Universit Du Qubec, Canada

cole de Technologie Suprieure

Mechanical Engineering Department

DGA1031 REPORT
Title: Adaptive control of a redundant robot in
production under uncertainties

Prepared by: Ali Adem

Supervisor: Dr. Jean-Pierre Kenne

Winter 2016
1

Contents
Abstract .............................................................................................................................................. 6
Objective ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 8
1.

Redundant robot .......................................................................................................................... 9

1.1.

Redundant robot definition...................................................................................................... 9

1.2.

The mechanics and control of mechanical manipulators ...................................................... 10

1.3.

Manipulator kinematics and Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) parameters ..................................... 10

1.3.1.

Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) parameters ............................................................................... 11

1.3.2.

Forward kinematic ............................................................................................................. 12

1.4.

Inverse manipulator Kinematics............................................................................................ 13

1.4.1.

Existence of solutions ........................................................................................................ 13

1.4.2.

Multiple solutions: ............................................................................................................. 14

1.4.3.

Method of solution ............................................................................................................ 15

1.4.4.

Analytic solution ............................................................................................................... 15

1.4.5.

Numerical solution ............................................................................................................ 16

1.5.

Dynamic Modeling of a Robotic ........................................................................................... 16

1.5.1.

Iterative Newton-Euler Formula........................................................................................ 16

.1.5.2

Lagrangian formulation of manipulator dynamics ............................................................ 18

1.6.

Trajectory Generation for Robot Movement ......................................................................... 19

1.6.1.

General considerations in path description and generation ............................................... 19

1.6.2.

Joint space schemes ........................................................................................................... 20

1.6.3.

Cartesian- space schemes .................................................................................................. 23

1.7.

Nonlinear control system ...................................................................................................... 24

1.7.1.

Available methods of nonlinear control system ................................................................ 25

1.7.2.

Feedback linearization ....................................................................................................... 25

1.7.3.

Robust control ................................................................................................................... 25

1.7.4.

Adaptive Control ............................................................................................................... 25

1.8.

Introduction to Optimization ................................................................................................. 26

1.8.1.

Modern Methods of Optimization ..................................................................................... 27

Chapter 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 28
Literature Review ............................................................................................................................. 28
2.

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 28

2.1.

Finite-state machine control of mechatronic systems ........................................................... 29

2.2.

Control system design of redundant robot ............................................................................ 29

2.3.

Optimization of Path planning of redundant robot................................................................ 34

2.3.1.

Sequential algorithm .......................................................................................................... 34

2.3.2.

Simultaneous algorithm and its variants ............................................................................ 34

2.3.3.

Genetic algorithm .............................................................................................................. 35

3

Chapter 3: Research problem ........................................................................................................... 36

3.

Problem Definition.................................................................................................................... 37

3.1.

Predictable contribution ........................................................................................................ 37

3.2.

Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 38

3.3.

Research Plan ........................................................................................................................ 39

References ........................................................................................................................................ 40

Chapter 1: Introduction

Abstract
Redundant robot has become widely used in industrial applications to perform repetitive tasks
such as welding and cutting materials. Redundancy in robots can be achieved by adding more
DOF than they needs, which will allow them to perform their tasks with more dexterity such as
dealing with uncertainties in their workspace. However, the maintaining of end-effector trajectory
in the presence of kinematic uncertainties such as free motion or constrained motion in redundant
robots becomes an important issue. Designing an adaptive control to use for trajectory tracking is
considered as an appropriate solution for this problem. Specific rules will be applied to generate
intelligent algorithm profile for all the possible solutions to perform the repetitive task with
acceptable quality and minimum errors. Experiments will be made on a redundant robot (ETS
laboratory) to validate the proposed models and to illustrate the robustness of control laws
developed in the context of real-time control.

Objective

The main objective: designing adaptive control for redundant robots to perform repetitive
task with knowledge of planning trajectory in the presence of uncertainty in the workspace
environment.

The specific objective: designing specific rules to identify the appropriate solution and
perform it with minimum errors and high possible velocity in the presence of uncertainties
in their workspace

Introduction
Developments in the electromechanical industrial sector has reached a great progress by making
robots to become more cost effective at their jobs, and as human labor continues to become more
expensive, more and more industrial jobs have become candidates for robotic automation. This is
the most important trend pushing growth of the industrial robot market. Additionally to the
economic side, the fact that robots became more intelligent and able to perform tasks that are
either dangerous or impossible for human workers to accomplish. The applications, in which
industrial robots perform, are gradually increasing in the year 2000; approximately 78% of the
robots installed in the US were welding or material-handling robots. Figure 1.1 shows the Robot
prices compared with human labor costs in the 1990s [12]. This report will introduce the
characteristics and operations of the redundant robotics in industrial to enhance the productivity
and how repetitive tasks are performed with redundant robotics under uncertainty in the workspace
environment.

