A comparison of industrial robots interface: force guidance system and teach pendant operation

Purpose This paper aims to propose an evaluation method to compare two different Human–Robot Interaction (HRI) solutions that can be used for on-line programming in an industrial context: a force guidance system and the traditional teach pendant operation. Design/methodology/approach The method defines three evaluation criteria (agility, accuracy and learning) and describes an experimental approach based on the analysis of variance to verify the performance of guidance systems according to these criteria. This method is used in this paper to compare the traditional teach pendant interface with an implementation of a force guidance system based on the use of an external force/torque sensor. Findings The application of the proposed method to an off-the-shelf industrial robot shows that the force guidance system has a better performance according to the agility criterion. Both solutions have a similar performance for the accuracy criterion, with a limit of about 2 mm in the achieved position accuracy. Regarding the learning criterion, the authors cannot affirm that any of the methods has an improved agility when the operator repeats the tasks. Practical implications This work supports the selection of guidance systems to be used in on-line programming of industrial applications. It shows that the force guidance system is an option potentially faster than the teach pendant when the required positioning accuracy is greater than 2 mm. Originality/value The new method proposed in this paper can be applied to a large range of robots, not being limited to commercial available collaborative robots. Furthermore, the method is appropriate to accomplish further investigations in HRI not only to compare programming methods but also to evaluate guidance systems approaches or robot control systems.

[1]  Margaret J. Robertson,et al.  Design and Analysis of Experiments , 2006, Handbook of statistics.

[2]  Alexander Verl,et al.  A HMM-based approach to learning probability models of programming strategies for industrial robots , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[3]  Germano Veiga,et al.  Programming-by-demonstration in the coworker scenario for SMEs , 2009, Ind. Robot.

[4]  Michael Kerger,et al.  MPI Motion Simulator: Development and Analysis of a Novel Motion Simulator , 2007 .

[5]  Jozef Suchy,et al.  Dynamic force/torque measurement using a 12DOF sensor , 2007, 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[6]  Neville Hogan,et al.  Impedance Control: An Approach to Manipulation: Part II—Implementation , 1985 .

[7]  Gunther Reinhart,et al.  Industrial Haptic Robot Guidance System for assembly processes , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Workshop on Haptic Audio visual Environments and Games.

[8]  Morten Lind,et al.  Open Real-Time Robot Controller Framework , 2010 .

[9]  Chang-Soo Han,et al.  An improved multipurpose field robot for installing construction materials , 2010, Robotica.

[10]  Milad Geravand,et al.  Human-robot physical interaction and collaboration using an industrial robot with a closed control architecture , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[11]  Jochen J. Steil,et al.  Assisted Gravity Compensation to cope with the complexity of kinesthetic teaching on redundant robots , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[12]  Rolf Gruninger,et al.  Market study on adaptive robots for flexible manufacturing systems , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics.

[13]  Neville Hogan,et al.  Impedance Control: An Approach to Manipulation: Part I—Theory , 1985 .

[14]  Massimo Callegari,et al.  Industrial Robot : An International Journal Manual guidance for industrial robot programming , 2016 .

[15]  Chang-Soo Han,et al.  MFR (Multipurpose Field Robot) for installing construction materials , 2007, Auton. Robots.

[16]  Ales Ude,et al.  Solving peg-in-hole tasks by human demonstration and exception strategies , 2014 .

[17]  John J. Craig Zhu,et al.  Introduction to robotics mechanics and control , 1991 .

[18]  Rolf Dieter Schraft,et al.  PowerMate – A Safe and Intuitive Robot Assistant for Handling and Assembly Tasks , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[19]  Alexander Winkler,et al.  Possibilities of Force based Interaction with Robot Manipulators , 2007 .

[20]  Subir Kumar Saha,et al.  Parallel active/passive force control of industrial robots with joint compliance , 2014, 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[21]  Dominik Henrich,et al.  Velocity control for safe robot guidance based on fused vision and force/torque data , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems.

[22]  Paolo Rocco,et al.  Walk-through programming for robotic manipulators based on admittance control , 2013, Robotica.

[23]  Ville Kyrki,et al.  Usability of force-based controllers in physical human-robot interaction , 2011, 2011 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).