Performances of observability indices for industrial robot calibration

This work presents a comparison of the five observability indices used for robot calibration. The comparison is realized in order to determine the most appropriate observability index, which allows for the best parameter identification of a calibrated robot, and therefore leading to the best improvement of the robot accuracy. In this study, the accuracy analysis is based on the robot end-effector errors, which are expressed in term of Euclidean errors. The parameter identification process is based on minimizing the residual of the position errors. The actual values of these positions are usually measured by an external measurement device and have measurement noise. The position residuals are calculated in all the calibration configurations, which are selected by using observability indices. An optimal set of configurations is the one reducing the impact of the measurement noise on the parameter identification efficacy. Our study is carried out for the calibration of four robots: two degrees of freedom (DOF) and 6-DOF serial robots, and 2-DOF and 3-DOF planar parallel robots. The comparison of the observability indices was achieved through a Monte Carlo simulation, using 100 different cases for each of the four robots considered. The position measurement noise was assumed to be within a range of ± 200 μm. Investigations led to conclude that there is a specific index that may be considered the best observability index for robot calibration. Finally, an experimental study has been applied to a LR Mate 200ic FANUC robot and confirms the simulated results.

[1]  Leila Notash,et al.  Comparison of Pose Selection Criteria for Kinematic Calibration through Simulation , 2009 .

[2]  Ilian A. Bonev,et al.  Absolute accuracy analysis and improvement of a hybrid 6-DOF medical robot , 2015, Ind. Robot.

[3]  Ilian A. Bonev,et al.  Kinematic calibration of a 3-DOF planar parallel robot , 2012, Ind. Robot.

[4]  Feng Gao,et al.  Calibration of a six-DOF parallel manipulator for chromosome dissection , 2012 .

[5]  I. Bonev,et al.  Kinematic calibration of a five-bar planar parallel robot using all working modes , 2013 .

[6]  Chia-Hsiang Menq,et al.  Experimental study of observability of parameter errors in robot calibration , 1989, Proceedings, 1989 International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[7]  Han Sung Kim.  Kinematic Calibration of a Cartesian Parallel Manipulator , 2005 .

[8]  D. Rajan.  Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes , 2017 .

[9]  Morris Driels,et al.  Significance of observation strategy on the design of robot calibration experiments , 1990, J. Field Robotics.

[10]  M. Yamada,et al.  A Kinematic Calibration Method for Industrial Robots Using Autonomous Visual Measurement , 2006 .

[11]  Jian Zhou,et al.  Comparison of the Observability Indices for Robot Calibration considering Joint Stiffness Parameters , 2010, ICIC.

[12]  Ilian A. Bonev,et al.  Calibration Efficiency Analysis Based on Five Observability Indices and Two Calibration Models for a Six-Axis Industrial Robot , 2013 .

[13]  Patrick Maurine,et al.  Geometrical Calibration of the High Speed Robot Par4 using a Laser Tracker , 2006 .

[14]  Bahram Ravani,et al.  An overview of robot calibration , 1987, IEEE Journal on Robotics and Automation.

[15]  Ilian A. Bonev,et al.  Comparison of two calibration methods for a small industrial robot based on an optical CMM and a laser tracker , 2013, Robotica.

[16]  José Mauricio S. T. Motta,et al.  Robot calibration using a 3D vision-based measurement system with a single camera , 2001 .

[17]  Jorge Santolaria,et al.  Modelling and calibration of parallel mechanisms using linear optical sensors and a coordinate measuring machine , 2011 .

[18]  P. Rousseeuw,et al.  Alternatives to the Median Absolute Deviation , 1993 .

[19]  Toby J. Mitchell,et al.  An Algorithm for the Construction of “D-Optimal” Experimental Designs , 2000, Technometrics.

[20]  Kui Sun,et al.  A novel optimal calibration algorithm on a dexterous 6 DOF serial robot-with the optimization of measurement poses number , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[21]  B. Ripley,et al.  Robust Statistics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Mathematical Geosciences.

[22]  Yu Sun,et al.  Observability index selection for robot calibration , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[23]  Ahmed Joubair.  Contribution à l’amélioration de la précision absolue des robots parallèles , 2012 .

[24]  John M. Hollerbach,et al.  The noise amplification index for optimal pose selection in robot calibration , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[25]  David Daney,et al.  Choosing Measurement Poses for Robot Calibration with the Local Convergence Method and Tabu Search , 2005, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[26]  G. Stone,et al.  Parameter Estimation for the Weibull Distribution , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Electrical Insulation.

[27]  Junwei Han,et al.  Kinematic Calibration of Parallel Robots Using CMM , 2006, 2006 6th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation.

[28]  Ilian A. Bonev,et al.  Comparison of the efficiency of five observability indices for robot calibration , 2013 .