Figure1.1 Robot prices compared with human labor costs in the 1990s

1. Redundant robot
In general, a robot can be defined as a goal oriented machine that can sense plan and act, and can
be classified to four categories; manipulator, mobile robot, machine vision and artificial
intelligence. This research problem will concentrate on manipulator that has more degree of
freedom (DOF) than it need, which is known as redundant robot. This chapter will introduce
briefly the kinematic and dynamic of redundant robot. In addition, the concept of adaptive control
rules will be explained.

1.1. Redundant robot definition

Redundant robots are those that have more degrees of freedom than it is normally required to
perform a given task. Redundant manipulators have extra DOFs compared to the minimum DOFs
required for reaching their task space. This allows the redundant manipulators to perform tasks
that require high dexterity. They can use the extra DOFs in their benefit to avoid their joint limits
and the obstacles in the workspace, while still reaching a desired end-effector pose and orientation
to perform any task in robot work space. Redundancy in robots can be achieved by adding more
DOF than it needs, and that will allow them to perform their tasks with more dexterity such as
dealing with uncertainties in their workspace.

1.2. The mechanics and control of mechanical manipulators

In the study of robotics, we are constantly concerned with the location of objects in
three-dimensional space. These objects are the links of the manipulator, the parts and tools with
which it deals, and other objects in the manipulator's environment. These objects are described by
just two attributes: position and orientation. In which, we represent these quantities and manipulate
them mathematically. In order to describe the position and orientation of a body in space, we
always attach a coordinate system, or frame, rigidly to the object. We then proceed to describe the
position and orientation of this frame with respect to some reference coordinate system. Figure 1.2
shows the coordinate systems are attached to the manipulator.

Fig 1.2 Coordinate systems or "frames" are attached to the manipulator

manipulator and to
in the environment.
1.3. objects
Manipulator
kinematics and Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) parameters
Kinematics is the science of motion which treats motion without regard to the forces that cause it.
Manipulator is assumed to be a set bodies connected in a chain by joints. These bodies are called
links. Joints form a connection between a neighboring pair of links. The term lower pair is used to
describe the connection between a pair of bodies when the relative motion is characterized by two
surfaces sliding over one other. There are six possible lower pair joints such as revolute, prismatic,
10

cylindrical, planar, screw, and spherical. However, most manipulators have revolute joints or
prismatic joints. In uncommon case, that mechanism is built with a joint having n degree of
freedom, it can be modeled as n joints of one degree of freedom connected with n-1 links of zero
length. The links are numbered starting from the fixed link called base link, which is called link 0.
The first moving body is link 1, and so on; out to the end free link which is called link n. Typical
redundant manipulators have more than 6 joints. A single link of a typical robot has many
attributes which is a mechanical designer had to consider during its design. For instance, the type
of material used the strength and stiffness of the link, the location and type of the joint bearing, the
external shape, the weight and inertia.

1.3.1. Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) parameters

According to the D-H representation, only four parameters (a, d, , ) are necessary to define a
frame in space (or joint axis) relative to a reference frame or base frame as shown in figure 1.3:
a = minimum distance between line L (the z axis of next frame) and z axis (mutually orthogonal
line between line L and z axis)
d = distance along z axis from z origin to minimum distance intersection point
= angle between x-z plane and plane containing z axis and minimum distance line
= angle between z axis and L

11

Figure 1.3 Conventional D-H parameters

1.3.2. Forward kinematic

The forward kinematic problem is to determine the position of the end effector from the
knowledge of the link positions, in other words, we know rotations angles and the translations
between them. Figure 1.4 shows the transformation between joint space and Cartesian space.

Figure 1.4 Forward and inverse kinematics

12

1.4. Inverse manipulator Kinematics

The problem of solving the kinematic equations of a manipulator is a nonlinear one.

The inverse

kinematic problem is to determine the link positions from the knowledge of the end effector. Using
redundant robot to perform repetitive task in industrial sector the planning trajectory is always
known. In addition, the task space will be within the dexterous space of the robot and that will lead
to multi-solution or infinite solution problem.

