51)
We are now ready to study the PD control with adaptive compensation Control law ) q ) [q + M (q , + C (q , q + Kv q , d + d + q = Kpq q] ) + g (q , (52)
+ M0(q ) q + C 0 (q , q + ) [q d + + Kv q d + q q] = Kpq + g 0 (q ), and ( t) =

0
(53)
+ T q q
(0), ds +
Kp, Kv IRnn and IRmm are symmetric positive denite. The pass from (52) to (53) follows by using (51).
= . We dene the parametric errors vector as: Introduced only with analytic purposes (it is not used by the controller). is unknown since it is a function of . It may be veried that = + + M (q , ) q + C (q , q , ) [q d + d + q = q ] + g (q , ) C 0 (q , q ) [q d + d + q q ] g 0 (q ) M0(q ) q
422
The control law takes the form + + Kv q = Kpq + C (q , q , ) [q d + d + q q ] + g (q , ) . + M (q , ) q Now the robot model can be expressed as: . + C (q , q + Kv q + q , ) q M (q , ) q q = Kpq Considering these facts we have that = T q + q .
Finally, the closed-loop equation, may be written as: q q d C (q , q + M (q , )1 Kpq Kv q , ) q q = q dt + q T q
which is a nonautonomous dierential equation and of which the origin, q = 0 IR2n+m , is an equilibrium point. q
Stability analysis
Lyapunov function candidate T 2Kp + TM (q , ) TM (q , ) q 1 , q , ) = q V (t, q M (q , ) M (q , ) 2 0 0 q 0 . 0 q 1
which is positive denite. This, may be more clear when rewriting it as

T 1 1 T 1 T , q , ) = q + . + + Kpq V (t, q q M (q , ) q q +q 2 2
425
The time derivative of the Lyapunov function candidate becomes ) = (t, q , , q V (q , ) q + + + +1 q + q q q M (q , ) q q q M 2 T 1 T . + + 2 q Kpq
T T
It may be reduced to ) = q (t, q TKv q , q , q TTKv V q
TKv is symmetric positive denite (because, is a non-singular matrix while Kv is a symmetric positive denite matrix, cf. Lemma 2.1) ) is a globally negative semidenite function. (t, q , , q Therefore, V
Above result, and since, the Lyapunov function candidate is globally positive denite, radially unbounded and decrescent, Theorem 2.3 guarantees that the origin of the closed-loop equation is uniformly stable, and all the solutions are bounded, that is, Ln , q q , Lm .
427
Because d (t)) q ( t) , ( t) , q (t)TT Kv V (t, q q ( t) dt ( t) min{T Kv } q V0 T min{ Kv } (0)) (0), (0), q where V0 := (0, q Ln That is: q 2 . we have
( t) q
0
dt
Ln , q Ln Thus, from q and q 2 , and Lemma A.5 we obtain

t
(t) = 0 IRn (control objective achieved). lim q
428
Example 16.3

y g
Link 1
lc1
l1 x
I1 m1 q1 lc2 l2 m2 I2 q2
Link 2

Dynamic model:
) C12(q , q ) M11(q ) M12(q ) C11(q , q g (q ) + + 1 = q q ) C22(q , q ) M21(q ) M22(q ) C21(q , q g 2 (q ) ) M (q ) g (q ) C (q ,q where

2 2 2 M11(q ) = m1lc + m + l l 2 1 1 c2 + 2l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I1 + I2 2 M12(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I2 2 M21(q ) = m2 lc 2 + l1 lc2 cos(q2 ) + I2 2 M22(q ) = m2lc 2 + I2
) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q C11(q , q 2 ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2) [q C12(q , q 1 + q 2] ) = m2l1lc2 sin(q2)q 1 C21(q , q ) = 0 C22(q , q g1(q ) = [m1lc1 + m2l1] g sin(q1) + m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) g2(q ) = m2lc2g sin(q1 + q2) .
Unknown parameters: m2, I2 and lc2. = 0. We wish to design a controller, such that: limt q We use the PD Control with Adaptive Compensation.
Parameterization of the dynamic model: M (q , )u + C (q , w , )v + g (q , ) = 11 12 13 1 = 2 21 22 23 3 +M0(q )u + C0(q , w)v + g 0(q ) where

