EMARO, Erasmus Mundus Master 2017

Optimal Kinematic Design of Robots

Lab No. 2

Kinematic analysis and design of a 3-RRR planar parallel

robot

Submitted To:
Prof. Phillipe Wenger

Submitted by:
Ahmad ADEE / Gabriel RIVERA
1 Introduction
This lab aims to deliver understadning of different configuration of 3-RRR Parallel Robot.
Geometric Model and Inverse Geometric Model was experimented by using different configu-
ration. Different design parameters were taken into account in order to observe the kinematic
design strategies and effect of parameters over them.

2 Exercises
2.1 Exercise 2
Visualize the Type 2 singularity loci and place the tooltip of the mobile platform on a sin-
gularity point. Click on the Calculate button and visualize solutions 1 and 2. What do you
observe?
For Type 2 singularity we observe two solutions only as can be seen in 1. There must be no
difference in the parameters theoretically.A slight difference in values may occurs because the
tool tip of the mobile platform is not exactly on singularity point. We get only one solution
in this configuration. The active joint values are θ1 = 327, θ2 = 60andθ3 = 237. Placing the
tool tip perfectly results in similar parameters.

(a) Assembly Mode 1 (b) Assembly Mode 2

Figure 1: Assembly Mode for Type 2 Singularity

2.2 Exercise 1
For the default design, go to x = -60, y = -40, φ = -40, and click on the Calculate button
to visualize six real solutions to the direct kinematic problem. Is it possible to have only one
real solution?
As per the proposed methodlogy values were set and six real solution were visualised.
Solution can be seen in Figure 2.

It can be noted that for all the solution, the value of active joints remained similar i.e.
θ1 = 30, θ2 = 163andθ3 = 224 It is also observed that with working mode changed to [-1,
-1, -1] two assembly modes are achieved. With this observation we conclude that it is not
possible to produce one real solution with this settings.

1
 (a) Assembly Mode 1 (b) Assembly Mode 2 (c) Assembly Mode 3

(d) Assembly Mode 4 (e) Assembly Mode 5 (f ) Assembly Mode 6

Figure 2: Six Assembly Modes for x = -60, y = -40, φ = -40

2.3 Exercise 3
The program relies on the Newton-Raphson iterative algorithm to displace the robot in active-
joint variables mode. Visualize the Type 2 singularity loci and try to cross them in active-joint
variables mode. Why isn’t it possible?

As show in the Figure 3 the platform end-effector point is in a Type 2 singularity loci rep-
resented by a green line. In this position the platform is unable to make a displacement by
changing the active-joints variables values. The applet shows a red value for θ3 indicating
that is not possible to perform the change of the value. The Newton-Raphson iterative algo-
rithm computes the next position of the robot Xi+1 in function of the current one Xi and its
Jacobian with the relation shown in Eq. 1. In a Type 2 singularity the Jacobian J is singular,
therefore it is not invertible and the algorithm fails in the attempt to compute a new position.

Xi+1 = Xi J 1 f (Xi ) (1)

Figure 3: Platform in Type 2 singularity loci

2
3 Design Rules
Report design rules that you have been able to get from the Parallemic Java applet.What
should be (or should not be) the ratio between r, l1 and l2 to have a large (x,y) workspace
free of singularities at φ = 0. What are the most sensitive parameters?Give your best design
with a figure. Consider also the choice of the working mode.

The geometric parameters that we are able to modify for the design are:

• r: size of the platform radii.

• l1 and l2 : Link lengths.

The workspace can be computed from the intersection of three circles of radii (l1 + l2 ) with
centers on each leg base of the robot. When the relation between |l1 − l2 | > 0 circular voids
are generated inside the workspace with radii |l1 − l2 | as shown in Figure 4a. By making the
legs of equal length l1 = l2 , it is possible to avoid this condition as shown in Figure 4b.

(a) Circular Voids in Workspace |l1 − l2 | > 0 (b) No Circular Voids in Workspace l1 = l2

Figure 4: Link Length Relation

In Figure 4b, parallel singularities are present in the workspace, in order to deal with them
the value of r can be modified. By decreasing this value Type 2 singularities can be avoided
as show in Figure 5a . However the value of r doesn’t have to be minimum because it will
cause a reduction of the workspace as in Figure 5b.

(a) r > rmin No Type 2 Singularities (b) r = rmin No Type 2 Singularities

Figure 5: Relation with r

3
Changing the working modes results in Type 2 singularities if the legs are not in the same
configuration (all in −1 or in +1), this can be seen in Figure 6.

(a) Working mode +1| − 1| + 1 (b) Working mode −1| − 1| + 1

Figure 6: Working Mode effects

As seen before, the more sensitive parameters are the relation between the link lengths and
the radii of the platform, which will lead to the larger workspace.

The best proposed design with φ = 0 is shown in Figure 7 where all the previous consid-
erations where taken in account resulting in the larger workspace without internal voids or
singularities of Type 2.

Figure 7: Proposed design r = 10, l1 = l2 = 108