1.4.1. Existence of solutions

For a solution to exist, the specified goal point must lie within the workspace (Dextrous workspace
and reachable workspace) in addition the dexterous workspace is a subset of the reachable
workspace. [12]. Consider the workspace of the two-link manipulator in Figure 1.4.
If 1 = 2 then the reachable workspace consists of a disc of radius 21. The dextrous workspace
consists of only a single point, the origin. If 1 2 then there is no dexterous workspace, and
reachable work space becomes a ring of outer radius 1 + 2 and inner radius |1 2 |. In addition,
inside the reachable workspace there are two possible orientations of the end effector. On the
boundaries of the workspace there is only one possible orientation. Also, when a manipulator has
less than six degree of freedom, it cannot attain general goal position and orientations in 3-space.
In general, the workspace of such robot is a subset of a subspace which can be associated with any
particular robot. Furthermore, workspace also depends on the tool frame transformation. Finally, if
the desired position and orientation of the end-effector frame is in the workspace, then at least one
solution exists [12].

13

Figure 1.4 Two-link manipulator with link lengths l1 and 12

1.4.2. Multiple solutions:

Another possible problem encountered in solving kinematic equation is that of multiple solutions.
A manipulator with three revolute joints has a large dexterous workspace in the plane since any
position in the interior of its workspace can be reached with any orientation. Figure 1.5 shows a
three-link manipulator with its end-effector at a certain position and orientation by multiple ways

Figure 1.5: Three-link manipulator. Multiple solutions.

The fact that a manipulator has multiple solutions will cause problems because the system has to
be able to choose one. However, multiple solutions are necessary to solve the uncertainty problems
that might be accrued environment of the robot such as obstacles and any parameters changes. The
14

criteria upon which to base a decision vary, but a very reasonable choice would be the closet
solution as shown in Figure 1.6. Moreover, the number of solution depends upon the number of
degree of freedom. For example, completely general rotary-jointed manipulator with six degrees of
freedom, there are up to sixteen solutions possible

Figure 1.6 one of the two possible solutions to reach point B causes a collision

1.4.3. Method of solution

The inverse kinematic problem can be solved by various methods. These methods can be classified
into two classes: analytic solution and numerical solution. Within the class of closed form
solutions there are two methods of obtaining the solution: algebraic and geometric.

1.4.4. Analytic solution

Analytic solution is known as a closed form solution, and it exists for special manipulator geometries,
for example it can be used to solve the inverse kinematic problem if non-redundant robots and the solution
can be obtained algebraically or geometrically.

15

1.4.5. Numerical solution

For robots that do not have decouple geometries, an analytical solution does not exist and only
numerical solutions relying on iterative procedures can be useful. In numerical algorithms there
are m equations and n unknowns and the algorithm starts with an initial estimate for n unknowns.
The most common methods are based on the Newton Raphson approach, and it is used to solve
inverse kinematic problem of redundant robots [9].

1.5. Dynamic Modeling of a Robotic

The dynamic equations of motion of a manipulator are a set of mathematical equations such as
forces and torque that describing the dynamic behavior of the manipulator, and that equations of
motion can be obtain from physical laws of iterative Newton-Euler formulation and the
Lagrangian formulation. In the iterative Newton-Euler formulation, dynamic equations were
derived in terms of forces and motions, but in the Lagrangian formulation describes the dynamic
behavior of a robot in terms of the work done by, and energy stored in the system.

1.5.1. Iterative Newton-Euler Formula

The Newton- Euler Formulation might be said to be a "force balance" approach to dynamics.
I.

Newton's equation: the force, F, acting at the center of mass of a rigid body which

causes this acceleration is given by Newton's equation and shown at fig.1.7

= Newton's equation
Where m is the total mass of the rigid body, and is the acceleration.

16

Figure 1.7 force F acting on the center of mass of the body causes the body to accelerate at
II.

Euler's equation

The moment N, which must be acting on the rigid body to cause this motion, is given by Euler's
equation and shown at fig.1.8
N = C I + x C I Euler's equation
Where C I is the inertia tensor of the rigid body written in a frame, {C}, whose origin
is located at the center of mass, angular velocity and with angular acceleration .

Figure 1.8 A moment N is acting on a body, and the body is rotating with
velocity
cv and accelerating at th.