2 u1 + l1g sin(q1) 11 = l1
12 = 2l1 cos(q2)u1 + l1 cos(q2)u2 l1 sin(q2)w2v1 l1 sin(q2)[w1 + w2]v2 + g sin(q1 + q2) 13 = u1 + u2

21 = 0 22 = l1 cos(q2)u1 + l1 sin(q2)w1v1 + g sin(q1 + q2) 23 = u1 + u2 m2 2.0458 1 = 2 = m2lc2 = 0.047 2 0.0126 3 m2lc 2 + I2 M0(q ) = C 0 (q , w ) = g 0 (q ) =
2 m1lc 1 + I1 0
0 0
0 0 0 0 m1lc1g sin(q1) 0 .
433
Particularly: + C (q , q , ) [q d + d + q q ] + g (q , ) = M (q , ) q + g 0 (q ), d + q + M0(q ) q where 1 + 12q 2 u1 q d1 + 11q d + q = u = q = 1 + 22q 2 u2 q d2 + 21q d + q= v = q = w = q 1 + 12q 2 v1 q d1 + 11q = v2 q d2 + 21q 1 + 22q 2 .
q w1 = 1 w2 q 2
434
The control law becomes 11 + + Kv q = Kpq 21 12 22 13 23 1 2 3
2 (m1lc 1 + I1 )u1 + m1 lc1 g sin(q1 ) , + 0 0
while the adaptation law is 11[v1 q 1] 1] + 22[v2 q 2] ds + 12[v1 q 13[v1 q 1] + 23[v2 q 2]
1(t) = 2 ( t) 3(t)
t 0
1(0) . 2(0) 3(0)

435
Where, Kp = diag{200, 150} [N m / rad] , Kv = diag{3} [N m sec / rad] , = diag{1.6 kg sec2/m2 , 0.004 kg sec2 , 0.004 kg m2 sec2 }, and therefore, = 11 21 12 1 := Kv Kp = diag{66.6, 50} [1/[sec]]. 22
Initial conditions, are chosen as: q1(0) = 0, q2(0) = 0 q 1(0) = 0, q 2(0) = 0 2(0) = 0 1(0) = 0, 3(0) = 0 .
436
0.02 0.01 0.00
0.01 0.02
[rad] ....... ..... q . ..1 . .. . . . . . . . . . ..... . ......... . . . . .. .. . ...... .... . . ..... . . . . .. ...... .. ........... ........... ............. . . . .. . .. ...... . ............ ... . . . .. ..... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .... ... . ...... ..... . .. .. . . ... .... ..... ... .... ...... . .... .. ...... . ... . . . .. ..... .... .. .. .. ... . .... .... ..... .... .. ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ........ ..... ....... .... . ....... .... . .. q 2
10 t [sec]
Figure 105: Position errors. ( t) , Figure 105 shows the steady state tracking position errors q by virtue of friction phenomena in the actual robot, are not zero.
437
3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0
. . ........ .... ......... ....... ..... ......... . . . ..1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .... .. .... .. .... .. .... .. ....... .... .. ....... ........ .. ....... ... . . ... .. . . . . .. . . .. . . .. .. . .. ....2 .............................................................................. .......................................................................... ....... 3 0 2 4 6 8 10 t [sec]
1, 2, and 3 Figure 106: Estimated parameters Figure 106 shows the evolution in time of the adaptive parameters. These parameters were arbitrarily assumed to be zero at the initial instant. We did not suppose having any knowledge a priori, about .
438
Thanks a lot for your attention!
439
http://www.springer.com/978-1-85233-994-4

Control of Robot Manipulators

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Control of Robot Manipulators

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

CONTROL OF ROBOT MANIPULATORS IN JOINT SPACE

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

The International Federation of Robotics (norm ISO/TR 8373) denes:

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Figure 1: Robot manipulator.

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

1 2 . The torques and forces are collected in the vector: := . . n

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

Familiarization with the physical system under consideration

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

Figure 3: Robot interacting with its environment.

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

Derivation of the dynamic model

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

Motion control of robot manipulators

Figure 7: Point-to-point motion specication.

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 1. What does control of robots consists in?

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space

Ch. 2. Introduction to Lyapunov stability theory

Ch. 2. Introduction to Lyapunov stability theory

R. Kelly, V. Santiba nez and A. Loria

Control of Robot Manipulators in Joint Space