17

1.5.2. Lagrangian formulation of manipulator dynamics

The Lagrangian formulation is an "energy-based" approach to dynamics. The kinetic energy of a
point mass formula is:
K=

1
2

Where is the velocity.

The kinetic energy of a manipulator can be expressed as
1

K = 2 m . +

1
2

The first term is kinetic energy due to linear velocity ( ) of link's center of mass and the second
term is kinetic energy due to angular velocity () of the link.
The kinetic energy of a manipulator (quadratic form) is given by:
K (, ) =

1
2

()

Where M () is the n n mass matrix of the manipulator (positive definite matrix)

The potential energy can be expressed as:

Where

is 3x1 gravity vector,

is the vector locating the center of mass of link, and is

constant.
The lagrangian of a manipulator is
L (,) = K (,) u ()
The equation of motion for the manipulator are then given by

18

Where is the n x 1 vector of actuator torques.

In the case of a manipulator, this equation becomes
d k
dt

+ =

[12]

1.6. Trajectory Generation for Robot Movement

Trajectory refers to a time history of position, velocity, and acceleration for each degree of
freedom. Trajectory generation is computed trajectory that describes the desired motion of a
manipulator in multidimensional space.

1.6.1. General considerations in path description and generation

When we will consider and specify paths of a manipulator as motions of the tool frame, {T},
relative to the station frame, {S}. We decouple the motion description from any particular robot,
19

end-effector, or workpieces. One way to include more detail in a path description is to give a
sequence of desired via points (intermediate points between the initial and final positions). The
name path points includes all the via points plus the initial and final points. Along with these
spatial constraints on the motion, the user could also wish to specify temporal attributes of the
motion. Usually, it is desirable for the motion of the manipulator to be smooth function that is
continuous and has a continuous first derivative and second derivative as well. Rough, jerky
motions tend to cause increased wear on the mechanism and cause vibrations by exciting
resonances in the manipulator. Any smooth functions of time that pass through the via points
could be used to specify the exact path shape.

1.6.2. Joint space schemes

Joint space methods of path generation are the paths that shapes (in space and in time) are
described in terms of functions of joint angles. Joint-space schemes achieve the desired position
and orientation at the via points. There are many smooth functions use to implement joint moving
with respect to time, two can function.
i- Cubic polynomials
Consider the problem of moving the tool from its initial position to a goal position in a certain
amount of time. There are many smooth functions, (t) that might be used to interpolate the joint
value as shown in figure 1.9. For a single smooth motion, at least four constraints on, (t) are
evident.
Initial and final value

(0) = 0 ,

Initial and final velocity

( 0) = 0,

Cubic polynomial (third degree) has the form

20

( ) = 0
( ) = 0

(1)
(2)

() = 0 + 1 + 2 2 + 3 3

(3)

Where 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 polynomial coefficients the joint velocity and acceleration along this
path are clearly
() = 1 + 2 2 + 33 2
() = 2 2 + 63

(4)

Solving these equations for the we get

0 = 0
1 = 0
2 =

3
( 0 )
2

3 =

2
( 0 )
3

(5)

By using (5), we can calculate the cubic polynomial that connects any initial joint angle position
with any desired final position.

Figure 1.9 several possible path shapes for single joint

ii- Cubic polynomials for a path with via points
Usually, we wish to be able to pass through a via point without stopping, and we need to
generalize the way in which we fit cubics to the path constraints in a smooth way. The constraints
of (3) become
21

(6)

Where the velocity constraints at each end are not zero.

The four equations describing this general cubic becomes

(7)
Solving these equations for the we get we get
0 = 0
1 = 0
2 =
3 =

2
3

3
2

( 0 )

( 0 ) +

1
2

(8)

( + 0 )

Using (8), we can calculate the cubic polynomial that connects any initial and final positions with
any initial and final velocities. In Figure 10, shows a reasonable choice of joint velocities at the via
points, as indicated with small line segments representing tangents to the curve at each via point.

22

Figure 1.10 joints velocities via points

As a result if slope of these lines changes sign at the via point, choose zero velocity; if the slope of
these lines does not change sign, choose the average of the two slopes as the via velocity.

1.6.3. Cartesian- space schemes

We study methods of path generation in which the path shapes are defined in terms of functions
that compute Cartesian position and orientation as functions of time. The most common path shape
is a straight line, but circular, sinusoidal, or other path shapes could be used.
i- Cartesian straight-line motion
If the tool follows straight-line paths between smooth widely separated via points.. Motions in
terms of straight lines are a subset of the general capability of Cartesian motion. In a system that
allowed general Cartesian motion, such path shapes as ellipses or sinusoids might be executed, but
a spline of linear functions with parabolic blends is appropriate. The orientation as a rotation
matrix at each via point, must be composed of orthonormal columns, if we combine angle-axis
representation of orientation with the Cartesian-position representation, we get a 6 x 1
representation of Cartesian position and orientation as a follows:

23

Where SKA is formed by scaling the unit vector SKA by the amount or rotation SA,
When via points are passed, the linear splines with parabolic blends are used and angular velocity
of the end-effector are changed smoothly. One minor problem arises from the fact that the angle
axis representation of orientation is not unique that is,

Where n is any positive or negative integer. Figure 1.11 shows four different possible of SKB and
their relations to SKA [12] .

Figure 1.11 shows four different possible of SKB and their relations to SKA

1.7. Nonlinear control system

In general the tasks of nonlinear control system can be divided to two types; stabilization or
regulation and the control is called stabilizer or regulator which is deal to maintain the system
stability around the equilibrium point. The other type called tracking and control is designed to
track a given time trajectory.
24

1.7.1. Available methods of nonlinear control system

Designing nonlinear controller for such system depends on the physic and complexity of the
system. There is no general method for designing nonlinear controller. There are many techniques;
each is applicable to specific classes of nonlinear control problems. This report will define briefly
the most used control design methods.

1.7.2. Feedback linearization

The basic idea of feedback linearization is to transform a nonlinear system into a fully or partially
linear system and then use the well-known linear design methods to establish a control design. It
does not guarantee robustness in presence of uncertainties conditions.

1.7.3. Robust control

In robust nonlinear control, the designed based on the consideration of both the nominal model and
some characteristics of model uncertainties (such as the knowledge that the load to be picked up
and carried by a robot is between 2 kg and 10 kg). Robust nonlinear control techniques are
considered the best to specific category of nonlinear systems, and generally need state
measurements [16].

1.7.4. Adaptive Control

Adaptive can be defined as controller with adjustable parameters to deal with parametric
uncertainty of systems with guarantee of system stability. The main advantages of adaptive
control, it does not excessively rely on models, and does not trade performance for modeling
accuracy, furthermore, it can improve itself under foreseen conditions. Adaptive control is superior

25

to robust control in dealing with uncertainties in constant or slow-varying parameters. Figure 1.12
is shown the operation signals of adaptive control.

Figure 1.12 the operation signals of adaptive control

Source: http://america.pink/adaptive-control_249118.html

1.8. Introduction to Optimization

Optimization is the act of obtaining the best result under given circumstances. In design, operating,
and maintenance of any engineering system, engineers have to take many technological and
decisions at several stages. The main goal of all such decisions is to get maximum performance of

26

the system with minimum efforts. Optimization also, can be defined as the process of finding the
conditions that give the maximum or minimum value of a function [15].

1.8.1. Modern Methods of Optimization

In recent years, some optimization methods that are practically different from the traditional
mathematical programming techniques have been developed. These methods are labeled as
modern or non-traditional methods of optimization. Most of these methods are based on certain
characteristics and behavior of biological, molecular, swarm of insects, and neurobiological
systems [15]. These methods are: simulated annealing, particle swarm optimization, ant colony
optimization, fuzzy optimization, neural-network-based methods and genetic algorithms.
Genetic algorithms (GA) are based on the principles of natural genetics and natural selection [15].
In GAs, the design variables are represented as strings of binary numbers, 0 and 1. In addition, the
GAs are naturally suitable for solving unconstrained maximization problems. The solution of an
optimization problem by GAs starts with a population of random strings denoting several
(population of) design vectors. The population size in GAs (n) is usually fixed [15].

27

Chapter 2
Literature Review

2. Introduction
In the last decade, development and research in robotics has been very active. Adding more degree
of freedom to robots than they normally require causes redundancy. This redundancy enhances the
performance of robotics and adds more cleverness to perform their tasks like human, and allow
them to avoid any unforeseen condition in their work space. Generally, a redundancy indicates that
the robot has an internal movement which does not influence the trajectory of the robots end28

effectors and allows the robot to perform auxiliary tasks such as, obstacle avoidance and any other
uncertainties conditions. At the same time redundancy add more complexity to the control design
methods and optimisation techniques of the redundant robots. This chapter will introduce some of
the research papers retreated to the control and optimization of robots.

2.1. Finite-state machine control of mechatronic systems

The design of control concepts and algorithms for complex processes that are characterized more
by the occurrence of discrete events than by differential equations representing the laws of Physics
[FSM]. Therefore, designing control systems for mechatronic systems can be achieved by
combining the concepts of both computer science and control. The dynamic systems can be
characterized by the interaction of a continuous part, governed by differential or difference
equations, and a discrete event part, traditionally described by finite state machines (FSMs), and
The sequential control can proposed.( Hanz, H 2012) proposed a sequential control technique
using modular finite-state machine (MFSM) to control sliding door [6].

2.2. Control system design of redundant robot

In 2006, Brice Le Boudec designed an adaptive control for a redundant robot ANAT. The direct
adaptive control approach is used for trajectory tracking. The generation of the trajectory with
obstacles avoidance is performed by calculating the differential inverse kinematics of the robot
based on the generalized inverse function. The tracking errors for the desired trajectory are very
small. The applied torques generated using the proposed control law are quite weak and can be

29

easily implemented in real time to the physical system. This implementation would be the future
work of this research project [2].
In 2011, Fabricio G. proposed sliding mode speed auto-regulation technique for robotic tracking
path tracking. Fuzzy controller evaluated the freely accessible 6R robot model PUMA-560, and
path tracking is divided into a geometric (desired error) and a dynamic (desired speed), where
speed profiles are assigned for nonlinear systems to track non-smooth paths. It is completely
independent of the robot parameters. This proposed technique can be extended to include
acceleration and/or torque constraints.[5]
In 2012, Madani, T. proposed an adaptive variable structure controller of redundant robots with
mobile/fixed obstacles avoidance. The controller is designed directly in Cartesian space and no
knowledge on the dynamic model is needed, except its structure, and the parameters of the
controller are adapted using adaptive laws obtained via Lyapunov stability analysis of the closed
loop. The Simulation and results obtained using a 3DOF robot manipulator evolved in the vertical
plan, and can be implemented on a robot that has more than 3DOF [18].
In 2013, Jing Zhao published a paper addressed as Generating human-like movements for robotic
arms. The control of criteria based method is combining both kinematic and dynamic criteria. A
new inverse kinematic algorithm was developed to plan the human-like reaching movements.
The Gradient Projection Method based Rapidly-exploring Random Tree (GPM-RRT) algorithm is
proposed to plan the human-like grasping movement. The criteria for human-like control in
robotics are incomplete because the obstacle avoidance problem is not considered, and GPM-RRT
can directly solve this problem [10].
In 2015 Hariharan S. in his PhD thesis designed a complete path planning of higher DOF
manipulators in human like environments. A multi-pass sequential localized search technique to

30

solve the problem of path planning of hyper-redundant manipulators for the shortest path in realtime in the presence of obstacles is used. He divided the path to nodes and used finite state systems
to represent the state at each stage and the lines connecting those represents gk (xk, uk). The
control sequence corresponds to the path originating at the initial state x0 and terminating at the
final state xN. The numerical solution is used to solve invers kinematic. The original task of
planning motions for hyper-redundant manipulator arms was implemented only in the presence of
obstacles. The future work will deal with other uncertainty problems such as load change or
surface friction [9].
In 2013, Farzin Piltan proposed a robust fuzzy sliding mode control technique for robot
manipulator systems with modeling uncertainties. In this research, a joint level controller for
continuum robots is described which utilizes a fuzzy methodology component to compensate for
dynamic uncertainties. Therefore, a fuzzy sliding mode tracking controller for robot manipulators
with uncertainty in the kinematic and dynamic models is designed and analyzed. The design
satisfied the desired performance objectives in the presence of noises, disturbances, parameter
perturbations, unmodeled dynamics, sensor failures, actuator failures, time delays. Sliding mode
method provides an effective tool to control nonlinear systems through the switching function and
dynamic formulation of nonlinear system [8].
In 2015, Qi Zhou presents a novel design method for adaptive tracking control which is proposed
for robot finger dynamics. First, the dynamics are described by considering the robot finger as a
largescale system since it has many joints and multi (DOFs). Second, by employing the direct
adaptive fuzzy approximation method to approximate the unknown and desired control input
signals instead of the unknown nonlinear functions, the number of adaptive design parameters
obtained in the control design process is greatly reduced. Moreover, it is shown that the designed

31

controller can guarantee all the signals in the closed-loop system to be semi-globally uniformly
ultimately bounded. The future work, based on the decentralized adaptive control method, the
tracking performance will be improved by implementing a fuzzy logic system control or neural
network control approaches [14].
In 2015, Claudio Urrea used a simulation tool to design and compare sex controller approaches
which are applied to 5DOF redundant robot. Through homogeneous transformation matrices the
inverse kinematic model of the redundant robot is obtained. Six controllers are prepared to test the
robots dynamic model: hyperbolic sinecosine; computed torque; sliding hyperbolic mode;
control with learning; and adaptive. A simulation environment is developed by MatLab/Simulink
software, which allows analyzing the dynamic performance of the robot and of the designed
controllers. This simulation environment is used to carry out different tests of the redundant
manipulator model together with each controller as they are made to follow a trajectory in space.
The results, obtained through a simulation environment, are represented by comparative curves
and RMS indices of the joint and Cartesian errors. They show that the redundant manipulator
model follows the test trajectory with less error using the adaptive controller than the other
controllers, with more homogeneous motions of the manipulator. The largest joint and Cartesian
errors generated occurred when the computed torque controller is used. Fig 2.1 shows the
comparison of joint error [4].

32

Fig 2.1 shows the comparison of joint error

33

2.3. Optimization of Path planning of redundant robot

In recent years, there have been many researches done to solve the motion problem and in
particular the path planning problem. In 2012, Francisco Rubio compares the quality and
efficiency of three methods for solving the path planning problem of industrial robots in complex
environments. The characteristics of five methods:

2.3.1. Sequential algorithm

This algorithm based on the fact that the path consists of a sequence of configurations, which are
between the initial and final ones. The set of intermediate configurations are part of the path, so
that the robot goes from one place to another, is calculated sequentially. In the first part, the
configuration space is generated from the initial configuration by calculating adjacent
configurations. The robot end-effector must visit all the nodes that are part of the discretized
workspace until the final configuration is reached [7].

2.3.2. Simultaneous algorithm and its variants

This algorithm has three variants depending on the cost function used. This algorithm
simultaneously calculates the configuration space and the shortest path as the algorithm evolves
looking for the solution. It is necessary to define the objective function to guide the search for new
adjacent configurations. The objective function is defined in terms of the distances that the robot
must travel between configurations. To calculate the distances, it is necessary to attach a node to
each configuration of the robot. Initially there are only nodes corresponding to the initial and

34

final configurations. Then a graph is generated which will be completed as new configurations are
obtained. Each node in the graph represents a possible configuration of the robot, and the arcs
between nodes represent the distance travelled by the significant points of the robot between these
configurations [7].

2.3.3. Genetic algorithm

GAs is a search algorithms based on mechanics of natural selection and natural genetics. The
genetic algorithm (GA) solves such problem by minimizing the traveling distance of the endeffector and the significant points between the initial and final configurations avoiding obstacles.
The workspace will be modelled in such way to provide a discrete configuration space based on
the positions of the end-effector between the initial and final configurations of the robot.
The algorithms are implemented on PUMA 560 robotic system, and the comparison shows that
they can be applied to any industrial robotic systems (by changing the significant points which
serve to define the robot) and can solve the path planning problem [7].

35

Chapter 3: Research problem

36

3. Problem Definition
Redundant robots have become widely used in industrial applications such arc and spot welding
painting, assembly and material cutting. Therefore, in an industrial application the path of endeffector is known and it will be in the dexterous space of robot, and that will lead to multi-solution
problem for inverse kinematic. Moreover, Robotic manipulators in industrial applications will
have to encounter nonlinearities and various uncertainties in their dynamic models, such as
friction, disturbance, and load changing. Due to the above factors, maintaining the end-effector
trajectory in the presence of these uncertainties will be the focus of this research (position control).
Designing a controller to achieve the acceptable speed with a minimum error is another challenge
(velocity control).
The forward kinematic problem: is to determine the position of the end effector from the
knowledge of the link positions, in other words, we know rotations angles and the translations
between them.
The inverse kinematic problem is to determine the link positions from the knowledge of the end
effector trajectory. The research will deal with solving the inverse kinematic problem of redundant
robot which is 7DOF to perform repetitive task in industrial sector such as arc welding, painting.

3.1. Predictable contribution

This research project will contribute to both scientific and technological levels:

It will provide a new intelligent control algorithm to add more cleverness to redundant
robots and more security as well as safety in their work space.

It will combine concepts from both computer science and control theory, in order to
develop a meaningful theory for controlling the motion in redundant robots

37

3.2. Methodology
1. Stage1. Model the redundant robot with 7 DOF which will

simulate all the possibility

solutions to perform the predetermined trajectory by using different parameters in the invers
kinematic matrix by Mathlab.
2. Stage 2. Simulate the uncertainties in the workspace such as obstacles and surface friction and
generate profile for each possible solution by Mathlab.
3. Stage 3. Specify control rules to generate a complete intelligent profile for all the possibility
solutions to perform the predetermined trajectory.
4. Stage 4. Implement the solution experimentally on 7 DOF ANAT robot in the ETS laboratory.

38

3.3. Research Plan

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Task 2
DGA
1031

Task 3
DGA
1032
Written
exam

Task
4
DGA
1033
Oral
exam
Task 5
First
Contribution
Task 6
Second
contribution
Task 7
Third
Contribution
Task 8
Thesis
Defense

39

Fall

Summer

Winter

Fall

Summer

Winter

Fall

Summer

Winter

fall

summer

Winter

Fall
Task 1
DGA
1005

References
[1] Boubaker Daachi, et al., Adaptive neural controller for redundant robot manipulators and
collision avoidance with mobile obstacles, Neurocomputing 79 (2012) 5060
[2] Brice Le Boudec, et al., Modeling and adaptive control of redundant robots, since direct,
Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 71 (2006) 395403
[3] Claudio Urrea, John Kern, Design, simulation and comparison of controllers for a redundant
robot, Case Studies in Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2015
[4] Claudio Urrea, John Kern, Trajectory Tracking Control of a Real Redundant Manipulator of
the SCARA Type, J Electr Eng Technol.2015;
[5] Fabricio Garelli, Luis Gracia, et al., Sliding mode speed auto-regulation technique for robotic
tracking, Robotics and Autonomous Systems 59 (2011) 519529
[6] Franc Hanz. Karel Jezernik, Finite-state machine control of mechatronic systems, J Systems
and Control Engineering 226(10) 13941409, 2012
[7] Francisco Rubio, et al., Comparing the efficiency of five algorithms applied to path planning for
industrial robots, Industrial Robot: An International Journal 39/6 (2012) 580591
[8]Farzin Piltan, Design Robust Fuzzy Sliding Mode Control Technique for Robot Manipulator
Systems with
Modeling Uncertainties, I.J. Information Technology and Computer Science, 2013, 08, 123-135
[9] Hariharan S. Ananthanarayanan, Complete path planning of higher DOF of manipulators in
human like environment, PhD thesis, Copyright by Hariharan S. Ananthanarayanan All rights
reserved 2015
[10] Jing Zhao, et al., Generating human-like movements for robotic arms, since direct,
Mechanism and Machine Theory 81 (2014) 107128
[11] J.M. Selig, Introductory Robotics, Prentice Hall, London, 1992
[12] John J. Craig, Introduction to Robotics Mechanics and Control, Third edition, Pearson
Prentice Hall, 2005
[13] Jing Zhao, Biyun Xie, Chunyu Song, Generating human-like movements for robotic arms,
Mechanism and Machine Theory 81 (2014) 107128

40

[14] Qi Zhou, et al., Decentralized Adaptive Fuzzy Tracking Control for Robot Finger Dynamics,
ieee transactions on fuzzy systems, vol. 23, no. 3, june 2015
[15] Singiresu S. Rao, Engineering Optimization Theory and Practice, by John Wiley & Sons, 2009
[16] Slotine, Jean-Jacques, Applied nonlinear control, Prentice Hall, New Jersy 1991
[17] Takashi Nammoto, and Kazuhiro Kosuge, An Analytical Solution for a Redundant
Manipulator with Seven Degrees of Freedom, Copyright 2012 International Journal of
Automation and Smart Technology
[18] Tarek Madani, et al., Adaptive variable structure controller of redundant robots with
mobile/fixed obstacles avoidance, Robotics and Autonomous Systems 61 (2013) 555564
[20] Z. Doulgeri, Y. Karayiannidis, Force position control for a robot finger with a soft tip and
kinematic uncertainties, Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 328336
[21] Tzuu-Hseng S. Li, Yun-Cheng Huang, MIMO adaptive fuzzy terminal sliding-mode
controller for robotic manipulators, Information Sciences 180 (2010) 46414660

41